Full Tilt Poker $50 + $2.50 Heads Up No Limit Hold'em Tournament - t15/t30 Blinds - 2 players
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter Powered By DeucesCracked.com

BB: t1290 M = 28.67
Hero (BTN/SB): t1710 M = 38

Pre Flop: (t45) Hero is BTN/SB with A A
Hero raises to t90, BB calls t60

Flop: (t180) Q T 9 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets t160, BB raises to t350

Villain is -35% over 307 games. He doesn't seem as bad as that would suggest though, being reasonably passive but no real "super obviously ******ed" plays. Villain has been modestly tight preflop.

I'm thinking here that flatting here allows me to play the turn more optimally than he can. That is, I can fold on a King, Jack or eight and perhaps some spades, while getting it on the rest. There are very few hands that I really benefit from getting it on the flop with that I lose the opportunity to get the money in on the turn with - mainly a Queen with a weak kicker giving up on some turn cards (and he's be no means certain to defend that preflop or raise the flop with it). Additionally, flatting is lower variance so if this guy really is awful I could increase my tournament equity this way.

Even if this spot is obvious I do think play on drawy flops is a worthwhile discussion topic.

Yeah, but on the other hand - there are sooo many bad cards that can fell down on the turn. It`s close I think.

That's exactly the point. Those bad cards still fall whenever I'm all-in. What matters is how they change the betting. I might gain more from being able to fold on those bad cards than I lose from the times Villain folds something on the turn he would have got all-in with poor equity on the flop. I don't think Villain has too many of those hands, hence why I think flatting might be good.

Flat flop raise shove over safe turns is stand line whn stacks are deeper....but u have swelled pot w cbet and he's short enough that I prolly ship it here

The idea here is that if u flat flop he'll only have a pot sized bet left and u will be getting 2:1 on his turn shove so u can't easily fold

considering villain has been as you say fairly tight preflop (and passive too) I think this is very much a case of damage control. Apart from the plethora of combo draws his range also includes a shed load of 2pr hands that are crushing you atm.

I really want to play a small pot here as we are probably crushed otherwise.

I imagine the best play would be to call flop in the first instance. Second we don't know how he's playing his draws is he a cc or a cr draw person ? being passive I would imagine the first and weight his hands more towards 2pr and pr + draw hands.

On turn pot is 880 and we have 850eff
Fold if led into on nasty turns, chk behind if checked to.
On safe turns if led into or shoved into a fold is still probably the most prudent. I like a check behind here too.

I guess considering he is shoving KQ/QJ and possibly JT, (J9 ?) calling shove on safe turns is possibly a toss up.

I think if the money goes in on the flop we're either slightly ahead or way behind.
If all the money goes in on the turn we're looking at a more WA/WB situation.

Hope this makes sense :P

just fold ez game

lol shove flop vs -37% player and race vs his Q3o

Agree 100%

this is not one of those spots where you can flat flop fold turn....but if stacks were deeper this'd be perfect...i think the key is that you guys are both committed after this flop because stacks are shallow and u cbet too much

Amen to this. -37% takes some doing. He is reraising with almost anything. Stick it all in.

I dont play SNGs, but given stack sizes i dont see how pot controlling with such a small stack-pot ratio can be good. We're getting exploited so badly if we flat here and fold scary turns. I think any fd shoves a 4 straight turn if they know what theyre doing, and visa versa. Just ship it in and embrace the variance

The thing is he gave no indication that he'd randomly spazz out here from other hands. I don't think he'd raised any other flops. He had no other obvious fish tells either. I suspect his real marginal ROI is much less negative - perhaps he's improved over his past games and/or has been running bad.

If you aren't getting it in when he raises, you should bet less on the flop. It should be obvious that pot controlling in a big pot just plain doesn't work.

Ship it in

Perhaps "pot control" is the wrong term. It's unlikely I'm going to get to showdown without being all-in for instance. The main point of flatting is to be able to fold on a small number of turn cards.

If that's the case I still think it's better to bet a bit smaller. Makes it easier to fold the turn, and it probably gets a bit more value from some weaker hands.

I agree Nichlemn that these kinds of hands do warrant a worthwhile discussion. I tend to like checking back the flop in these kinds of spots. It is obviously a scary board and you don't necessarily want to get it in on the flop here against a -37%er when he has something like Q8, TJ, KT, J9, etc. I think you can get better equity on the hand be checking back flop and valuing later streets. This disguises your hand, controls the pot, and in the end gets you the most value in my opinion.

I think just calling the checkraise is a little bit tougher of a spot. I see your argument for just flatting for pot control and cutting losses on the bad turns, but as played, I have to agree with spamz here. He's a -37%er and he's going to beat you in the pot with any Q. You don't want to flat and find a card that will freeze action or result in you folding the best hand.

Ummmm ship flop 110% of the time you shouldn't even have to think about it. If he coolered you or sucked out gg this is hu poker sometimes you cannot win them all but there is no need to make a superman read and possibly fold b/c for the one time you're right here, you're going to lose WAY more value in other situations where your damage control line hurts you. You are ahead of his range ship flop.

+1

predator: checking back flop vs spewtards like this looks pretty bad to me given they're obviously willing to get their money in BAD; i wouldnt be too surprised to see J6o or T2s here playing for stacks from a -37% guy (obv not a very decent sample but still 300 games and he wont be a winning player imo)

My argument is that I'll be able to get him to put in a sizable part of his stack by the end of the hand whether I bet the flop or not. If I wait until the turn, I get to see whether or not a % of his range fills up before I put my chips in. I'm still getting good value on safe turns and I can avoid going broke on scary turns that may have made his hand. The drawback is that you freeze the action on scary turns against hands like Qx and Tx that would have put all the chips on on the flop.

I tend to focus on win% and not so much on hourly rate simply because I put in low volume at higher stakes where there are long breaks between matches. So I tend to advocate pot control against fishbowls to increase win%.

I'm in no way saying that betting the flop is bad and it's probably the standard play, but I think there is a strong argument for checking back especially against a terrible player.