I think villain is scared here and he's protecting a paired Ace or Queen ?
Am I right to lay down here ?
No Limit Holdem Tournament • 2 Players
$6.85+$0.15
Hand converted by the official HUSNG.com hand converter
| SB | Hero | 500 | |
| BB | Chirurgul | 500 |
Effective Stacks: 25bb
Blinds 10/20
Pre-Flop (30, 2 players)
Hero is SB
Hero raises to 60, Chirurgul calls 40
Flop (120, 2 players)
Chirurgul checks, Hero bets 60, Chirurgul calls 60
Turn (240, 2 players)
Chirurgul bets 120, Hero folds
Final Pot: 240
Chirurgul wins 360 ( won +120 )
Hero lost -120
So I think turn donk bluff here repping trip eights is not happening unless villain is mad crazy fool ?
Damn hate laying down those Tens.
Will run some equity and range calculations once I'm back. Gotta run.
Go forth and CRUSH !
I have 3 matches against this guy with 50 hands played.
2bets 38/50/40/11
Afq 67,F 50,T 100, R-
Opens 38% of hands in the 1st blind level.. Gives my TT apprx 44.7% equity.
If I assign him 50% of hands I’m at 50.41% equity against his range.
Tight opening range I think but will jam over MR with K9s at 22bb, called a 14bb jam with Q9o so Im a bit confused to his assignment of ranges. Jams frequently but folds a lot and only ever limped 4 hands.
Go forth and CRUSH !
You have a bluff catcher.
In order for villain to be bluffing here, he needs to have floated with air and then lead the turn without the initiative.
c/c flop and then lead turn without the initiative when the turn pairs 2nd/3rd pair, is almost always turned trips looking to get value from top pair or the flop draws.
Add to that, that players @ this stake love to protect their made hand vs FDs and generally won't balance their overt value lines with enough bluffs. It's a pretty easy fold given there is so little money behind and only 2 cards left in the deck that we like on the river.
Well played imo.
Thanks Cdon,
If I was Villain here, the bet sizing on the turn is too large ?
If I had hit trips I see my options as -
To chk back and let Hero bet into me for two more streets. I may miss on value but theres a good chance I get bet into 120 and can take down the hand there with a CR ? Or bet small on the river like 75 to induce a call. Im trying to think of river cards I don't want to see here and theres a lot that make two pairs.
Make my bet sizing smaller like 90 to rep A or Q induce top pair or second pair.
If I was the villain and was holding a paired A or Q, 120 is only being called by trips, paired Ace or Q. KJ, QJ, TJ... KT type hands....
If you was the villain here, what would you do ? Would you make the bet sizing smaller to extract value rather than shutting down the hand on the turn ?
GL Run Well.
Go forth and CRUSH !
Assuming villain has 8x, I like his play.
And if he has a complete bluff, kudos to him, his propensity to float cbets will show up soon and we can readjust to take advantage of it.
The turn pairing 2nd / 3rd card on the board is a terrible card to 2barrel bluff vs a flop c/c range.
As such, I think SB gives up with his air here a lot and probably checks back some hands that can call a bet on the turn, Qx & FDs.
Therefore BB leading the turn is the best way to target your range which can call a bet but that would not 2barrel.
His sizing is fine. Any bigger would be bad, but I think a half pot bet gets called just as much by the range that calls say a 1/3 size underbet.
If I was in villain's place it would be close. I would make the decision based on how aggressive I perceived you to be.
That is, some players will blindly 2barrel in position and even 3barrel just because the board is A hi.
If I thought you might be in that category I would check to you. If I thought you were a "one and done", cbet and then give up without a very strong hand I would be inclined to lead the turn, especially if I thought it might induce a jam over with Ax or draws.
Hi Cleaner,
Quick question - why did you choose to 3x? Was he particularly loose OOP? There is seldom justification in doing so...
Either way; postflop I think you can actually argue for a flop check-back; you only get value from a small number of draws (of which you have blockers to many) and 8x (which will likely give up on later streets). If he check-raises draws then you are almost certainly going to get blown off your hand. Furthermore, if he has an 8 or turns some equity (lower pair, picks up draw) he will either check at which point you can thin value bet knowing you have best hand more often than not, or he will lead at which point you can call/re-evaluate river. Obviously this is turn card dependent and when he donks such a dry turn there is no option but to fold your now weak bluffcatcher (as pointed out by CDon).
Your mathematical conclusion is impressive but sometimes the math can be misleading as it does not consider gameflow and/or texture; a bluff here would be incredibly audacious and frankly suicidal, particularly seeing as you 3x raised and the Ax board smacks your range (even most non-thinking players can recognise this).
To conclude; the fold was standard. Try to also focus on the other facets of the hand; namely the merits of the3x raise and the cbet.
Hay thanks for your reply,
I didn't consider checking back the flop for some reason ?!? Thanks for pointing that out, I'll have to go over the hand again. Some one said recently 'raising to gain information is a no no' well, something like that, but i wasn't thinking like that at the time, and usually I'm raising for value... And a bit of information on the side is always a bonus.
3x opening was only playing back at villains continuous 3x opening I'd seen in previous hands, I didn't want to play smaller pots in position than out of position, normally I just am going with 2x unless I see a tendencies in the villain that I should adjust to.
The 'audacious' bluff from the villain, if that's what it was.... Wouldn't surprise me 100% as we have all been maniacs at some point in our career :-) That's kind of why I checked the hand again because I was like, he can't bluff here like that... ? Can he ?
So as I'm learning, the big thing that stands I'm my way ( one of them LOL ) is being able to bet correctly relative to texture, range, stack sizes and pot sized bets on the river. Ive been of the amateur school using brut force bets which I see through my failings that It just doesn't work like that....but hanging back and keeping bet sizing down, playing multiple streets and being able to get away from a hand when it all goes wrong are aspects I'm still working on.
Going to do a bit of travel for a week and will if possible stay off the tables to have a break. Come back fresh and rolled for some action.
Thanks and GL at the tables !
TC.
Go forth and CRUSH !
I didn't notice the 3x in the HH (I must be a HH fish lol).
This is what weak players do with the top of their range preflop.
It makes you incredibly easy to play against and reduces the amount of action you get with the top of your range vs price sensitive / villains that are thinking at all.
It also conditionally weakens your min raising range & limping range opening you up for even more exploitation.
A good player will tear you up if you 3x the top of your range.
It's a bad habit to get into and a bad strategy given the % of the population it might be good vs represent such a small % of the player pool.
Wrt to cbetting or checking back.
It's close.
Villain will have a fairly inelastic continuing range on this board against which we have decent FE.
And he's not likely to start bluffing his stack off unimproved on later streets so our bluff catching equity on potential run outs is not that great.
I would just cbet and take it down the dead money the majority of the time here rather than check back and give a free card to FD type holdings which we're ahead of and will probably play passively on an AQx board.
Hey Cdon, Thanks,
Maybe I made that adjustment to hastily, I just chk'd the HH and the first two buttons he open 3x, this was the 3rd hand.
Q: For the future, if villain has a tendency to open buttons 3x what do we do ? Do we stay as value 2x ? Playing smaller pots in position and large pots out of position ???
Appreciate the help,
Thanks.
Go forth and CRUSH !
Executive Summary:
It is better to exploit his standard raise size of 3x by expanding your 3b jamming range rather than adjusting your own button raise sizes.
Details:
If he 3x as standard, you can 3b jam a wider range more profitably.
Plus, when he makes it bigger to go pre, he decreases the money left behind post which decreases the implied value you can realise from a lot of hands you typically put in your flatting range.
I would reallocate some of the at the margin hands in my flatting range to 3b jams to capitalise on the additional FE he has offered up by making his standard raise size 3x.
Of course, I want to have an idea of what frequency he is opening from the button to determine which hands should be 3b jammed (because a lot of my expectation relies on FE => especially if I add 3b bluffs from the bottom of my flatting range vs a very wide opener). And if he also has a limping range, I need to account for how that conditionally affects his button raising range.
Ordinarily when we 3b jam vs a min raise our fold equity (FE) is only worth:
2f ; where f = % villain folds = [raise fold] / { [raise call] + [raise fold] }
When he makes it 3x, our FE becomes 3f
Wrt to your own opening range.
Typically we make a lot of our money in the early stage of a HUSNG while we are still deeper stacked, in position.
The majority of our expectation against the population comes from exploiting our positional advantage vs imbalanced weak tight [call pre and fold to cbet on flop] ranges. It varies from player to player, but an overwhelming % of the population is not willing to contest postflop without either a strong hand or a lot of equity. And if you can handread within the context of opponents actions + boardtexture, there are a lot of opportunities to exploit their imbalanced ranges.
As such, I prefer to min raise to give myself both a better price on immediate profit with the bottom of my range and to leave more money behind postflop in single raised pots where we expect to realise most of our edge in position. It has the additional benefit of balancing the top of my range which should result in the top of my range in aggregate getting more action.
Example queries supporting this @ stakes $3.50 - $7.00 from a while ago
http://www.husng.com/content/oop-profitability-possible-leaks-pushfold-end-game-win-rates
By min raising, we make more % wise the times villain folds + we donate less implied value to his (typically) weak tight continuing range vs our cbets on the majority of flop distributions.
One reality of holdem is that you don't make big hands very often (see aejones theorm for lol implications in high stakes games). The value you gain from taking down dead money at a cheap price is typically worth more than the extra value you will reap by building bigger pots in position. The typical falsification for this statement would be vs calling stations. Where building big pots in position with hands that make big hands post flop will be extremely profitable. The hyper turbo format is such that you don't even need all 3 streets to get the money in for most of the game. Plus the extreme amount of action which fills the games in the lobbies means you're rarely playing with reads that would justify not min raising anyway.