I've been working on balancing out my turn actions after a flop check back in late position vs. the blinds. Here was a hand from 40/80 last weekend I've been chewing on. Interested in your thoughts on it.

I open on the button with Q4 and I get a smoothie in the SB, BB folds. I've had too many Johnnie Walker Blacks... again...

SB: Break even to winning player. Plays on the tighter side with some MUBSy tendencies. I think he's aware of that so is working on it in his game, though still does things like smoothie in the SB against a button open. Maybe he's trying to exploit my drinking .

Flop comes J36
Check, We check back

Turn: 2
Bet, We raise, Call

River: 8
Check, We bet, Call

So I give him the obligatory "I got there..." and roll over the Q high. He has A7o. I feel like an idiot and order another scotch. Standard.

I've been working on finding spots to bluff raise after a flop check back on pretty dry boards and thought this hand would be a good fit (7 outs probably). What do you guys think? Just another good player running bad?!?

J Lot

What hands do you have for value on the turned deuce?

It's a good question, I do feel a little thin on value here. I could have some mid pocket pairs (T's, 9's, 8's), some weaker pairs (67s) and maybe a few decent aces like AT. I think I'd be raising the T's and 9's for sure. Maybe I need to check back a few more strong hands?

I like your flop chk but I’d just call turn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I also like the flop check. I would call the turn at high frequency and would raise at low frequency(<10%) with this particular hand. My high frequency turn raises with draws here would be A5(90%), A4, K5s, K4s, at diminishing frequency as my equity decreases, continuing down to Q5s, Q4s both at very low frequency, 75s and 74s(if I open it) at very low frequency(calling the turn gives me stronger pair outs)(must be able to fold to 3 bet imo) but these hands get bet on the flop most of the time.

I check 54s at low frequency on the flop. I check 22 on the flop 100%. I don't check sets on the flop as default,* but I suspect that it would be correct at frequency in equilibrium(the more strong hands I block, the less action I'll get on the flop, the more slowplaying will profit) with JJ, 66, 33 at diminishing frequency. Note that these hands all have lots of turn equity; these hands can support more turn bluffs than a weaker turn raising range would be able to.

*because I think there's more value to be had on flop vs average opponent. Perhaps this isn't true at 40/80? I wouldn't know.

Depending on the bb, this could be good or bad imo.

Maybe. I think it's more likely that you should raise turn less often with draws for now. My reasoning?:

If you now switch to value heavy turn action, you will gain vs a (bet to induce bluff raise and call river) strategy that overvalues no pair no draw(imo).

However, I don't think this is a reason to slowplay weaker hands like Jx, specifically because a pair of Jacks is very vulnerable; the flop bet provides needed protection for hands like 77-TT and Jx.

Sorry, but whole hand was mangled pretty badly.

The point of checking back flop heads up (a practice occurring with very increased frequency over the past decade, among good players) involves saving a bet when the board texture makes it fairly likely your opponent will check-raise you, and your hand doesn't have very many places to go.

A great check-back spot would involve having A3dd on the button against the BB, and the flop coming 8h6h4c.

A dumb check back spot would be Qh7h against the BB and the flop coming Ad8s2c.

I don't like your check back for these reasons:

1) J36 rainbow isn't all that likely to have hit an SB flatter to where he would check-raise you often

2) If he just calls the flop, there are a number of scenarios on the turn where you'd like to see a free river (including the turn you got)

3) You open yourself up to way too much bluffing on the turn by missed hands, and often you won't have enough of a piece to call down, as Q4 high lacks showdown value

4) J36 misses enough SB flatting hands to where they fold to one bet a fair amount of time

I also don't understand the turn raise. A bluff? What do you think the player believes you hit there with that 2?

I also don't understand the river bet. The 2 induces very few draw-bets, as it makes the board fully rainbow, and doesn't open up many straight draws. So what is he folding on the river which he could call on the turn?

Looks a lot like fancy play syndrome to me.

If dealt to me, I would have raised pre, then bet flop, checked back turn, and folded river to a bet.

If I were check-raised on the flop, I would have called, then called turn, then folded river.

I don't understand the high and low frequency thing at live 40/80.

Nobody is sitting there with a HUD analyzing your play. You're not going to gain enough future equity from that one particular opponent (nobody else is going to pay enough attention to remember) from making suboptimal plays like this.

I think you're better off raising bigger draws here in the future on occasion, if you want to induce calls in the future against your real hands after you check back and they bet turn.

Personally I've found that everyone is so untrusting of SB v BB situations that they're always looking for a reason to call down, so there's not a lot one needs to do in order to induce A7-high to pay off the whole way when you do have a hand.

Regarding checking back 22 on a board like that, I have been trying to figure out if that is right or wrong. I've seen a lot of bottom pair or underpair checking back in recent times, and I can both see the merits and flaws with such a strategy. Obviously you hate getting check-raised when holding 22 on flop, but on the flip side, 22 unassisted is extremely vulnerable to free cards beating it. I've been betting my 22 in these type of spots, and then folding on turn or river when pretty sure I'm beat (based upon opponent and turn/river board textures.) I just hate handing out free cards with 22 to opponents who have often missed badly.

I used to be of this opinion:

Now I believe that it's important to begin all poker conflict with a mixed strategy because, if correctly constructed, a mixed strategy will perform well vs all player types.

Appreciate the feedback. I'm going to read through this a few times over the weekend to process your points more fully, but I think there's something to be added to the point made around checking back flops. While I agree board texture is a consideration (who's range benefits most from certain textures informs the % of our range that checks back), I also think we need to consider what the point of our bet is. Is our bet a value bet or a bluff?

In this example it's not clear to me what the point of our flop bet is. Are we going to get better hands to fold or worse hands to call?

At first blush, I also like your and Bob's points about practical play vs. theoretical play. Some more things for me to think about. Again, thanks for the feedback guys.

J Lot

I used to love when my opponents would do stuff like this (no offense, just honesty). Through their eyes I guess it looked like savvy poker, but the reality is it just ends up being chip-spewing in a very small pot with a weak hand and little to no chance of success.

The preflop raise is weak in my opinion, and I'd chuck it unless the blinds are money sieves. Sure, Q4s might have an equity edge straight-up through the river against random hands but you never get to the river straight through and on the internediate streets it plays much worse than say a low suited connector or semi-connector.

Flop check doesn't accomplish anything, the reason you raise in the field against the blinds is to take it down when you both miss; you missed, now bet to take it down. If you're going to check something back it's A3 on 9TJ flop, not this one.

Turn raise is terrible. He's expressed an interest in the hand now by betting into you, so he's either outright bluffing or protecting what he thinks is the best hand. If he's bluffing, there's a high chance it's with something worse than Q high, so you're basically committing three big bets between turn and river to confirm this, the last of which he won't call.

If he's betting to protect what he thinks is a made hand, and you're trying to bluff him, you need him to believe you somehow have a piece of all this, that you checked back A2 or something and are now raising 4th pair and betting it on the river too. If he's got a hand he thinks is best, there's not a single hand you are realistically repping with a flop check and turn raise that beats his holding, whatever it may be. So he'll call you down and you lose the maximum with your line, and in a super-small pot to begin with no less. Waste of chips.

Your unspoken premise is that you could have gotten a hand he's betting for value/protection on the turn to lay down. Look in your heart and ask, does your line and the dry board texture look at all convincing to your opponent for this to happen?

In poker theory circles, we're moving away from using the term bluff when referencing preflop, flop, and turn action. I still say it out of habit, and because there's no term to take the place of "bluff" as of yet. However, it's important to understand that all hands have equity vs rationally constructed opposing ranges and thus there's no true "bluff" on any street except the river.

We could say something like "draws that have (ev bet) > or = (ev check)" but that is quite cumbersome.

There's money in the pot and equity in J's hand thus checking accomplishes profit earning, by hitting a Queen, four, five, deuce, any club, or even checking back the turn and river, winning sometimes.

Implied in my statement was "doesn't accomplish anything versus betting the flop". Betting and getting called also allows us to hit all the above cards on the turn, but also gives us a chance at winning right then and there, or on the turn with a further continuation bet.

Betting and getting checkraised might be seen as undesirable, but I really don't think so. Consider your whole range here... he'd be taking control of the hand at a spot that allows you to punish him when you "have" it (sets, top pair, overpairs etc.). Your whole range here plays fine against a flop checkraise. Does Q4s specifically play so poorly that it's worth taking out of your flop bet-call range? No, it really doesn't. You might not love getting checkraised but that's not the point of poker, it's to maximize the results of an entire range of hands that would all take the same line in a given spot.

Betting and getting called significantly reduces the strength of those mentioned pair outs. I feel much better about hitting a 4 on the turn after checking back the flop compared with being called on the flop.

Or bluff less on the turn. Wala! Good luck at the tables, Corner. Remember, no money in Boston, everyone solid!

I suppose the point I'm exploring is the importance of balance in this scenario. As Munga points out, I may be out of balance here and too heavily weighted towards bluffs, but I still think it's important to have this line in my arsenal.

For example, same hand, let's say I bet the flop and he folds (unlikely with A7o, but let's say he does). I win the pot and move on with my life thinking I've made the right decision. Let's say instead of Q4s here I have T's and I play it the exact same way, which I would. Now instead of just winning the 2.5 BB pot, I would also win an additional 3 big bets. I think it's fair to question whether or not I'm balanced here on the turn, but I want to be mindful of the times I take the same lines but with a value hand. When I do that I want to be called down light and I'm worried that if I don't ever bluff in this spot I won't get called down.

Bob - I like your idea of not calling it a bluff too. It's more like, what's the best way for us to realize our equity while minimizing our opponent's.

Keep the feedback coming! Thanks guys.

J Lot

Bluff less?!? NEVER!! Everyone is solid in AC too...

I mostly agree with the above.

The main exception involves the Q4s. You definitely don't chuck that when folded to on the button. Offsuit I would fold. Suited, no way.

The rest of what you wrote is pretty close to my thinking in the situation.

Regarding checking back the flop against one opponent, the question you need to ask yourself is, "How likely am I to be check-raised here?"

If the answer is, "Not that likely", then you should always c-bet, because the upside to doing so is threefold -- you may win the pot right there, you may run into something on the turn and allow you to get 3 streets of value, and you can check the turn back and basically get two cards for the price of one small bet.

Too many people these days are checking back the flop too often, because that seems to be the sexy play in LHE nowadays (if there is such a thing).

One other problem with checking back is that it exposes that you don't have a big piece of the flop (most likely), and this allows people to exploit you on future streets when you do actually catch something.

For example, let's say the board is T74, and I have T7 on the BB. I attempt to check-raise, and the BB checks behind. If a big card hits (Q or higher), I can pretty reliably check-raise the turn, because I know that my opponent either hit top pair or is going to try and represent he hit top pair. (On a side note, if you're against a guy who checks behind boards like that often, it's probably better just to fire out on the flop.)

In general, I don't like telling my opponent I missed, unless the possibility of being check-raised on the flop is high enough to where giving away that information is still worth it.

Some situations don't need to be balanced, or can be balanced in other ways. You can "balance" this spot (bet into by SB on dry board after flop check-through) by simply calling a certain range and folding a certain range, and further calling and folding certain ranges on the river. I don't think you need to have any raises on this particular turn in order for your game to be "balanced" overall. The discussion/analysis around what range to call and what to fold on the turn, and what to call and what to fold on the river, is interesting and worthy of discussion in and of itself.

It sounds you're contemplating introducing a flop-check-turn-raise range to this spot, and populating it with pocket-second pair and Q4s that pulled a gutshot. Maybe that's an optimal "mix", but it sends very limited. Couldn't you just raise TT and not raise Q4s in the same spot, and still get called down on all your TTs without spewing on the Q4s? How would your opponent know your mix here?

A separate idea that I solved to my satisfaction when I was playing was whether you should have all these exotic lines. Any exotic line that comes up rarely needs a lot of mental effort to properly "balance". My conclusion was that it was simpler to keep the number of lines I'd ever play constrained to fewer combinations.

I assume we play differently enough that we'd come to different conclusions about Q4s. I really don't like how it plays vis a vis the rest of my game, and would lose money with it, or maybe a better way of putting is if my whole strategy included openraising Q4s on the button I might make money from that spot in a vacuum but I'd make less money overall than if my whole strategy didn't include that raise.

As to your last point, I think you on average want to be making decisions that your opponents don't like (though that shouldn't be your primary tool for making poker decisions, it should likely be a byproduct of good decision-making). Checking back A3 on 9TJ is going to pain my opponent most of the time if he saw what he had. Checking back Q4s on J52 is going to pain my opponent a lot less.

I used to think this way re: never chking certain flop textures, but I’ve come to realize in wide range spots you almost always do better when you have a flop chking range on different textures.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let's play heads up? Later this year, talk strat. I'm assuming Ur in San F or LA area? PM me. - Soul Crusher

Just been learning and playing limit a few weeks to include in mixed games

Flop seems like such a good spot to cbet - turn raise looks a little dodgy but at least you targeted the right kind of hand

Let me turn this one around handsome. What hands do we think we would bluff raise the turn with here after checking back the flop?

Flattery will get you everywhere.

But standard disclaimer, i'm not good at poker in today's solver world. With that out of the way I'm not sure I actually find flop checks with the next worse no pair hands in my button open range, T7s and 97s (w assumption that the three bdfldr combos of each make best checking hands). But if I did, it'd be a few of those. Or maybe we should better consider blockers? I dunno. Honestly, I think Bob148 has great answers here. Moar value.