HU Hand

[titaniumbean]

BK is a tourny sicko fwiw.

[SuuPRlim]

would he do this with something like 99-TT that he a) might get you to lay down Jx or even Ax or b) Level you into calling with 7x or 88 something like that, or is that really crazy

mmmmmmm. interesting ideas.

I mean, he certainly could, and it's some creativity he is most defo capable off. However, I think he'd bet the flop a LOT with 99/TT? He could defo be planning on showing a hand like those down and then when I bet realize he can't call and go for quite a cheap bluff. Problem he has is that I CAN have full houses, and he can't, which makes it quite a tough spot for him to bluff in, and a pretty bad one at that, I think he has to respect my range and fold those hands OTR.

Also I'm not sure he would expect me to bet a 7x or 88 all that often, in fact if he gives me some credit he'll prolly realize I'm betting them near enough never and very good players like him don't try to affect the "levels" with no history. So I think he couldnt realistically expect a "merge" (folding better and called from worse with the same bet) to work here ever. I think if he thinks I am betting 7x/88 here then TT has a pretty easy call.

[SuuPRlim]

I have no idea who is right or wrong here. All I know is that a lot of 'good' players seem to believe they can get away with trying to run over their opponents in spots where they rep very thin value ranges. And they often get away with this against weak opponents. Presumably they would not do this if they knew their opponent was a strong thinking player... but he's probably heard of you and so knows you're just a weak-tight scared money type lol

haha yh, eeeeezzzzzzzz lil dave monies up for grabs. TBH he's prolly 1,000,000 to have heard of me, I don't talk about 3 or 4betting at the tables or have a ridic expensive watch - I was however wearing a bright yellow hoody, am pale, look about 17 and needs glasses, usually the look of someone who has played a decent+ amount of internet poker

I agree that 'good' players do this - like EXACTLY what we discussed recently, however we're not dealing with a 'good' player here, we're dealing with a legitimately excellent player.

[Honeybadger]

I agree that 'good' players do this - like EXACTLY what we discussed recently, however we're not dealing with a 'good' player here, we're dealing with a legitimately excellent player.

Fair play if you say this guy is excellent. The thing is though... he has not taken a very 'excellent' line. I can't really think of any value hand that a legitimately excellent player would/should play this way. When it is very unlikely that a player is making a bad bluff or is spazzing, but EXTREMELY unlikely that he has any sort of value hand... well then the bluff/spazz becomes the most likely. Which is why I ended up deciding that calling was marginally better than folding. Like I said though, I am far from 100% in my mind about this.

[SuuPRlim]

I think checking the flop with some FD's would be quite a nice play here tbh. however I'm not totally convinced that checking the TURN with them would be all that great, unless it was Xd which I think would be ok/maybe even best idk.

[Honeybadger]

I think checking the flop with some FD's would be quite a nice play here tbh. however I'm not totally convinced that checking the TURN with them would be all that great, unless it was Xd which I think would be ok/maybe even best idk.

Yep checking the flop with some % of your flush draws is a really good play that very few players do. It means your checking back range is uncapped if the turn/river brings a flush. It is also incredibly tricky and you deserve a medal if you manage to make a flush after checking back the flop. It might seem counter-intuitive, but probably the best flush draw hands to check back are some of your nut FDs, as opposed to your baby FDs. They have showdown value etc.

[SuuPRlim]

yh agreed, with K or A high diamonds he could well find himself in a decent bluff-catching spot later on in the hand.

[Honeybadger]

Come on Dave, time to post results of this hand.

[SuuPRlim]

I folded.

Initial reaction was to Jam, however I didn't know how much credit he would give me, I think if he gives me credit for knowing what I actually know then he won't be folding a flush and I honestly felt like it was the most likely thing he had.

[Honeybadger]

I folded.

Initial reaction was to Jam, however I didn't know how much credit he would give me, I think if he gives me credit for knowing what I actually know then he won't be folding a flush and I honestly felt like it was the most likely thing he had.

Fish. You need to grow a pair

[SuuPRlim]

I folded.

Initial reaction was to Jam, however I didn't know how much credit he would give me, I think if he gives me credit for knowing what I actually know then he won't be folding a flush and I honestly felt like it was the most likely thing he had.

Fish. You need to grow a pair

haha yep, no balls

[DMorgan]

Only read OP but I'd fold.

I assume that he perceives you as an unknown, in which case its perfectly reasonable for him to take this line with an Ace. He's obv smart enough to know that when you check here you are almost never checking to fold. Your range is almost entirely weak-ish showdown value (you just happen to have the top of that range) and I think vs that range he does better by checking here and raising river because most randoms will just call because they think that when he checks back turn and raises river he doesn't rep anything. If he bets turn you are almost always going to c/c c/f.

I think raising/jamming here is absolute suicide. No way he gives you credit for being able to resist betting a flush draw or a hand better than his on the turn. If you are unknown to him I think he's going to expect you to bet Ax/sets/2prs/FDs on this turn almost 100% of the time. He is also well aware that the vast majority of people will view this river bet as him repping absolutely nothing and in those kind of spots, tend to find the button in the middle a fair amount.

[DMorgan]

On the river however he can credibly rep really very little, so for a player of his caliber to decide now is the spot to bluff after refusing two excellent opportunities to stab at the pot previously seems VERY strange to me ...... I always feel like when stuff doesn't make sense there is usually a value bet somewhere behind it.

I usually see this completely the other way round... if it makes no sense I always suspect a bluff.

mmmm yh, in a lot of spots I guess you're prolly correct, thing is with good players who are well aware when they are making no sense whatsoever it just always seems like they wouldn't risk taking completely bizarre bluff-lines into reasonably uncapped (albeit quite wide for value) ranges without a good hand. Could well be wrong though everyone is up to mischief all the time in these silly tournaments.

In my experience I'd say that in these spots where people know that they are likely to be perceived to be repping nothing they have it more often than not.

Also I've never actually spoken to him but from his online persona I'd say he is far more likely to just play a standard aggro strategy and not get out of line too much because he feels like he has a big edge anyway. Obv you can't know this at the time though.

This is the kind of guy we're dealing with:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/61/mtt-community/scoop-bets-1183840/

[TL900]

I think raising/jamming here is absolute suicide. No way he gives you credit for being able to resist betting a flush draw or a hand better than his on the turn. If you are unknown to him I think he's going to expect you to bet Ax/sets/2prs/FDs on this turn almost 100% of the time. He is also well aware that the vast majority of people will view this river bet as him repping absolutely nothing and in those kind of spots, tend to find the button in the middle a fair amount.

this

[Honeybadger]

No way he gives you credit for being able to resist betting a flush draw or a hand better than his on the turn. If you are unknown to him I think he's going to expect you to bet Ax/sets/2prs/FDs on this turn almost 100% of the time.

This is not at all true IMHO. It is perfectly consistent/reasonable/likely for hero to have checked the turn with a big hand. And the reason for this is because the turn card is an Ace. For example, if hero flopped a set he would obviously be planning on betting the turn once he'd whiffed the flop check-raise. But when an Ace hits the turn he would likely change his plan and go for a delayed check-raise. This is, of course, because the Ace hits villain's perceived range well, and thus it is a card that villain is going to make a delayed cbet on very often. If a complete rag had come on the turn then I agree hero cannot rep very much by 3betting the river, but on this particular board run out hero can rep all the full houses.

If anyone should not be given credit for being able to resist betting a good hand on this turn card... it is villain, not hero. Hero can credibly be going for a check-raise on the turn, villain cannot. So, when villain checks back he doesn't get much credit from me for having a strong hand like two pair/a set, nor even usually a FD for that matter (although I concede villain can have a FD here sometimes).

What this means is that when we get to the river hero's range is still nutted, yet villain's absolutely is not. When this occurs, it does not matter how great a player villain is nor what level he is capable of thinking on ... if he puts himself in a situation where we are able to take a big position against him then there is nothing he can do about it. Villain is quite entitled to go for thin value with, say, trips Aces by raising our river bet. But once he gets 3bet he should be folding his entire range. No amount of levelling can change the fact that we are nutted here, and there is not a thing he can do about it.

Seriously Dan, put yourself in villain's shoes and imagine you have somehow got to the river with trip Aces. Let's give you ATo. You decide to raise the river donk for value, thinking you are likely to get called by worse cos you have played it weirdly etc. When that big 3bet comes back at you are you seriously telling me you're doing anything other than folding? I think you are folding, and moreover I think that you should be folding. It is all very well thinking "Wow, I am almost at the top of my range here and my opponent knows I am capped and so could be making a big move on me". But this still does not mean it is a call if your opponent's range is nutted, and Lil'Dave's range clearly is in this spot.

Edited to say: If villain does not give hero credit for being good enough to check the turn with a set/two pair, then he is definitely not going to give hero credit for being able to 3bet bluff the river to exploit villain's capped range.