Quote:
Originally Posted by Sattva
00.54 4th table
if you get raise on the turn what do you think about opponent's range, would it have enough bluffs to continue considering your stack sizes?
|
I'd start with making some assumptions, then I'd relate to the turn PSR and decide my move.
Assumption 1: He's full stacked and therefore a reg.
Assumption 2: If he flats any 6 it'll be one of A6s (2 combos) 76s, 65s, 86s (12 combos).
Assumption 3: There's probably only a 50% chance he even flats those hands, so we'll call it 7 combos.
Assumption 4: A set of 22 gets raised on the flop, as does the 1 combo of 66. KK gets 4bet.
So say I were to get raised on the turn, I simply wouldn't be folding to a guy representing 7 theoretical combinations when without reads (and this is 100nl) he could be raising a frustrated AQ/AJ/A2 that decided to float this relatively dry board, or an (unlikely) misplayed KQ, or flush draws looking for delayed FE, or just a pure air. He just wouldn't represent enough, and I'd go call/ call but not love life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sattva
05.09 4th table
you say that you'd always bet 77 in opponent's position. don't you think that you'd have low equity with 77 on a board like 98x ?
|
When called (which is all that matters) our equity isn't great, but it's not terrible VS many considering the number of straight draws, and we have backdoors VS something like A9. Importantly though, the bet on the flop wouldn't be a bet for value, it'd be essentially a bet for protection, thus satisfying one of the 3 reasons for betting (value bluff protection). We have the best hand very very often, we just don't want to allow him to see free cards.
Also, a flop bet is usually on the cards for me with a whole range of hands (2nd pair, etc), the reason being that you can represent so much more later on in the hand with a flop bet, whereas a check often just means '2nd pair or give up'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sattva
16.00 4th table
you've said that if your opponent has KQ he will afraid that you has AK and what sense of this statement? I just don't understand how to use it. Should we think that if he has KQ and afraid of our AK he won't c/r flop?
|
Ok yeah I'm trying to put myself into his mind specifically. Basically I'm assuming that when guys of his level see a 3bet then they see AK as making up the bulk of the value range (ie, 2.6% of hands would be AA-QQ, AK, with 2 kings on the board around half of my value range is AK, and if you remove QQ based on my flop bet then you're left with a hand range of 2.2%, of which over half (1.2%) is AK. I'm not saying he's aware of these numbers of course, I'm just saying that plenty of people understand that AK often makes up the bulk of a 3betting range, and thus yes I'd expect him to CR KQ less because of this given that we're 200bbs deep and people often play much weak tighter with value hands (the rights and wrongs of which can be debated, but it's just the way I percieve he thinks).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sattva
21.50 2nd table
there wasn't cb, you bet vs missed cb in this spot. so maybe you should bet the river for value?
|
Indeed, I obviously got the flop action wrong and that fucked up the rest of the assumptions I made throughout the hand. A river bet given his line is totally mandatory, and I'd expect to see AQ the bulk of the time, sometimes KJ KT. He's more likely to call AQ 3 streets given the entire purpose essentially of his check flop line is to invite bluffs, so most find it difficult to find a river fold in his spot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sattva
35.25 4th table
why don't you think that vln should float a lot of his draws on the turn?
|
He may well do, and if so we should bet for value *providing* we play perfectly on the river. Unfortunately OOP no such perfect play is available, and so by betting and then possibly having to CC the river we lose more VS a top pair type hand than we would've done had we allowed villain to weakly pot control the turn then bet river. Checking also allows him to bluff his draws on turn and river, but again assuming he only bets one street we're keeping the pot smaller on a tough decision OOP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sattva
37.30 4th table
would you 3barrel in this spot if you don't hit the nuts?
|
When barreling on a board with a flush draw then 'bobbo theory' usually says that if you bet twice then you must bet 3. There are exceptions of course, such as either when there is abolsutely no hint of a straight draw (as in this example) or when the board is ace high (as in this example). So, no I wouldn't be betting 3, and only betting 2 the times we turn some equity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sattva
41.30 4th table
if you don't pick up a flush draw on the turn are you going 3barrel too?
|
Good question. I wouldn't bet again on a complete turn blank, it's basically a bet 1 or bet 3 type spot given the board texture. We're going to bet 3 the times we pick up some turn equity, so any spade, any T, probably any K. If the turn is 2d, shutdown city.
dan
grogheadflow - $100 NL
Linear Mode
