blonde poker forum

It's at 20nl. We have £27 villain has £20.

In the SB with  Td Th

Villian in the cut off raises to 70p, we 3 bet to £2.20, and he 4 bet jams lol. And we call.

It was a pretty quick call too.

He is a regular, he's not a nit like most regs at the level, and seldom folds to a 3 bet. We are just 3 betting for pure value.

He calls (against me) with aces a whole lot to 3 bets. I doubt he jams KK (ever) or QQ here - he could be doing it with JJ, but reckon it's mostly geared towards AK, or a lower pocket pair if he's spewing.

If you have those reads, sounds like you've already answered your own question.

3+  5% of the pot*  £1.80 (max rake)

£40-£1.80= £38.20

I'm in for £2.20 so £17.80 to call, to win £38.20.

I really don't like racing when you factor in rake it's just a losing play IMO (at this low level), but once I've 3 bet i reckon i'm committed against this player.

 

Obvs bad in a vacuum but apparently we're not in one of those

Defo bad in a vaccum calling here with 10 10, and really exploitative as in he can just jam QQ plus here profitably to my 3 bet, cutoff versus SB.

The jam here if we see the cards face up and it's a race, it's just a tough spot surely it's losing overall for both players.

Probably a bit of a moot point as these scenarios don't crop up that often, just a bit of an annoying spot really.

It wouldn't be as bad if the rake wasn't as a big a % of the pot.

very easy call yeh

Well you've given a range for him doing it with and if your range is right then obv it's a snap call. Seems very specific though... like if he jams 99, why is he jamming 99? Surely not as a bluff to expect you to fold anything TT+, is it cos he just wants you to fold lots of 2 overs hands cos he's scared of playing 99 postflop in a 3b pot? Does he think/do you call with 2 overs ever? If so why can he never have QQ?

What's the worst hand you'd call off with here? Cos it sounds like TT is much the same as 99/88/77 given the reads. Do you call w/ AK?

Imo, trying to work rake into your decision making is just a waste of time/silly. You're never gonna know it's a flip before you've invested any chips and by the time you have, it'll be the better option to flip. Even if you could guarantee that calling was exactly neutral EV, that's still better than the -11BB of folding now that you've 3bet. Plus TT v AK isn't exactly 50/50 anyway.

Yeah it is quite specific!

He's mostly doing this with AK - seen this a few times. I've seen him do it with 99 too one time, although he was spewing then. Someone else said he made a similar move with 66 once too.

I've never seen him make the massive over bet jam with a better pair than 10s - he's always calling or making a normal 4 bet.

99 prob a call. AK defo a call. 88 and 77 is a bit more ropey, despite the fact we are putting him on one hand here (most of the time)



 

Why?

He never has Aces or Kings in that spot

If his range is AK, and 10s- exclusively, which you seem to be telling us it is, then why would we call with AK?

That's just my reads, based on which we can't fold AK once we've 3 bet or we are just burning money.

Of course if he makes a normal 4 bet, its a diff story and the games on, we have all options open to us.

We're not actually burning much money. If you guys are deeper vs this range AK is probs a fold, you'll lose more than the 2.20 you put in by calling. As it is we only win like 6bbs more by calling than folding with AK. If the effective stack is yours, making the pot 54.20 when you call, by calling you win less than 1bb more (i.e. lose 1bb less) than if you fold. Food for thought.

Also, I don't know how much advice we can give you on a spot where you seem to have some pretty insane reads on your opponent which dictate your decision in a very player dependent situation. This post seems almost like a diary brag about a sick call rather than a hand we can dissect :p

For sure if we are 200 bb deep, i'm never calling. In the above I meant like 100bb deep.

Never actually seen that before, a 4 bet jam all (20x the pot) in super deep, maybe 1 day:)

I posted really to say what are you meant to do here 100 bb deep, it's just an annoying spot when he jams so massive.

Prob a bit of a silly post, in as much as it hardly ever happens and is very specific to this one player.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is another hand; nothing special, but quite interesting on the turn:

We have  Aspades Js UTG + 1 (£38.68) The BB Has (£35.65)

UTG 3xes to 60p, we call, SB and BB Call (Pot £2.40) Quite happy with the call preflop.

Flop,  Qs 5s 3h

SB Checks, BB donks for £1.20, UTG folds, we just call, and the SB folds.

2 Players to the turn, pot is £4.80

I decided just to call the bet instead of raising.

Turn  Kh, Villian Checks.

Thoughts on checking versus betting this turn after we have only called the flop?

In the hand I bet £3.60 - (slightly to big?? if indeed we are going 2 bet).

Really pukey spot, villian re-raises by £6. It's £6 into £18, so not quite getting the right price. He has just over £24 behind.

First of all, we do have the odds to call, but if you think you don't, why did you?

I'm starting to sound a little standoffish without meaning to :p Basically all I'm trying to do is get you to think about why you're doing things a little more. "Odds" is a blanket term that is often used incorrectly, but if we don't think we're ahead, and we don't think we're getting the right price to call, then why are we?

Not at all Rexas, sorry my fault, made a mistake in the last post.

It wasn't a min raise.

Villian re-raised by £6. It's £6 into £18.  He has just over £24 behind.

I called for implied odds.

We're getting roughly three to one on a call, which translates to 25%. So, we need 25% equity to call immediately. We have 10 clean outs to the nuts (7 spades, other 3 tens), plus 3 outs to top pair which may or may not be good, and 2 outs to other spades which pair the board but are still likely to be ok for us. Either way, we're a little better than 20% to make the nuts on the river, so we're not far from the immediate odds needed to call anyway. When you factor in the fact that the other two spade outs are going to be live a reasonable amount of the time, and occasionally our A outs might be good too, we don't really need any implied odds to make the call immediately fine.  

When people talk about implied odds, they often say things like "I called for implied odds" without being entirely sure what they mean. What implied odds basically are is the amount we think we can win on the river if we make our hand, so we can add the amount we think we will make on the river if we make our hand to the pot on the turn, so we're effectively calling the same amount to win even more. This, of course, is pretty hard to predict mathematically because it requires us knowing if the villain will bet or call if we do, and how much either way, but we can work out how much we need to make and decide how likely it is that we make that amount. For example, in this situation, assuming we HAVE to make the nuts to win the hand, we need to get at least £6 out of him on the river when we do get there to make our turn call break even. If we think we get more than that on average, then it just adds to the profitability of the call.

So, we're close to the immediate odds to call and we have decent implied odds (since I doubt he's going to check raise and then just fold the river all that often, especially if its a 10). Calling seems fine, then, ott. Calling is also probably fine pre, definitely fine on the flop, and betting is again definitely good on the turn. Wp.

I know what implied odds are bud;)

We are getting about 3/1 on a call, and need about 4/1 to call.

After my play on the flop (just calling) don't know if there is much point betting the turn.

I got lucky otr, hit flush and villain jams. Just didn't like calling here knowing we had 2 fold if we bricked. Our ace outs are dead. You are right rexas we just about have the odds 2 call.

Well, it depends on what you think he has (his range)?

He could have a weak pair that was donking the Flop to fold out overcards, is now scared and will fold by the River at least?

He could have a weaker draw (spades, 46, A4, A2; and less likely, hearts or JT), from which you can extract value.

But, obviously, if you think he is likely to be trapping you then just Check.

Too many people on bode have john black syndrome right now. A lot of people giving very good advice bit lots of people don't seem to want to listen.

Even if he does raise, do we ever hate getting it in? Play mostly comps, so no doubt different to cash, so forgive me having no idea haha

Think he'd need to be folding lots of made hands and/or calling with worse draws, which seems unlikely, to want to raise.

Definitely not folding though. He'd have had to have seen our cards for us to want to Fold.

Well, it depends on what you think he has (his range)?

He could have a weak pair that was donking the Flop to fold out overcards, is now scared and will fold by the River at least?

He could have a weaker draw (spades, 46, A4, A2; and less likely, hearts or JT), from which you can extract value.

But, obviously, if you think he is likely to be trapping you then just Check.
[/quote]

When he check raised the turn, i'm putting him on atleast 2 pair, if not a set.

If he has a draw after checking the turn, most times he'd just call.

It's quite unusual at 20nl for players to check raise strong hands when they have the betting lead as opposed to just betting themselves for value.

Maybe he thought I was quite aggro and betting most times when checked to.

I quite like his line to try and get max value from his hand.

Vern if I got it on OTT, don't think I could watch there after lol

Love getting it in in mtt's in spots like this tho if we have FE, albeit a lot shallower stacks

---------------------------------------

In the other thread, the queens thread, people were speaking about GTO

In a simple sense, using my flush draw hand as an example.

Does it mean sometimes we will be raising our flush draw here on the flop and other times just calling?

Not really, no. GTO isn't the same as balance.

GT deals with how we can make decisions to reduce our opponents profit in a complete vacuum to 0 i.e. how often we should take an action in order to make our opponent indifferent to his action. GTO assumes that our opponent is playing perfectly, and attempts to come up with a way to counter his action to make us both completely breakeven. The most common example of this in poker terms are the Nash push/fold charts that you've probably seen before. Assuming you are shoving the correct range, and calling with the correct range, you are guaranteed to be at least breakeven. Our opponents range is, as such, irrelevant if we are taking a purely gto approach to the game.

Balance is a buzz word that came into common use a few years ago as a way of saying "I should be able to be bluffing in most situations". It was also a fantastic concept, because the amount of completely crazy shit I see people do on a daily basis "because balance" is wonderful :)

JB <3

I was talking about your opinion of his range when he checked the Turn, as you were asking whether there was any point betting the Turn, not what you think he has when he raises your bet on the Turn.

Your analysis above is fine once he does Ch/R though.

Don't worry about GTO, just try to play each hand well.

Which I think you have, in both cases, and won plenty of bb's (don't know the result of the first one though).
Making your decision to post them both and argue (badly) against your own lines utterly bizarre!

He's really wide on the turn, like you said. What's happened is I have framed the hand on the basis of his check raise OTT, which probably isn't a helpful way to look at it!

It's been an interesting thread!

Thanks to everyone who has contributed, and in particular to Rexas who spent a great deal of time writing detailed posts.

Hand 1, was a beautiful flop, 882, turn was a 3, river was an ace lol He had AK