How should I play the flop?

[pleno1]

3. more likely to continue with Qx when we bet small.

4. if we ever want to bluff this board then we save money by betting less

5. it makes a turn barrel cheaper

6, easier to get 3 streets (stack) this way

[RED-DOG]

So it's pretty much unanimous that 1400 is too much?

Seat 4 flats, seat 7 folds.

Turn


He checks. Do we have any options?

[Skippy]

6, easier to get 3 streets (stack) this way

Wat? We're only playing effective stacks of 24bb. We really shouldn't need 3 streets to get the money in.

[mulhuzz]

6, easier to get 3 streets (stack) this way

Wat? We're only playing effective stacks of 24bb. We really shouldn't need 3 streets to get the money in.

as a general point it's valid though.

we should jam now.

[outragous76]

Nothing wrong with going dogging here IMO ;O)

[SuuPRlim]

but are we not concerned about inviting a call on such a draw heavy board?

the logic of betting to make sure they fold draws here is a little backward for a few reasons, firstly were effectively betting to fold out all hands that are worse than ours and get action of stuff were beaten by/flipping with, and secondly there is no way in a million years anyone in this tournament is folding a flushdraw, so my advice would be to not worry about his flushdraws cos he's calling these whatever we bet. Think about hands in the lower part of his range (worse 1pair hands mostly) and just try to maximise value from those hands. If he happens to cling on with a flush draw and makes it then sigh w/e you got kinda unlucky just move on

Stu Rutter wrote a really good article once on maximising profit vs weaker parts of ranges, will try find it.

[cambridgealex]

These responses are interesting to me as I'd always be betting 50-65% of the pot on this flop.

My logic being

1) People never fold FDs - obviously, been said already.

2) People like to play hands with a K in them. We crush all but KQ, they're not being folded any of them.

3) Same with Qx, AQ, QJ, QT. Can't see them ever being folded for one cbet. Even if they fold to another bet, if the continuation bet is big, then that's more $ we've won.

4) JT, AT, they're not folding JT to a 60% cbet either. AT could be the one hand they're calling a 40% cbet but not a 60%. Even that he's probably calling.

A fairly typical limp calling range I'd estimate to be around 22-66, A2-A9 suited, KT-KQ off and suited, QT/QJ/JT/Q9ss, suited connectors 45ss+, a couple of suited one gappers T8ss, J9ss sort of hands. This is about 20% of the range. Of which he's calling the flop with Kx, Qx, JT and all spade combos. This is about 55% of the above range.

So 55% of the time the first limper calls your cbet - with two limpers this doubles you're chances of getting a caller. The chances of them both folding are roughly 20% (45/100*2).

The pot is 2700, and we have effectively 4-5k stacks.

Iff you bet 1450 and get one caller, then the pot on the turn is 5600 and stacks are 2500-3000, setting up an easy turn jam.

I can't believe I've written a vaguely coherant post in the state I'm in, sorry if it's awful. In summary - this flop hits their limp/calling range pretty hard. Make a decent bet, because the chances are, one of them will call it, they may fold the turn when you shove, but at least they'll have put that 1500 in on the flop rather than 1000.

[cambridgealex]

Pleno/Lolhuzz

have to take issue with your 6 points.

I'm beginning to see the error of my ways, but are we not concerned about inviting a call on such a draw heavy board?

we're ok with it for two reasons:

1. it's hard to hit on the turn, where you'll bet again.

2. for this reason, many draws will shove now with fold equity knowing they'll get to see both cards if called.

Therefore, we're defo happy to bet small, call it off.

3. more likely to continue with Qx when we bet small.

4. if we ever want to bluff this board then we save money by betting less

5. it makes a turn barrel cheaper

6, easier to get 3 streets (stack) this way

1) yes we're not worried about inviting him along with a small bet. i'm worried about the $ im leaving behind by betting so small though.

2) if they've flopped a flush draw, they're not folding to 65% cbet. they're shoving or calling regardless of fold equity. i've never ever ever seen a player limp/call the 45 green then c/fold when they flop a FD. He's flopped what he wanted, he's going with it.

3) The ONLY reason I can see to be betting smaller. Even so, as I said, I think most limp/cally fishy type villains will call a 60% bet with QJ/QT (which by the way are pretty much the only Qx hands he can have so less likely than FDs and Kx)

4) I'm never every bluffing this board so don't care about that balance. As a said before, I estimate a cbet to get through 20% of the time, so I'm almost never trying it with an airball. Also, balance hardly important in this sort of comp surely?

5) again, never bluffing the turn

6) already been said, the turn is set up for an easy jam either way, 3 streets not important in this case.

[stato_1]

Really good posts from cambridge al the tourneyman

[RED-DOG]

Thanks everyone.

So many poker savvy peeps....  No wonder I keep getting beat.

[Keylek]

bet call flop for sure

[EvilPie]

I'm beginning to see the error of my ways, but are we not concerned about inviting a call on such a draw heavy board?

We should only be concerned about inviting a call when we have a bad hand or think we're losing.

In this case we have a good hand which means we should be more worried about making him fold.

Ideally we want to be playing for stacks which is why the bet size is designed to induce the fish in to jamming thinking that we might fold. As George says we bet small to give him the illusion that we have enough left back to fold when he shoves.

Ideally we want stacks in the middle as soon as possible. Hopefully we achieve this by him jamming.

If this isn't happening then on the river we want to have no more than a pot sized bet back so that we can shove for value and get called by other worse hands.

A reasonable guide in a heads up pot is that you need 1/3 of your stack in the middle to set up a pot sized river shove.

You start with 5600 so you need at least 1900 in the middle before the river which puts 3800 in the pot with 3700 back.

Ask yourself what you'd call 3700 with if you were the other guy? If you think he's going to be folding often then you need to get more in before the river in order to make the river call more tempting for him.

With 25bb stacks it's pretty simple. Half pot on flop and turn will always make the river shove easy. You can often get it in on the turn and tempt them to sigh call with draw type hands. In a three way pot it's even easier because obviously the pot builds quicker.

If you got 50-100bbs it gets more difficult particularly against a good opponent. You get in to the realms of sizing to leave an overbet shove which is designed to look like a bluff. Maybe small river bets designed to induce a bluff or a whole host of other stuff.

This is where history against opponents comes more in to play and you can start value betting 4th pair because the history between you means he may call with worse. He then shoves and you start to level yourself in to thinking he's good enough to bluff so you call with your 4th pair because it could well be good. So much fun!!

[DMorgan]

Yeah def bet less than 1k.

The reason that betting smaller is to induce some spaz from hands that we're abso crushing. I agree for the most part that 50-65% of pot is getting called by the hands that you list, but you're getting bluff jammed on by naked gutters, small pocket pairs etc far more often when you bet 925ish than you are when you bet over 1k.

When he does bluff jam, we get it in with ridic equity so our smaller sizing doesn't actually have to result in a bluff jam very often for it to be more profitable than betting bigger. Same concept as overbet jamming, doesn't have to work as often as a smaller bet to be more +EV.

[cambridgealex]

imo  a fish (which is what i assume these limp/callers are) will see a bet of less than 1k as a "milker" and won't bluff shove that often. you may be right though dan.

[stato_1]

imo  a fish (which is what i assume these limp/callers are) will see a bet of less than 1k as a "milker" and won't bluff shove that often. you may be right though dan.

This is what im thinking too. Had to quote alex cos i refuse to use the word milker in a pha post