Poker Forum > Strategy
Flush draw (too passive ??)
deanp27:
--- Quote from: George2Loose on February 28, 2012, 00:20:15 AM ---
--- Quote from: Erimus on February 28, 2012, 00:03:54 AM ---
--- Quote from: George2Loose on February 27, 2012, 23:50:07 PM ---
Don"t understand why you"d want to check the flop but then bet the turn?
--- End quote ---
Got the nickname fossil for a reason lol, thought with villain checking the flop as well, a bet on the turn would take it down if he had total air, but looking back betting the flop makes us look a lot stronger,
--- End quote ---
It"s difficult to see what you"re repping when you check the flop and lead the turn.
--- End quote ---
Only a set of tens that makes quads.
By checking back flop you are letting villain pot control all his medium strength hands so he only has to call 2 streets when your hand looks like ace hi. With stacks as they are, you should be betting flop for maximum leverage, especially given the stage of the tournament
TheSnapper:
--- Quote from: Swinebag22 on February 27, 2012, 23:10:29 PM ---
Also think Brendan"s point about 3 betting pre is very valid. I would auto 3 bet here, because I like doing it a lot but the argument for playing a smaller pot OOP against an unknown is fair enough.
--- End quote ---
I"m not necessarily making a case for flatting over 3 betting Rob, the thing is though, our 3 bet here is a bluff against some 3 bet calling ranges and for value against others. If villain folds to 3b"s too often then his range for continuing has us crushed and we are not 3 betting for value.
I"m more interested in Brians rationale for choosing the 3b option.
--- Quote from: AMRN on February 27, 2012, 23:19:37 PM ---
My point is that by 3betting small, there is no incentive for him to fold, meaning we are guaranteeing his call, and are then going to have to play the rest of the hand out of position against an unknown random. It"s hard enough to play oop against someone when we have reads and known tendencies, but with no prior info, it"s pretty damned awkward.
So, is there really no merit in taking the hand down here and now with a larger 3bet??
--- End quote ---
If you want him to fold are you 3b bluffing? If you are bluffing, why do you think KQs should be part of your 3b bluffing range and do you have a flatting range in this spot?
--- Quote from: George2Loose on February 27, 2012, 23:36:13 PM ---
Would rather play the hand OOP but with the lead then flatting. We"re just going to end up c/folding so many flops. I"m 3 bet folding against a random but actually don"t mind 3/5 betting against the right opponent
--- End quote ---
Tbh I see some merit in having the lead, but we have to consider other factors too. Depending on the buttons tendencies we may illicit various responses....
He folds, we take it down preflop, this can steal positional advantage and some equity from villain but he seldom folds better hands than ours.
He flats, we have initiative but villain has positional advantage and often a dominating range.
He 4 bets, we fold and burn our equity or we level ourselves.
Of course villain may call with hands that don"t fare well against our holding but then we are not really 3b"ing to have the iniative but to exploit his weak calling range and to maximise the value of our hand.
noble1:
--- Quote --- is flatting an option ?
--- End quote ---
suited broadways make far better calling hands when out of position in spots/situations like this imho...
--- Quote ---After flop should i lead out
--- End quote ---
as played leading out is the better option [have a think about what sort of bet sizing is best for manipulation] if villain 2bets the flop then at this sort of stack size close to the FT i"d 3bet jam, i wouldn"t expect a huge amount of folds from the villain BUT you wil get some folds from some random bluffs or some tight spewy nits with JJ maybe even QQ might find a fold :) u still have around 40% equity versus villains get it in flop range of sets and over pairs on this texture.. with a double up @ this stage u can coast to the FT and beyond ;D
if u call pre and this sort of low co-ordinated ish texture flops [or 864ccx for example etc] because many of a player will open a wide range from late position if u check and villain checks behind its not a flop texture that gets slowplayed very often, over pairs,two pair or a set will lead out as from his point of view this should be hitting a lot of your calling range in the BB.. [making a assumption here that down to the last 15 in a $30 MTT that villain is at least competent :)]
i suppose we are in the capped range theory area, check raise turn if villain bets out on most turn cards as he will very seldom have anything stronger than one pair and u can rep a missed check raise on the flop, this should be +ev imo and even if villain calls the re-raise a large river bet will get a hell of a lot of folds..
if we have to have a 3bet range oop versus a unknown opening from the button i think i"d prefer to be polarised....
all other scenarios i"ll leave out :) or it will be another essay... :o nice post btw, plenty of things to take/discuss from it...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version