$50NL facing a 3-bet flop push
Back to a site that is supported on Poker Tracker "cheers:
I have an pretty aggro image after the flop at this table after 150ish hands in. Have shown down only solid hands except for a few draws that I have re-raised post-flop.
Villian has VPIP - 21, PFR - 12, Aggression - 8 over 120 hand sample.
I am pretty sure I am good here on the flop. He would have re-popped AK pre-flop and AA is so unlikely here. I am usually only behind 66 or 33.
Is the flop check raise the best line for me to take?
I wasn't expecting him to push but when he did I figured that I am usually so far ahead here I had to call.
Comments?
** Game ID 1506242480 starting - 2007-07-18 21:58:25
** Arminus [Hold 'em] (0.25|0.50 No Limit - Cash Game) Real Money
- IJackit sitting in seat 1 with $196.87
- PolishPimp1 sitting in seat 2 with $62.10
- Bear1982 sitting in seat 3 with $58.35
- Sven10 sitting in seat 4 with $12.20 [Dealer]
- mikulas5 sitting in seat 5 with $49.25
- PeeG sitting in seat 6 with $51.30
mikulas5 posted the small blind - $0.25
PeeG posted the big blind - $0.50
** Dealing card to IJackit: :ac :qs
IJackit raised - $2.00
PolishPimp1 folded
Bear1982 called - $2.00
Sven10 folded
mikulas5 folded
PeeG folded
** Dealing the flop: :6d :ad :3s
IJackit checked
Bear1982 bet - $4.75
IJackit raised - $18.00
Bear1982 went all-in - $51.60
I have an pretty aggro image after the flop at this table after 150ish hands in. Have shown down only solid hands except for a few draws that I have re-raised post-flop.
Villian has VPIP - 21, PFR - 12, Aggression - 8 over 120 hand sample.
I am pretty sure I am good here on the flop. He would have re-popped AK pre-flop and AA is so unlikely here. I am usually only behind 66 or 33.
Is the flop check raise the best line for me to take?
I wasn't expecting him to push but when he did I figured that I am usually so far ahead here I had to call.
Comments?
** Game ID 1506242480 starting - 2007-07-18 21:58:25
** Arminus [Hold 'em] (0.25|0.50 No Limit - Cash Game) Real Money
- IJackit sitting in seat 1 with $196.87
- PolishPimp1 sitting in seat 2 with $62.10
- Bear1982 sitting in seat 3 with $58.35
- Sven10 sitting in seat 4 with $12.20 [Dealer]
- mikulas5 sitting in seat 5 with $49.25
- PeeG sitting in seat 6 with $51.30
mikulas5 posted the small blind - $0.25
PeeG posted the big blind - $0.50
** Dealing card to IJackit: :ac :qs
IJackit raised - $2.00
PolishPimp1 folded
Bear1982 called - $2.00
Sven10 folded
mikulas5 folded
PeeG folded
** Dealing the flop: :6d :ad :3s
IJackit checked
Bear1982 bet - $4.75
IJackit raised - $18.00
Bear1982 went all-in - $51.60
Comments
Hand's not strong enough to do it. You don't have a monster here, you have top pair second kicker. You're now in a big pot with a moderate hand at best.
As for his holding, a call of 4x BB in position preflop and the re-push suggests he could have 66 or 33 to me. However, if he's particularly weak, he could be limping with AK (all the cool kids seem to be doing this), or may be willing to pump it on a flush draw / straight draw (or combo of those - 45 diamonds?).
So, you're ahead of Ax (x<Q), you're behind 66,33,AK, and 45dd (15 outs 2x) is a coin flip. Further, the only Ax limping hand I see is maybe AJ, A10 (and that's a poor poor hand). So, you're ahead of A10, AJ, and a flush draw. You're behind AK, 66, 33, and if he donkey'd in with an A3 or A6. Further, you have almost no redraws...
Personally, I bet out at that flop, see what he does. In this case, you've let the pot size get out of control, and now you're making a difficult decision.
Mark
Note: I think the texture of flop would have me leading out with a pot size raise. I think it more clearly defines your hand and gives you more options against a reraise.
What strength of hand do I need to check/raise?
More times than not a check/raise will kill your action and this was my desire here. Get an very aggro-player to put an extra bet in and then take down a smallish pot with what is very likely the best hand (this flop is extremely good for my hand).
I agree that a pot-sized-bet would have kept the pot smaller and the board doesn't have any realistic straight draws out there and the diamond draw is obvious.
Pot the flop and check call a dry turn?
The villain has a VPIP of 21%, which is tightish... (disclaimer: 120 hands don't mean shit). What could he call with? Maybe AJ / A10 as I said, but more likely pocket pair, this is standard play with those hands.
Personally, I rarely check raise, maybe as a bluff, but otherwise, I'm more content just to bet out. In fact, the more I think about check-raises, the more I hate them.... Regardless, you wanted to end the hand now, so it didn't work, why are you asking what to do then? If you WANTED to end the hand, and it didn't happen, well, fold here.
You also contradict yourself, your thinking is of two streams, at one point you say that you check raise to end the hand now, and then in the same breath, you say "this flop is extremely good for my hand" (which again, I disagree with - it's moderately good). If it's extremely good, then giddily call his all in, if you wanted to end it there but got THREE bet, fold it... decide if you're behind or not and act accordingly.
I think you're beat, and beat badly - best case scenario he "only" has two pair, and you're drawing to 3 outs, most likely he's setted, and you need runner runner. If you have "pretty aggro image after the flop", you're the kinda person I *WANT* to hit a set against, because you're going to pay me off.
I'm sorry he had a set of 3's.
Mark
P.S... I guess if I WAS going to check raise, barring a decent read (i.e. I'm playing against Itsame), I would probably need at least 2 pair... check-raises are the poker equivalent of Tie Domi - all power, no finesse...
Actually he had a Kd7d for a nut flush draw.
Check raising is a valuable weapon. To discount them entirely is a mistake. If you never check/raise you might as well send the table a note that says, "Please bludgeon me with bets every time you have position on me."
Actually.. if I'm continually betting, I find that when they do get sick of it and push back, I can get all their money because I have the goods... it's more a "bring it on if you think you've got me".
Hell, even Brunson doesn't like Check raises... I'm not saying they don't have their place, but meh...
As for what he had, well, he's a bad player, if you called him, well done, and I'm glad you were able to make this fantastic (retroactive) read. Personally, I don't think top pair is worth going to war here with.
Mark
If I pot the flop and he calls. Lead a dry turn?
Actually, I completely disagree with you here. See my above posts. The villain’s play makes sense to me, especially if Cadillac has shown the ability to fold (on top of his aggressive post flop play).
Cadillac, I think for this hand the best play would have been to lead with a pot size bet on the flop. I think it would have been much more likely for the villain to chase his flush and therefore control the pot size. By going for the check-raise I think you end up pot committing yourself regardless of the villain’s hand.
As for when is a good time to check-raise; I don’t think there is a shortage of opportunities and I definitely do not think you need to have a particularly strong hand to do so.
See what the turn brings. I would look at the call as a drawing hand on the villain’s part. The only draw that seems very likely is the flush draw but I am a sucker for paying off straight chasers on a sooted board. If the turn is a non-diamond I would bet pot again. If it is a diamond then I would check fold unless you feel very strong that the villain could play a bluff this way. Considering this is low NL ring game I would hesitate to give the villain that much credit though it would be another possibility
I am thinking I like your idea here. With the diamond draw out there I could have potted it and he usually just calls here. The only real scary turn card is a diamond and I can check fold if it falls.
Cheers Jimmi
A: He likely isn't just calling with 2 pair / set as he would want to protect against the flush
B: a decent bet makes HIM make the mistake for calling
Your check initially is a mistake (see Sklansky's Theory of Poker) as you're letting him beat you for free. Betting out on the flop here (and most times) is the correct play.
Sweetjimmi: As for your disagreement with me re: my comment about him being a bad player... he called with K7 suited... that is usually a bad play, UNLESS he's been watching cadillac and his "aggro post flop style" and figured the implied odds were huge.
Which, to be honest, I may agree with.
Mark
Yes...
If he's just calling a bet on a board like that, I find it hard to believe he's not drawing. Any set / 2 pair SHOULD be protecting against the flush... the only hand that may be trouble and fit this to my thinking is AK. The set may slowplay too, but that's another argument for betting out, check raises swell the pot size while normal betting keeps it manageable.
Mark
We are not playing Min-bet here. What you are quoting is referring to Limit poker. Theory of Poker was written long before NL came into vogue.
No-Limit is about reads, trading mistakes, my small ones for his big ones preferably, and more importantly 'manipulating' your opponents. If I am a garden variety TAG here he may play his hand this way. If he believes I am aggro he is more likely to let me bet off my stack.
However, he is sick of me raping this table (I am up 3 buy-ins at this point), and he is going to make a stand. His range is pretty wide (Aggression factor of 8 is huge) here so I think the call is correct. I chose to discount AK and AA because such an aggro player is almost always going to raise those hands. That being said there is a very narrow range of hands that I am behind here for a player who is 21VPIP. (A6 and A3Sooted only and 66 33, there is no way he has 63).
He also clicked ALL-IN almost immediately after my check/raise which is a bit of a tell.
P.S. He turned a Q of diamonds and I didn't fill up on the river if that makes you happy.
But you're wrong. In fact, I'm not sorry either. I'm referring the the basic Theory of Poker - anytime you play your hand as if you could see your oppoenent's hand, you're making money. Checking to let him beat you for free is a mistake. The check raise ended up being correct in this case, but for reasons stated, the lead-out bet is a much better option.
For what it's worth, it does seem like you're making a lot of retroactive justifications:
"However, he is sick of me raping this table (I am up 3 buy-ins at this point), " - Barring chat box stuff, you're projecting here.
"His range is pretty wide (Aggression factor of 8 is huge) here so I think the call is correct." -- based on 120 hands, don't mean shit
"I chose to discount AK and AA because such an aggro player is almost always going to raise those hands" - Yea, we covered this already, though I still thing AK is possible (as mentioned earlier)
"there is a very narrow range of hands that I am behind here for a player who is 21VPIP" - and an even more narrow one that you're beating IMO.
"He also clicked ALL-IN almost immediately after my check/raise which is a bit of a tell" - Meh... I do the all in instantly with a set too, so your massive 120 hand read is the defining characteristic here I guess
"P.S. He turned a Q of diamonds and I didn't fill up on the river if that makes you happy." - I'm not particularly emoitionally attatched to your results, and you shouldn't be either.
Mark
I personally love money and aspire to having even more of it..so wouldn't a more call-able bet of say 2/3 max be in order?
Mark
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=11285781&an=0&page=0#Post11285781
A: Most of the replies say much the same as we did... continuation bet is the better line here. Some even question your being ahead here, further, the one fellow that thinks your check raise is a decent line further feels your read isn't reliable enough to call his all in. In summary, "ditto".
B: Funny, I re-read the posts in this thread and apparantly you went all "Da Vinci Code" on me to find where I called you an idiot... you asked for feedback, I gave it, with viable backup reasoning. You disagreed, told me I was wrong (referencing the Theory of Poker inappropriately, which I wasn't btw), and now you're claiming I'm calling you names...
The one thing that may have been terse was when I said....
"I'm sorry
But you're wrong. In fact, I'm not sorry either"
So, let me apologize for that false apology, and further apologize if due to the previous questionable apology, this apology is not regarded as sincere (rambling on in a Monty Python-esque spiel).
So.. ummm.. yea... back to poker, I think the consensus is that the standard continuation bet is the better play here, and you're not ahead of the all-in as often as you think you are.
Mark
he has diamonds... call!
Edit: Sweet I was right
/g2
lol Funniest thing I've read all day. I'm making it my personal mission to use the line "you went all Da Vinci Code on me" in a real world situation as soon as possible.
How DARE you say that about me!
I do NOT condone inter-species mutual masterbation.
Mark
Yeah, the general consensus is c-bet the flop. Which is the why I posted this hand in the first place.
My chk/raise #'s on pokertracker is 1% exactly. I don't feel like that is too often. Agree? Disagree? Do you think the flop is usually the wrong street to make this play? Most of my chk/raises are made on the river.
Villians post-flop aggression is damn huge and while I wasn't expecting it I was pretty sure he would take this line with a worse A or a flush draw. I agree that folding to that push is really bad.
Agreed.
Disagree
We all seem to agree that C-betting the flop is the best play in this situation I will give you my thought process through this hand. Hate it, fine. Maybe give you a different point of view and maybe you can use it to your advantage in some way. If not, maybe someone else can.
The flop hits and I have him on a fairly wide range of hands. He voluntarily puts $ in the pot with 21% all hands he is dealt. He has position on the pre-flop raiser, theoretically this should widen his range and if he feels that I am aggro he should in theory widen his range some more. If I use a range of roughly 25% here it would look like this (22+,A2s+,K6s+,Q8s+,J8s+,T9s,A8o+,K9o+,QTo+,JTo)
The flop hits and I am a long way ahead of this range. Can we agree on that?
I know that his post-flop aggression is very large and that if I check to him he will bet with another wide range of hands that I will still be ahead of. So I make a small mistake and give him a chance at a free card in order to allow him to make a bigger mistake and put money into the pot when he is behind.
Note: I am not prepared to put my stack in if we go check, check on the flop and a diamond falls on the turn.
He bets and I check raise him to $18. This puts $40ish in the pot if he calls with 2 streets of betting remaining. It basically tells him that if you are on some type of draw you are playing it for your stack (he has about $40 left).
Now he shoves the rest in. This is a strongest play to make because he still has some fold equity here if he is on a draw. If I believe he would make this play with any of the diamond flush draws included in his original range plus AJ and A10 offsuit as well A6, A3, 33, and 66 (his aggression numbers confirm this), then I still have solid equity in this pot and a call here is virtually a must.
There is a very solid post on 2+2 that discusses getting a read on a player after like 6 hands. The general consensus from many amazing players (who would all eat me for lunch) was that this was enough information for you to start to incorporate reads into your play.
FWIW 120 hands would be like 5-6 hours in a Bricks and Mortar game. If you don't think you can get a read on aggression and betting tendencies in this time frame then I am absolutely floored.
I'm sorry, you're right cadillac. I'm sorry for answering your question in a manner to which you disagree. Just let me know when you'll post next so I can agree with everything you do.
Mark
This goes both ways! This the same shit that keeps alot of the great poker minds that have been on this board away. You can both disagree with one another but quit making it so f'ing personal. You both are bringing valid points just as the other posters on this thread have. This personal shit is stupid and only hinders any chance of good discussion on the board.
Hows this?
http://pokerforum.ca/showthread.php?p=121579#post121579