Playing into a paired board

[bundle]

Ok now on a flop of 666 it is checked around to the button, now the blinds are 1200/2400.. and he lumps in a pot sized bet..WTF Is this guy trying to tell me he had a 6. NO WAY he can have a 6, who in their right mind would lose all the customers with quads, so I call thinking the hand will be decided on the turn, and infact I hit my Q there for the boat…anyway after the hand is over hes yelling you fish, how can you call that flop bet…Well I deduced the next card will sort out the winner..

So here is the big question, if the board came 77J and someone bets out, what the hell chance is there in them holding the 7. Don’t you want some value here. If there is no danger on the board would anyone ever bet holding the set or trips or whatever ?

Cheers.

Your ever learning Bundle

[Ironside]

basically the first hand your calling a bet with the pot giving you 2-1 when you are proberbly 3-1 dog to win at river or 6-1 to hit on the turn

as the raisers problery doesnt have a 6 but has a PP

sometimes when i have trips i will bet out cause people dont expect you too sometimes you get the value by betting your hand yourself other times you have to wait for the bluff to get the value

[bundle]

Yeah i agree i didnt have the odds but my hand looked so nice KQc, and with 38 runners left i was 2nd place in chips, so i made the dodgy call...I really find it hard to believe players bet on the flop holding the goods, The turn yes sure, But the flop i just can't see it...

[bundle]

Oh and BTW he called me down.  he had A8. And i had him for the ace here. And sent him to the rail

[bundle]

Hmmm Food for thought

[totalise]

you also have to factor in preflop action, to try and establish the liklihood of them holding a solitary 6 in their hand.

If you have raised preflop, then its less likely that they are calling with a filthy hand like A6 or K6....  (if the stacks are deep, they might have 6/7 or 5/6.. but stacks are rarely that deep)... so you aren't really going to be doing much wrong if you always assume that they dont have it, rather then the other way round

As for people that bet 95% of the time when they have it, and 95% of the time when they dont, its a pretty bad idea, for obvious reasons

[bundle]

you also have to factor in preflop action,

I had, he limped on the button, small just made up, I was the BB, I was going to raise but thought i would see a flop incase Aces came out and with him limping, i thought he might hold 1, also the Sb making up was not far away in my thoughts

[thelodger]

Please do explain. Some of us dont get the obvious

Me neither!

[ifm]

Please do explain. Some of us dont get the obvious

Me neither!

Add me to this list

[Norwich Fan]

he could easily have a mid range pp, like 55 or 77 and i too would consider someone calling here with KQ a bit of a fish. (although if he was constantly button stealing in the game, then a flat call and raise on the turn might do the trick).
But i dont like the call, hoping to hit an over card type of play.
I too would often bet out at boards like these, cause often, first bet takes it down.
Dont get totalises answer at all.

[totalise]

The reason why the comment was made was with regards to the 95% frequency with which Royal Flush is apparently betting in these situations

On the one hand, he is saying that *fish* never give him credit for having quads,so, so when he has it, great, we have perfect coverage because we bet every time. Great huh?

Not great at all, because whilst we probably get stacked the 1 time in 9,800 that we have quads, we are exposing ourselves to dumping off a lot of chips on crafty bets/bluffs  a lot the other 9,799 times we dont have it.

In any optimal strategy, theres going to be a bet frequency that maximizes your expected profit, and obviously when you are betting on a board that is going to favor a Button limper much more then a BB random hand, the optimal 'bluff' frequency, (because, its  going to be a bluff  a high % of the time unless you habitually check pairs or A/x in high blind/short stack situations vs a Late position limper)  is going to be a lot less then 95%

if you bet say 1/2 the pot on a bluff, you need it to be succesful 33% of the time (this is assuming zero pot equity for simplicity)

pot 10, you bet 5... two times you lose the 5, one time you win the 10.. 2/1 is 33.33%

In these spots, you are unlikely in a typical tourney to pick up the pot even 33% of the time on a bluff, for reasons already described, so a betting frequency of even this low amount seems excessive.

The point wasn't so much to comment on the correct betting frequency, more to outline that betting 95% of the time in this spot is far too high to show any sort of profit.

Norwich Fan said this:


"I too would often bet out at boards like these, cause often, first bet takes it down.
Dont get totalises answer at all."

i agree that you should bet reasonably often, but not 95%

[snoopy1239]

I think it depends on the texture of the flop.

If it comes  , then it might be wise to bet rather than risk giving the draws a free card.

[NoflopsHomer]

Leading out when you have a set is much better I think, especially if people have you tagged as an agressive player.

[elblondie]

I agree with most of this. The 2 situations are slightly different.
If I was holding a 6 on a board of 666 I would probably check the flop, to give my oponnent opportunity to bluff the turn. If he doesn't I will bet the turn and it will look like an obvious steal anyway.
If the flop is 77J and I hold a 7, I will bet the flop 80% of the time, in the hope my opponent has a Jack, a different pair, or just fancies making a move on me. If my opponent is tight then I may give it obe check. Remember of course this hand can easily get outdrawn by an inside staright or pocket pair. So a check may get you into a lot of trouble.

[bundle]

Great to see the Pro posting in this forum on hand analysis