c/r turn for value at nl100 and below

[klamsauce]

Hey guys, a little about myself. I was midstakes reg on FT before black friday and had much success there just applying a typical 'keep opponents ranges wide strategy' which involved rarely raising the turn under any circumstances. Since then though, I've had to move to merge like a lot of people and I'm stuck playing nl50 and nl100. What I'm finding though, is this strategy doesn't seem to be optimal here.

At mid stakes, probably nl200 and higher, most regs are good enough to recognize spots like if you bet this turn as a bluff you have to bet this river, etc etc. People are 3brl bluffing frequently. They are also 3brling for value often as well to balance their 3brl bluffing range. So keeping opponent's ranges wide is key and I can rarely think of a time when raising the turn is ever a good play. At these small stakes or micro stakes though, I'm finding people's overall river play is pretty dismal. Alot of people fire 2 and give up on the river when they are bluffing, even if the river card is the nut bluff card. Also, people are not value betting rivers well either, and checking behind really strong hands.

What I propose is to c/r the turn for value to target these players who will bet turn check behind river, but will call a c/r on the turn and a river shove. Keeping opponents' ranges wide and bluffing ranges alive isn't a top priority when villain's just aren't going all the way w their bluffs for us to tailor our play to it. At the same time, I feel like it's possible to induce a spewy shove from a gutshot if we c/r the turn than for that same villain to actually fire all 3 as a bluff w that gutshot if we just c/c turn.

There are definitely some players I play with in these games who I wouldn't make this play against, as I would consider them stronger players capable of reading hands ranges and not afraid to fire away for 3 streets. But in general, I am just getting to the river too often w the nuts only for my opponents to check behind tptk, a hand I could have easily got all the money in against somehow had I raised somewhere.

[piguanitore]

What about c/c turn, lead river against these guys to keep the top pair type hand or good/medium hands they are going to fold to a c/r on the turn, but call on the river vs a lead and not vbet when checked to ?

[klamsauce]

Originally Posted by piguanitore

What about c/c turn, lead river against these guys to keep the top pair type hand or good/medium hands they are going to fold to a c/r on the turn, but call on the river vs a lead and not vbet when checked to ?

This makes sense, the only thing I don't like about it, is that a c/r on the turn looks much bluffier than a c/c turn lead river line, I think allowing some villains to make river hero folds to the lead whereas u can kind of trap them in the hand if they dont believe the turn c/r.

[DRUK88]

I have been noticing this a lot more lately myself, and is applicable to micros too.

I think if the turn makes the board wetter, c/r'ing has way more merit. The reason being, V is likely gonna be betting with draws more often and is also unlikely to fold them to a c/r (position, misperception of pod odds etc). Also, V is likely to put us on more bluffs (as we can now have more draws), thus making him even more likely to call.

However, on dry turns, it's kind of dependent on his turn barrel stat and vpip/pfr. If tight players 2barrel on bad turns, I think c/r can be good. We also know that if he does checkbk turn, he wouldn't have a hand that we would be getting 3 streets from anyway, so we just donk river and expect him to call very frequently.

Regarding c/c, c/c, donk, I think this should only be done when V's bluff frequency improves, but the river card comes that gives him showdown value. An example would be if we flat KTs bb v btn, flop T74r (c/c), turn Q (maybe bringing in bdfd for good measure), then river bringing a K. Here V is gonna be checking back hands like AQ, KJ, QJ, maybe even AK, but will call with all these hands if we donk.

Thoughts?

[guitarizt]

I think it's better to call some flops and lead more turns against people who won't ever bluff you. That being said I never slow play hands at micros for this reason. They can't hand read, they can't fold big hands, and especially if I'm oop I want to shovel money into the pot and take control of the betting because people aren't aggro enough.

[Zaza]

I think this makes a lot of sense, We are too often stuck looking at hands from our own perspective, when using bet sizes or when deciding to slowplay in certain spots.Ive found that to for example slow play sets on flop anbd turn or stronger hands doesnt work as great at lower stakes, id say even at 200 nl i see people not bluff often enough in optimal spots.
I also think the ch r turn line can be good to induce spews from average to mediocre thinking regs at these limits as they will get confused and may call down too lite or bluff jam the turn.
I dont think that the issue of our river range being too weak is gonna be one vs the vast majority of regs at these limits as they simply dont make these type of notes, I imagine they will write down the hand but not infer what that play means for our overall range.
Good point imo.