KK 6max 50NL, anyone do anything different?

[rbc_mike]

PokerStars Hand #80089709219:  Hold'em No Limit ($0.25/$0.50 USD) - 2012/05/07 20:31:23 ET
Table 'Otero V' 6-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: foldbudiao ($54.03 in chips)
Seat 2: nicebetman ($51 in chips)
Seat 4: citizenAA ($24.02 in chips)
Seat 5: pro100_RaZoR ($51.09 in chips)
Seat 6: HERO ($199.97 in chips)
HERO: posts small blind $0.25
foldbudiao: posts big blind $0.50
JP Drouin: sits out
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to HERO [ ]
nicebetman: folds
citizenAA: folds
pro100_RaZoR: raises $0.50 to $1
HERO: raises $3 to $4
foldbudiao: folds
pro100_RaZoR: calls $3
*** FLOP *** [ ]
HERO: bets $5.25
pro100_RaZoR: calls $5.25
*** TURN *** [ ] []
HERO: bets $14
pro100_RaZoR: calls $14
*** RIVER *** [ ] []
HERO: bets $141
pro100_RaZoR: folds
Uncalled bet ($141) returned to HERO
HERO collected $44.88 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $47 | Rake $2.12
Board [ ]
Seat 1: foldbudiao (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 2: nicebetman folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: citizenAA folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: pro100_RaZoR (button) folded on the River
Seat 6: HERO (small blind) collected ($44.88)

Didn't wanna check and him check back pair and flush draw combos.  Think it's a standard value shove, is it thin? Could have a few two pair hands on this board, but thought we'd get called by worse more than 50% of the time (he's obvs never folding better).

[rfgqqabc]

I'd expect most pair and flush draw combos to have you either; A) Beat: JTss/QTss or B) Folding T8ss

The river is an awful card, i think I check/eval. Your turn size is pretty dam big too, sets up a nice shove but depends on opp's tendencies. Stats would be nice

[Honeybadger]

Turn sizing is not too big imo. On this particular board his calling range is likely to be fairly inelastic, so you could even consider betting slightly bigger. Betting bigger would leave very awkward stacks for the river of course, so I wouldn't normally advise it - but in this particular spot it is fine.

River is a jam I think. It is fairly thin though. I personally don't like check/evaluate lines in spots like these when playing online. How are you going to evaluate? In a live game there is much more reason to check/eval since you can use your spidey senses (live tells FTW).

[rbc_mike]

Yeh my thought for the turn sizing was that I wanted to set up a straightforward river jam.

Villain tendencies, don't have any stats, but he was playing pretty loose, showing up with some weird hands/lines.  Like I think he is more likely than others to raise/jam the turn as a semi-bluff, have seen him call down quite light before.  As a side note, jamming must be good for balance, obv this is a ridic small sample but for repeat encounters.

The river is an awful card, i think I check/eval. Your turn size is pretty dam big too, sets up a nice shove but depends on opp's tendencies. Stats would be nice

Can't see any bet from him other than a jam, in which case I assume you are advocating a fold?  Feel like at these stakes, I just wanna be value betting pretty thin, if he folds then it's not a disaster as he knows I'm capable of three barrelling, but has no information on my three barrelling hands.

[pleno1]

c/jam turn

[rbc_mike]

c/jam turn

if it goes c/c, are we b/f spade rivers? (this is ridic exploitable?) I have the  fwiw

[Honeybadger]

c/jam turn

Yuck.

Not saying it is bad though, it might be the nut line against this guy.

But still... yuckedy yuck yuck.

[pleno1]

y yuck?

[Honeybadger]

y yuck?

You could just call it personal preference, but I think these old school stack-a-donk lines suck. Obviously with specific reads this line can work. For example, you are playing a live game, you can feel your opponent straining at the leash and you 'know' that he will bet if you check. But readless you are just guessing/hoping that your opponent will bet for you. It is a disaster if he checks back the turn. Bet, bet, jamming is far superior imo - with your value hands and bluffs alike. It makes you much harder to play against.

[muckthenuts]

Reads? Without i prefer to go betbetbet. If we're checking river it isn't to call imo.

[rbc_mike]

Reads? Without i prefer to go betbetbet. If we're checking river it isn't to call imo.

Not many reads, except that I think he is more likely to call us down lighter, as we have been quite active.

[FrenchieBeni]

Villain tendencies, don't have any stats, but he was playing pretty loose, showing up with some weird hands/lines.  Like I think he is more likely than others to raise/jam the turn as a semi-bluff, have seen him call down quite light before. 

depends on how you think hes playing his big spades on the flop - vs passive opponents i think check/calling > jamming as the runout makes his river betting range pretty polarized.
according to villains description i like jamming.

dont like turn c/jam because of this card - if its a blank i think its a v good line.

[pleno1]

If we gonna bet turn should be a lot smaller so river is a little by more balanced. As played we should c/f this exact river.


But c/jan turn if we get here with this pts

[Honeybadger]

If we gonna bet turn should be a lot smaller so river is a little by more balanced.

I don't agree with this.

How does betting smaller on the turn mean that we are more balanced on the river? Don't get it at all, am I being stupid? It wouldn't be the first time lol...

Normally in 3bet pots with 100bb eff stacks the SPR means we have two betting schemas:

1) ~half pot flop, ~half pot turn, jam river for a little over half pot, or
2) big bet flop, jam turn.

Nothing else makes sense due to the SPR - in most 3bet pots if we bet 2/3 or 3/4 pot on the flop and turn we run out of chips to make a meaningful river bet with.

However, this hand is a little different because the SPR is bigger than in most 3bet pots (due to the min open, and the correspondingly smaller than usual 3bet size). Thus we can make more 'normal sized' flop and turn bets without running out of chips to bet the river with. The turn bet sizing OP has used sets up a really nicely sized river jam.

Also, with this particular texture of board it makes a lot of sense to bet on the bigger side. Opponent's range is likely to be more inelastic than usual, and when this is the case the logical response is to make bigger bets.

As played we should c/f this exact river.

I do agree with this.

But c/jan turn if we get here with this pts

I don't understand what this means...

[FrenchieBeni]

Also, with this particular texture of board it makes a lot of sense to bet on the bigger side. Opponent's range is likely to be more inelastic than usual, and when this is the case the logical response is to make bigger bets.

why would his turn range be inelastic? to me the majority of villains range is bluffcatching on this turn card ; 5x, Tx, 66-99
so his range is not responding the same to different bet sizings at all imo.
say you open CO, BB flat and flop comes ; we cbet he calls. turn comes . this card makes his turn calling range inelastic.

am i getting something wrong?

Quote from: pleno1 on Today at 12:39:16 PM
As played we should c/f this exact river.

I do agree with this.

Dont get this either - isnt completely dependant to how he plays his draws and sets on the flop?
like what do you want him to vb? QTs, a rare TT, QJss which he didnt raise flop? but in this case he has plenty of busto :spades: .
he could even vb worse sometimes with AQ, KQ floats.