Home
(1 votes) 
February 8, 2017
Offline
PokerStars – 250/500 Ante 50 NL (6 max) – Holdem – 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4
MP: 85.26 BB
CO: 118.74 BB
BTN: 27.81 BB
SB: 30.05 BB
BB: 72.46 BB
UTG: 19.8 BB
6 players post ante of 0.1 BB, SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB
Pre Flop: (pot: 2.1 BB) BB has 7
T
fold, fold, fold, fold, SB raises to 2.61 BB, BB calls 1.61 BB
Flop: (5.82 BB, 2 players) 8
6 4
SB checks, BB bets 2.44 BB, SB calls 2.44 BB
Turn: (10.71 BB, 2 players) 3
SB checks, BB bets 7.07 BB, SB calls 7.07 BB
River: (24.84 BB, 2 players) J
SB checks, BB bets 17.83 BB (all in for villain)
It’s not great that I block so many of the straight draws and don’t block the flush. That being said, I expect villain will cbet his flush draws more often than not, so the river seems like a good one for me to represent. Villain SB RFI is 8/11, so probably at least 60% of hands. I think villain’s range will include a lot of pairs below an eight, some busted straight draws, the occasional ace high (especially A7/A5), some slowplays, and whatever flushes he chose not to cbet. I think most strong hands are unlikely to slowplay on this kind of texture.
Blind vs blind I think a lot of low pairs will find the call button, especially if they block the flush. I don’t have a good read on how sticky this villain is. I need a fold 42% of the time for my bet to break even, probably closer to 47% of the time for it to be worth the risk.
TPE Pro
December 6, 2012
Offline
I’d go smaller on turn, bigger on river. A lot of your turn bets are going to be hands that don’t want to commit to calling raises, some combination of semi-bluffs and thin value/protection bets. Then on rivers (as here) you will shove a polarized range for a bigger size.
I probably rip it myself, but it’s worth asking: do you have any give ups here? If you jam every hand that can’t win by checking, you’re getting exploited by anyone who just closes his eyes and calls with a pair, which as you say is a common strategy BvB.
February 8, 2017
Offline
That’s really good advice about the turn sizing, thank you. When I’m planning to 3 barrel frequently, I tend to default to small flop bet and bigger turn bet, setting up a 60-100% pot shove, whether bluffing or value hunting. I should be thinking more about what my range as a whole is going to prefer. You’re absolutely right that I’m going to have a lot more thin value and semi-bluffs on this turn than hands looking to play for stacks, so a smaller size seems more reasonable. Having more chips for extra pressure on the river decision doesn’t hurt either.
Do you think our turn sizing will affect villain’s check-raising frequency much? If a lot of our range doesn’t want to face a check-raise, is there some benefit to forcing villain to commit all of their chips?
The counter-argument to that question is that by forcing villain into a decision of fold, call a big bet, or shove, they may opt to check-raise more frequently. Now that I think about it, a big bet is probably more likely to induce check-raises than allowing the villain to see the river for a price they can justify calling. Curious about your opinion (and other people’s) on that, so I’ll leave the question up even though I think the counter-argument is more likely to be right.
About the give-ups, I’m probably on the side of giving up too frequently. I’m trying to fire the third barrel more, so I might be overdoing it a touch. I was definitely under-bluffing in spots like this for a long time, but need to be careful about becoming too spewy while trying to improve my river play.
November 28, 2015
Offline
DDD I love this question. I am curious what you think as well, Andrew?
TPE Pro
December 6, 2012
Offline
I think in practice people tend to raise/fold more vs bigger bet, but that’s not a law of nature. What i think is more relevant is that your thin value and semi-bluffs tend to have better equity when a small bet is called than when a large bet is called. For a polar range this is not so relevant – strong hands have good equity even vs a stronger range, and airballs have poor equity even against a weaker range. Here, for instance, if a small bet is called and you river a T or even a 7, you have a fair bit of equity. Less so if the larger bet is called.
November 28, 2015
Offline
OHH! This one is going in the notes of my poker binder. Thanks Andrew.
February 8, 2017
Offline
That makes a lot of sense. In other words, the villain’s calling range gets narrower as our bet size increases, and some hands that we might like to bet for value become very marginal against the tighter range. We’ll also have a harder time being profitable with a third barrel if we reduce the number of marginal combos that reach the river.
It’s funny, I’ve explained that concept to people for other situations, and it’s something I rely on to make many decisions. Recognizing all of the spots that it applies to… well, that’s another story.
Most Users Ever Online: 2780
Currently Online:
35 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
bennymacca: 2616
Foucault: 2067
folding_aces_pre_yo: 1133
praetor: 1033
theginger45: 924
P-aire 146: 832
Turbulence: 768
The Riceman: 731
duggs: 591
florianm1: 588
Newest Members:
CSerpent
KJ
Tillery999
sdmathis89
ne0x00
adrianvaida2525
Forum Stats:
Groups: 4
Forums: 24
Topics: 12705
Posts: 75003
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1063
Members: 12010
Moderators: 2
Admins: 5
Administrators: RonFezBuddy, Killingbird, Tournament Poker Edge Staff, ttwist, Carlos
Moderators: sitelock, sitelock_1
