Welcome.

Take a tour. Enjoy some free sample content.

How it works

Free Video: CLP Video No. 287: Home Game Bart Reviews His Splashy At $1-$3 Deep Part 2

Free Podcast: CLP Podcast No. 54: Time Warp And Turn Value
New to Crush Live Poker?

Do you think I am a spewy tomato?

squishmytomatosquishmytomato Posts: 352Subscriber, Professional
edited March 2017 in NLHE Strategy Discussion
5/10, ~1300 effective

Villain is an unknown young European dude sporting the poker pro starter pack (hoodie, big headphones, backpack, very serious expression permanently etched across his face, etc). He has been playing relatively tight so far. Opening small pocket pairs and never limping pre, but otherwise pretty standard. Did see him make a huge river check raise on an AQ727 board with what felt suspiciously like a bluff to get his opponent off a chop. Sits with $1300. I cover.

Note: Since villain has sat down at table I have been relatively card dead and have had no hands go to show down.

Weak tight player (who is deep) limps in EP. I make it 45 in the lojack with 4 3. Euro dude flats in the hijack. One of the blinds calls. The limper calls. Oops. Here we go.

Flop ($180):
K Q 7

Checks to me, I elect to check. Euro dude checks behind.

Turn ($180): 3 :s:

Checks to me. I bet $105. Euro dude thinks for a moment and makes it $375. It folds back to me and I make it $900 (!!).

Thoughts?
Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • MonadPrimeMonadPrime Posts: 803Member
    edited March 2017
    His line looks FoS, so I don't mind your play. In a 3! pot it might be bad but not sure.
  • neverlearn2neverlearn2 Posts: 2,862Subscriber
    Bet turn larger to get more value from draws also it sets up a better line when we do ahve to bet river.

    as played I think your line is really cool. Hes not epping much eother since he checked back flop IP mUltiway there. I could see him folding some hands we beat. if he does has say a set or wont let QJ go then we got some equity to win.
  • Bart HansonBart Hanson Posts: 6,147Administrator, LeadPro
    edited March 2017
    Is this a 3 bet pot or did you open over a limp? You language is a bit confusing when you say the weak player "opens". I assume do to your preflop sizing that you iso raised his limp.

    I would say that the villain's hand is quite polarized here. I mean if he was the type to flat your raise with AK, then check back the flop is he really going to raise the turn? So if he generally does not have one pair here what do you think that you are getting him off of? Are you thinking that he is suddenly turning 88-TT into a bluff?

    Now that we have paired up on the turn, and if you agree with me that he is strong (and wont fold to a 3 bet) or weak (you are ahead plus have diamonds to block his outs) are you thinking that this an equity protection raise? If he has a hand like say 56 he has only 9 outs because of your flush draw. If hes not folding made hands to your 3 bet I think there is consideration for call, calling instead of 3 betting turn. I would also play 33 this way quite a bit. Notice that the turn does not bring in a backdoor flush draw.

    Bart
  • squishmytomatosquishmytomato Posts: 352Subscriber, Professional
    edited March 2017
    bart - sorry for the confusion, I did indeed iso over a weak players limp.

    i very much agree with you that his range seems very polarized - but if he's competent he may realize my range is capped at aq and be turning a hand into a bluff. the problem for me is - most of the hands he would turn into bluffs I don't beat. I think he would bet his flush draws and jt type hands on flop. and I think he would call with kx on the turn here. if he did decide to raise say kj for thin value after checking flop sizing would most certainly be smaller. so that leaves hands like 7x. mid pocket pairs. etc. all of which I lose to. furthermore, if he's betting two pair (kq) on flop on wet board, and only has 77 for sets which he bets 90% as well, what strong value hands does he have left? 33? I block it.

    that's my logic behind the raise. it looks like he's turning a hand into a bluff. and I don't beat a lot of his bluffs.
  • Bart HansonBart Hanson Posts: 6,147Administrator, LeadPro
    bart - sorry for the confusion, I did indeed iso over a weak players limp.

    i very much agree with you that his range seems very polarized - but if he's competent he may realize my range is capped at aq and be turning a hand into a bluff. the problem for me is - most of the hands he would turn into bluffs I don't beat. I think he would bet his flush draws and jt type hands on flop. and I think he would call or sometimes rarely raise small with kx. so that leaves hands like 7x. mid pocket pairs. etc. all of which I lose to. furthermore, if he's betting two pair (kq) on flop on wet board, and only has 77 for sets which he bets 90% as well, what strong value hands does he have left? 33? I block it.

    that's my logic behind the raise. it looks like he's turning a hand into a bluff. and I don't beat a lot of his bluffs.

    He's turning 55-TT into a bluff now, instead of calling to get you off of JJ or AQ or he has air as a bluff or a semi-bluff? My point is I think the ladder is way more likely.
  • squishmytomatosquishmytomato Posts: 352Subscriber, Professional
    fair point. so you think may hand is strong enough to call as a bluff catcher now that I have a pair?
  • Bart HansonBart Hanson Posts: 6,147Administrator, LeadPro
    fair point. so you think may hand is strong enough to call as a bluff catcher now that I have a pair?

    That's my point yes. I think it is very optimistic for your opponent to have a stronger hand than yours that he is turning into a bluff. I think he shows up much more often with value hands he won't fold or bluffs that don't beat your hand.
    Thanked by 1squishmytomato
  • Bart HansonBart Hanson Posts: 6,147Administrator, LeadPro
    edited March 2017
    Thats just my hunch, however. This hand is quite complex when you take into account:

    1. The equity he has when bluffing vs your hand, improves to the best hand and checks back the river
    2. The times he continues with his bluff unimproved on the river
    3. The times he gives up unimproved on the river
    4. The times he improves on the river, bets as a bluff and wins

    Its probably something for CardrunnersEV. But we cant really do that type of math in real time at the table in a spot like this.
  • squishmytomatosquishmytomato Posts: 352Subscriber, Professional
    edited March 2017
    Bart wrote: »
    Thats just my hunch, however. This hand is quite complex when you take into account the equity he has when he is bluffing vs your hand improves and checks back the river, the times he continues with his bluff unimproved on the river and the times he improves and bets the river as a bluff and you call and lose.

    Its probably something for CardrunnersEV. But we cant really do that type of math in real time at the table in a spot like this.

    so there might be merit to the line of thought - he has no value hands here and shouldn't be able to call so I may as well raise and take this pot.

    like raise and we win x amount 90% of the time now vs calling and we win y amount 65% of the time

    would love to run it in card runners ev
  • Bart HansonBart Hanson Posts: 6,147Administrator, LeadPro
    edited March 2017
    Bart wrote: »
    Thats just my hunch, however. This hand is quite complex when you take into account the equity he has when he is bluffing vs your hand improves and checks back the river, the times he continues with his bluff unimproved on the river and the times he improves and bets the river as a bluff and you call and lose.

    Its probably something for CardrunnersEV. But we cant really do that type of math in real time at the table in a spot like this.

    so there might be merit to the line of thought - he has no value hands here and shouldn't be able to call so I may as well raise and take this pot.

    like raise and we win x amount 90% of the time now vs calling and we win y amount 65% of the time

    would love to run it in card runners ev

    The complexities widen when we realize that you have to make some frequency assumptions based upon information that we simply don't have, like how often he slowplays that flop with a set of 7s or KQ, how often he continues his bluffing on the river, how often he is turning a hand into a bluff on the turn that he 1. continues to bet the river with and we call 2. checks back the river, etc etc..
  • Rysher8Rysher8 Posts: 234Subscriber
    I love this raise. It's hard to see a good player checking last to act in a 4 way pot with a monster on that flop. The 3 helps nothing but 33, which you block.

    What seems much more likely is that as a thinking player, he realizes that your line looks full of it, and sees this as an easy spot to take it down. He just found out that you're not an easy spot.

    I agree with Bart that your pair of threes is likely good here on the turn. However if you call, chances are good he's going to continue his bluff on the river, but may actually shut down on a diamond. Worst of all worlds. As you mentioned he could also improve, or already have minimal showdown value. I would be surprised if your raise doesn't fold him out immediately.
  • DrSpaceDrSpace Posts: 716Subscriber
    edited March 2017
    Bad open from low jack at 130bb deep. Mostly bet flop to get out in between pairs, you are rarely getting raised. I like the turn play. You have the right hand for it. Its a committing raise.

    You are ahead a bunch on the turn but you get both equity protection and capture the value of your hand. You do fold out his odd plays that actually are pretty big equiyt favorites if he is getting out of line with a better hand because you do not rep much. You are charging the flush draws that call and are a big dog.

    I suppose a big consideration is how would he play Q ♦️ x ♦️. It is often bet on the flop but a good player may ✔️ it some too as it is a great hand to have in the ✔️ back range. But you probably loose a bunch to this hand in any line.
  • iamalliniamallin Posts: 1,173Subscriber, Professional
    1. Fold pre. 34s is just too light from LoJack.
    2. Must bet flop. Low flush draws are almost mandatory bluffs here. If they fold anything you are playing your hand correctly.
    3. As played I like the 3 bet. I would just shove. Don't see how making it 900 is more profitable.
    Thanked by 2squishmytomato Fred
  • squishmytomatosquishmytomato Posts: 352Subscriber, Professional
    @drspace just one note - over 250bb eff with villain who limped in ep. that was my reasoning for iso raising here.
  • ThehammahThehammah Posts: 7,090Subscriber
    @drspace just one note - over 250bb eff with villain who limped in ep. that was my reasoning for iso raising here.

    this is fine if and only if:

    1) villain you are isoing is going to fold to most flop cbets.. ie if you hit this board with just this one villain you cannot check it..

    2) you are likely to get it heads up with the villain you are isoing. so in this spot if there are tight players behind you. If there are either aggro or loose players behind you then raising 43 suited is -EV..



  • ThehammahThehammah Posts: 7,090Subscriber
    Bart wrote: »
    Bart wrote: »
    Thats just my hunch, however. This hand is quite complex when you take into account the equity he has when he is bluffing vs your hand improves and checks back the river, the times he continues with his bluff unimproved on the river and the times he improves and bets the river as a bluff and you call and lose.

    Its probably something for CardrunnersEV. But we cant really do that type of math in real time at the table in a spot like this.

    so there might be merit to the line of thought - he has no value hands here and shouldn't be able to call so I may as well raise and take this pot.

    like raise and we win x amount 90% of the time now vs calling and we win y amount 65% of the time

    would love to run it in card runners ev

    The complexities widen when we realize that you have to make some frequency assumptions based upon information that we simply don't have, like how often he slowplays that flop with a set of 7s or KQ, how often he continues his bluffing on the river, how often he is turning a hand into a bluff on the turn that he 1. continues to bet the river with and we call 2. checks back the river, etc etc..

    @bart

    How often at commerce because you know the player pool so well are even "good" players checking to the pfr with a strong hand here? Squishy texted me this hand and originally I thought the pro was oop not in position.. So I will give villain more bluffs and semibluffs when he raises the turn..

    but that said.. when squishy now threebets his line looks so FOS.. that even if say said pro was "bluffing" with say a weak top pair.. I would think that unless squishy spiked a set on the turn I have the best hand.. so Squishy ends up getting it in vs a good player with bottom pair and a flush draw.. not a good spot imho...

  • maphacksmaphacks Posts: 2,009Subscriber
    edited March 2017
    first off, I will cbet this with a very high frequency holding your specific hand. pretty good board for the openraiser.

    AP, I will most likely just call the turn. very strange raise by him after checking the flop, 33 makes most sense to me but that's only one combo. he could have slowplayed a hand but you won't get him off here by backraising. so he is either FOS or has KQ+. against that range, calling and evaluating river is the right play in my eyes.

    PS: betting the turn after checking flop doesn't achieve too much IMO. it's hard to get better to fold, hands like 44-TT might call a bet now.

    PPS: super unlikely villain is raising Kx/Qx or 7x . no idea why you guys think that he would do that. makes no sense at all and I very rarely see such a play.

    PPPS: ISO 43s vs a fun player is totally fine in most line ups if you have a decent postflop game. it doesn't even matter if he is a "fit or fold" player, you just have to know which type of player he is and act accordingly.
    Thanked by 1squishmytomato
  • Letmewin1Letmewin1 Posts: 1,246Member
    edited March 2017
    deleted
  • DrSpaceDrSpace Posts: 716Subscriber
    @drspace just one note - over 250bb eff with villain who limped in ep. that was my reasoning for iso raising here.

    ya makes sense -- ty

  • DrSpaceDrSpace Posts: 716Subscriber
    maphacks wrote: »
    first off, I will cbet this with a very high frequency holding your specific hand. pretty good board for the openraiser.

    AP, I will most likely just call the turn. very strange raise by him after checking the flop, 33 makes most sense to me but that's only one combo. he could have slowplayed a hand but you won't get him off here by backraising. so he is either FOS or has KQ+. against that range, calling and evaluating river is the right play in my eyes.

    PS: betting the turn after checking flop doesn't achieve too much IMO. it's hard to get better to fold, hands like 44-TT might call a bet now.

    PPS: super unlikely villain is raising Kx/Qx or 7x . no idea why you guys think that he would do that. makes no sense at all and I very rarely see such a play.

    PPPS: ISO 43s vs a fun player is totally fine in most line ups if you have a decent postflop game. it doesn't even matter if he is a "fit or fold" player, you just have to know which type of player he is and act accordingly.

    44- TT are calling now -- don't think so. Can you comment on the villain's FLUSH DRAW range?
Sign In or Register to comment.