Raise or call here?

sandhu31sandhu31 Red Chipper Posts: 49 ✭✭
edited June 23 in Live Poker Hands
Live 1/3..stacks ~700

-utg limps
-Villain raises to 20 in UTG+2 (tight aggresive player, doesn't get out of line too much)
-Hero calls on the B with :8D: :6D:
-limper calls, 3 ways to the flop

Flop (64): :7H: :5H: :5S:
-checks to Hero
-Hero bets 35
-Villain calls (I think he cbets a flush draw or over-pair most of the time, so I think he's just floating with overcards)

Turn (134): :QH:
-Villain leads for 50
-Hero calls (Thought about raising but decided to flat, putting him on a AQ or KQ type of hand now. Also, if he has a heart I have 2 less outs and he's unlikely to fold)

River (234): :3H:
-Villain checks
-Hero bets 125 (8 high here so I take a stab. Repping a hand like :AH: :5C:
-Villain calls and shows :KH: :QD:

How's my line?

Comments

  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭✭
    IMO, fine up until you name what you're repping. Do you really call with this hand pre-flop? Are you really flat-calling the turn?

    I don't mind the river stab as a general practice, but I don't think that you can rep enough to generate enough folds in this particular hand to make it profitable. I think that ship sailed once you flat-called the turn.

    So, once you name what you're repping, it opens up how you would have to have played the hand differently earlier to tell that story all the way.
  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,217 ✭✭✭✭✭
    sandhu31 wrote: »
    How's my line?

    optimistic and spewy.
    if you want folds - your bet sizing needs to be more polarizing.

    as played - you're giving V the right odds to call with the type of hands we'd expect him to have. so he's really not making much of a mistake.

    if you're going to play this hand from the button, a 3-bet is better.
    but personally - in a valu-oriented low stakes game, this hand is a fold.
    you don't need to "balance your range" with garbage like this as Polk and Ryan Fee do in the bigger games. And if you're going to take a page from their book - then your bets need to be more convincing.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I agree with basically everything Kagey said.

    Utg is being isolated by a tight aggressive player. What is your plan for winning the hand? Is UTG a loose passive fish and UTG+2 (mp1) trying to isolate him \ her?

    I will occasionally 3bet this hand if I've been inactive and feel the tag will fold a big hand like AJs AQo or even TT to my 3bet. Other than that its a value oriented game.

    Seeing how your trying to rep A5o leads me to believe your not really beating this game and are just spewing money on every street.

    Given your being floated oop by KQo shows how value oriented you should be in this game. Don't need fancy play to beat these players. I would like your sizing if you had 77, 55, A5s, 9h8h, something with a good amount of equity.

    As Kagey pointed out if you want folds polarize your sizing a bit more. Preflop raiser checks so likely doesn't have a PP. Most likely A10s+ AJo+, KJ+. i think 45-55 gets the job done on the flop. Then you face a donk turn bet as played and you choose to call because you think he has Qx maybe or maybe not with a heart..you plan on just hitting your 6 outter?

    All around super spewy imo.

    There was a 50\100 game I was watching earlier where they talked about players using lines Doug uses at the nose bleeds. Doesn't work well in the low stake games. Browse some of my old post, I speak from experience.
  • sandhu31sandhu31 Red Chipper Posts: 49 ✭✭
    Thanks guys..I agree I played it badly, especially post flop. Can't really rep A5o on the river. Folding this on the button pre flop with ~700 seems a little too tight though.. but maybe I'm wrong.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    sandhu31 wrote: »
    Thanks guys..I agree I played it badly, especially post flop. Can't really rep A5o on the river. Folding this on the button pre flop with ~700 seems a little too tight though.. but maybe I'm wrong.

    How often will 86s make a straight or flush? You already proven you don't have fold equity, so most of the time you need make 2 pair or better with this type of hand to get paid off. Doesn't happen often enough and your over thinking deep stack play. Axs, suited broadways, PP, stick to those and do yourself a favor.
  • sandhu31sandhu31 Red Chipper Posts: 49 ✭✭
    You’re right @Austin. It’s a fundamental leak that I’m going to plug. I have to go back to the fundamentals and have the discipline to not play without the initiative and range advantage. Thanks for the wake up call..I needed it
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭✭
    Hold on, hold on, hold on.

    Calling 86s on the button with effective stacks of $700 in a 1/3 game is NOT a leak. Not at all.

    What IS a leak is calling without a plan. How does V play? Are you able to assign him or her a range yet? What are ways that you can win post-flop vs. V? Does V tend to fold to pressure or call down light?

    In addition, what is your table image? How often have you been 3betting, and with what hands?

    And, perhaps most important, what are SB and BB likely to do -- fold, call, or 3bet?

    All those questions determine whether calling (or raising or folding) with 86s against this particular opponent is a viable or optimal option.

    But, please, don't believe that it is categorically a leak to call here. Just know WHY you are calling and WHY it is better than your other options.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hold on, hold on, hold on.

    Calling 86s on the button with effective stacks of $700 in a 1/3 game is NOT a leak. Not at all.

    What IS a leak is calling without a plan. How does V play? Are you able to assign him or her a range yet? What are ways that you can win post-flop vs. V? Does V tend to fold to pressure or call down light?

    In addition, what is your table image? How often have you been 3betting, and with what hands?

    And, perhaps most important, what are SB and BB likely to do -- fold, call, or 3bet?

    All those questions determine whether calling (or raising or folding) with 86s against this particular opponent is a viable or optimal option.

    But, please, don't believe that it is categorically a leak to call here. Just know WHY you are calling and WHY it is better than your other options.

    Vs this villain there is not much fold equity as he is floating with just KQ and a back door flush draw, which would put a 4 liner out there. These hands are only profitable through play-ability or super deep stacks. The fact that hero is trying to make a hand on a paired, 3 flush board, fishing for a straight just proves how unprofitable this hand is for the hero.

    I suggest learning how to play a tight range before you expand this far.
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    Hold on, hold on, hold on.

    Calling 86s on the button with effective stacks of $700 in a 1/3 game is NOT a leak. Not at all.

    What IS a leak is calling without a plan. How does V play? Are you able to assign him or her a range yet? What are ways that you can win post-flop vs. V? Does V tend to fold to pressure or call down light?

    In addition, what is your table image? How often have you been 3betting, and with what hands?

    And, perhaps most important, what are SB and BB likely to do -- fold, call, or 3bet?

    All those questions determine whether calling (or raising or folding) with 86s against this particular opponent is a viable or optimal option.

    But, please, don't believe that it is categorically a leak to call here. Just know WHY you are calling and WHY it is better than your other options.

    Vs this villain there is not much fold equity as he is floating with just KQ and a back door flush draw, which would put a 4 liner out there. These hands are only profitable through play-ability or super deep stacks. The fact that hero is trying to make a hand on a paired, 3 flush board, fishing for a straight just proves how unprofitable this hand is for the hero.

    I suggest learning how to play a tight range before you expand this far.

    Learning tight should definitely come first. I'm just responding to what seems like responses that suggest that folding or 3betting are the only good options. They're just not.

    For OP in this case, there are other issues that need to be addressed before I would add calling this hand to his arsenal. For instance, might "tight aggressive players", as OP described V, don't raise KQo in UTG+2. I just didn't want him -- or anyone -- to get the impression that this hand is an auto-fold.
  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,217 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Learning tight should definitely come first. I'm just responding to what seems like responses that suggest that folding or 3betting are the only good options. They're just not.

    actually, @moishetreats - they are
    86s plays awful against an EP limping and raising range...
    and with everybody folding - we're not getting any overlay to our call

    since we know that playing Bingo! is not the correct way to play poker
    we need to create a plan before we put money in the pot
    3-betting sets us down the path of telling a story that we've got a monster hand which will help us with fold equity later

    calling doesn't.
    so when we call, we've basically got to hit our hand against a V who's sticky
    imo, this isn't profitable ever
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭✭
    kagey wrote: »
    Learning tight should definitely come first. I'm just responding to what seems like responses that suggest that folding or 3betting are the only good options. They're just not.

    actually, @moishetreats - they are
    86s plays awful against an EP limping and raising range...
    and with everybody folding - we're not getting any overlay to our call

    since we know that playing Bingo! is not the correct way to play poker
    we need to create a plan before we put money in the pot
    3-betting sets us down the path of telling a story that we've got a monster hand which will help us with fold equity later

    calling doesn't.
    so when we call, we've basically got to hit our hand against a V who's sticky
    imo, this isn't profitable ever

    I hear ya', @kagey. But, I'm not there yet.

    1) We don't have an accurate profile of V. According to OP, he's "tight aggresive player, doesn't get out of line too much" but also raises from UTG+2 with KQo then check-calls the flop. Yes, maybe his play on this hand was anomalous. But, I'm not putting too much stock into V's profile at this point.

    2) Let's say that OP and you are correct that V is a sticky TAG. Then, deep-stacked with 86s would be a great hand, IMO, with which to call on the button. It means that OP would get paid off on the turn or river by an overpair were the straight to come in. It also reduces reverse implied odds. KK vs. 86s -- it's hard for the 86s suited to lose on a board where OP's draw hits.

    3) If your and OP's image of V is off and V is much wider, then I would certainly not remove calling from the toolbox depending on how V plays. Based on this hand alone, I'm not sure that it's optimal; I'd rather flat-call in position against a V who is likely to cbet, double-barrel, or even triple-barrel with air. That doesn't seem to be the case.

    Here are couple of things where we agree. Flat-calling pre-supposes very strong post-flop play -- hand-reading, range-reading, and V-reading -- and awareness of deeper-stack play. In addition, flat-calling, IMO, shouldn't be the default play.

    But, I DO believe that flat-calling is a tool in the box that should not be eliminated. Against an opponent who gets sticky with top pair or more or against an opponent who barrels wildly, there is room for tremendous profit calling rather than bloating a pot when V might do it for you -- and enabling you to apply pressure later in the hand by being deep-stacked.

    I'm not sure that the conditions fully apply here but neither do I think that there is no room for its consideration.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭✭
    Here are couple of things where we agree. Flat-calling pre-supposes very strong post-flop play -- hand-reading, range-reading, and V-reading -- and awareness of deeper-stack play. In addition, flat-calling, IMO, shouldn't be the default play.

    I think that's the big point around calling preflop. Without serious postflop skills, @kagey is right about flatting being spewy. (And sorry @sandhu31 , based on your previous comment / other thread, you don't seem good enough for that.) And even if it's good in theory to 3bet with 86s, I think it also requires some good skills to proper maneuverer such hand in a 3bet pot.

    Otherwise, I've nothing against calling with 86s preflop, esp. if Hero has position. But we need a clear plan and enough info a) for the plan to be +EV and b) to be able to execute the plan.
    2 best way to be +EV with 86s IMHO are to have a lot of postflop fold equity, and being against a station who is going to call way too much when we hit.
    But again, as you said, you need strong postflop skills.
    1) We don't have an accurate profile of V. According to OP, he's "tight aggresive player, doesn't get out of line too much" but also raises from UTG+2 with KQo then check-calls the flop. Yes, maybe his play on this hand was anomalous. But, I'm not putting too much stock into V's profile at this point.

    The play is anomalous only if the description of V is correct. If Hero's observation are not too good, then it can lead to a biased (or even wrong) description, leading then to bad decisions.

    If we run the hand with the opinion of V being "sticky straightforward", then the strategy is way different than against a "TAG not going out of line".
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    kagey wrote: »
    Learning tight should definitely come first. I'm just responding to what seems like responses that suggest that folding or 3betting are the only good options. They're just not.

    actually, @moishetreats - they are
    86s plays awful against an EP limping and raising range...
    and with everybody folding - we're not getting any overlay to our call

    since we know that playing Bingo! is not the correct way to play poker
    we need to create a plan before we put money in the pot
    3-betting sets us down the path of telling a story that we've got a monster hand which will help us with fold equity later

    calling doesn't.
    so when we call, we've basically got to hit our hand against a V who's sticky
    imo, this isn't profitable ever

    I hear ya', @kagey. But, I'm not there yet.

    1) We don't have an accurate profile of V. According to OP, he's "tight aggresive player, doesn't get out of line too much" but also raises from UTG+2 with KQo then check-calls the flop. Yes, maybe his play on this hand was anomalous. But, I'm not putting too much stock into V's profile at this point.

    2) Let's say that OP and you are correct that V is a sticky TAG. Then, deep-stacked with 86s would be a great hand, IMO, with which to call on the button. It means that OP would get paid off on the turn or river by an overpair were the straight to come in. It also reduces reverse implied odds. KK vs. 86s -- it's hard for the 86s suited to lose on a board where OP's draw hits.

    3) If your and OP's image of V is off and V is much wider, then I would certainly not remove calling from the toolbox depending on how V plays. Based on this hand alone, I'm not sure that it's optimal; I'd rather flat-call in position against a V who is likely to cbet, double-barrel, or even triple-barrel with air. That doesn't seem to be the case.

    Here are couple of things where we agree. Flat-calling pre-supposes very strong post-flop play -- hand-reading, range-reading, and V-reading -- and awareness of deeper-stack play. In addition, flat-calling, IMO, shouldn't be the default play.

    But, I DO believe that flat-calling is a tool in the box that should not be eliminated. Against an opponent who gets sticky with top pair or more or against an opponent who barrels wildly, there is room for tremendous profit calling rather than bloating a pot when V might do it for you -- and enabling you to apply pressure later in the hand by being deep-stacked.

    I'm not sure that the conditions fully apply here but neither do I think that there is no room for its consideration.

    Reads like your trying to make a hand vs a sticky opponent and hoping there are enough implied odds due to stack depth. Not sure there is.... Maybe with 76s but not 1 gappers.
  • Yanming ZYanming Z Red Chipper Posts: 294 ✭✭✭
    @kagey @Austin I believe folding 86s on the button is way too tight. At low stakes you rarely have to worry about blinds 3 betting, and 200BB+ is plenty implied odds.

    I’d also lean toward calling instead of 3 betting, because if H truly believes the V is a TAG (which we found out later that he isn’t, because the guy raised KQo from +2, but we don’t know this during the hand), V’s range should be fairly strong from EP. 3 betting will likely get little folds, and sometimes will invite a 4 bet.

    And I don’t think we should avoid the V because he is sticky on the flop with 2 over cards. We should be looking to exploit it. Which means more double barreling on a board that we have a range advantage. In this particular hand the V got the perfect runout on the turn and the river allowed him to continue, but most of the time we are just gonna pick up whatever he called us on the flop with on our second barrel.
  • keasbeykeasbey Red Chipper Posts: 91 ✭✭
    i am just here to say that i agree with everything Teddy @kagey -B said. ok ill show myself out
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    kagey wrote: »
    Learning tight should definitely come first. I'm just responding to what seems like responses that suggest that folding or 3betting are the only good options. They're just not.

    actually, @moishetreats - they are
    86s plays awful against an EP limping and raising range...
    and with everybody folding - we're not getting any overlay to our call

    since we know that playing Bingo! is not the correct way to play poker
    we need to create a plan before we put money in the pot
    3-betting sets us down the path of telling a story that we've got a monster hand which will help us with fold equity later

    calling doesn't.
    so when we call, we've basically got to hit our hand against a V who's sticky
    imo, this isn't profitable ever

    I hear ya', @kagey. But, I'm not there yet.

    1) We don't have an accurate profile of V. According to OP, he's "tight aggresive player, doesn't get out of line too much" but also raises from UTG+2 with KQo then check-calls the flop. Yes, maybe his play on this hand was anomalous. But, I'm not putting too much stock into V's profile at this point.

    2) Let's say that OP and you are correct that V is a sticky TAG. Then, deep-stacked with 86s would be a great hand, IMO, with which to call on the button. It means that OP would get paid off on the turn or river by an overpair were the straight to come in. It also reduces reverse implied odds. KK vs. 86s -- it's hard for the 86s suited to lose on a board where OP's draw hits.

    3) If your and OP's image of V is off and V is much wider, then I would certainly not remove calling from the toolbox depending on how V plays. Based on this hand alone, I'm not sure that it's optimal; I'd rather flat-call in position against a V who is likely to cbet, double-barrel, or even triple-barrel with air. That doesn't seem to be the case.

    Here are couple of things where we agree. Flat-calling pre-supposes very strong post-flop play -- hand-reading, range-reading, and V-reading -- and awareness of deeper-stack play. In addition, flat-calling, IMO, shouldn't be the default play.

    But, I DO believe that flat-calling is a tool in the box that should not be eliminated. Against an opponent who gets sticky with top pair or more or against an opponent who barrels wildly, there is room for tremendous profit calling rather than bloating a pot when V might do it for you -- and enabling you to apply pressure later in the hand by being deep-stacked.

    I'm not sure that the conditions fully apply here but neither do I think that there is no room for its consideration.

    Reads like your trying to make a hand vs a sticky opponent and hoping there are enough implied odds due to stack depth. Not sure there is.... Maybe with 76s but not 1 gappers.

    That's exactly what I am trying to do (depending on skill level, of course). And why on earth aren't there enough implied odds here given the stack depth??
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    kagey wrote: »
    Learning tight should definitely come first. I'm just responding to what seems like responses that suggest that folding or 3betting are the only good options. They're just not.

    actually, @moishetreats - they are
    86s plays awful against an EP limping and raising range...
    and with everybody folding - we're not getting any overlay to our call

    since we know that playing Bingo! is not the correct way to play poker
    we need to create a plan before we put money in the pot
    3-betting sets us down the path of telling a story that we've got a monster hand which will help us with fold equity later

    calling doesn't.
    so when we call, we've basically got to hit our hand against a V who's sticky
    imo, this isn't profitable ever

    I hear ya', @kagey. But, I'm not there yet.

    1) We don't have an accurate profile of V. According to OP, he's "tight aggresive player, doesn't get out of line too much" but also raises from UTG+2 with KQo then check-calls the flop. Yes, maybe his play on this hand was anomalous. But, I'm not putting too much stock into V's profile at this point.

    2) Let's say that OP and you are correct that V is a sticky TAG. Then, deep-stacked with 86s would be a great hand, IMO, with which to call on the button. It means that OP would get paid off on the turn or river by an overpair were the straight to come in. It also reduces reverse implied odds. KK vs. 86s -- it's hard for the 86s suited to lose on a board where OP's draw hits.

    3) If your and OP's image of V is off and V is much wider, then I would certainly not remove calling from the toolbox depending on how V plays. Based on this hand alone, I'm not sure that it's optimal; I'd rather flat-call in position against a V who is likely to cbet, double-barrel, or even triple-barrel with air. That doesn't seem to be the case.

    Here are couple of things where we agree. Flat-calling pre-supposes very strong post-flop play -- hand-reading, range-reading, and V-reading -- and awareness of deeper-stack play. In addition, flat-calling, IMO, shouldn't be the default play.

    But, I DO believe that flat-calling is a tool in the box that should not be eliminated. Against an opponent who gets sticky with top pair or more or against an opponent who barrels wildly, there is room for tremendous profit calling rather than bloating a pot when V might do it for you -- and enabling you to apply pressure later in the hand by being deep-stacked.

    I'm not sure that the conditions fully apply here but neither do I think that there is no room for its consideration.

    Reads like your trying to make a hand vs a sticky opponent and hoping there are enough implied odds due to stack depth. Not sure there is.... Maybe with 76s but not 1 gappers.

    That's exactly what I am trying to do (depending on skill level, of course). And why on earth aren't there enough implied odds here given the stack depth??

    What are the odds of 2 pair or better and villain having a hand to pay you off with? 9 out of 10 times you don't flop anything. The 1 time is a flush draw and who knows if villain doesn't make a boat or higher flush. Hands benefit from FE not making hands. It's the playability aspect of it, not the fact you will make a flush 6.4% of the time.
  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,217 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 26
    there are a few assumptions here that are contradictory:
    Yanming Z wrote: »
    @kagey @Austin I believe folding 86s on the button is way too tight. At low stakes you rarely have to worry about blinds 3 betting, and 200BB+ is plenty implied odds.

    implied odds...
    pre flop we have to call 20 to win 50
    so we need 40% equity... which we've got with anything that's not a pair (in V's hand)
    BUT
    what flop are we looking for?
    K86? DDD? 975? 66A?
    there are very few flops that we'll get where we flop great and V flops 2nd best
    so we'll have to play turns and rivers...
    and truth is, we'll miss many of them
    or, when we hit strong - he won't. so we get no valu
    so basically, heads up - there's very little room for monetizing this hand
    look it up on Flopzilla...
    we're behind pre and we're a low % to win against V's range
    to me, this is the definition of unprofitable
    Yanming Z wrote: »
    I’d also lean toward calling instead of 3 betting, because if H truly believes the V is a TAG (which we found out later that he isn’t, because the guy raised KQo from +2, but we don’t know this during the hand), V’s range should be fairly strong from EP. 3 betting will likely get little folds, and sometimes will invite a 4 bet.

    okay - now wait
    if V is opening merged - then he's not 4-betting us
    and if he's opening polarized - then he would 4-bet us (some of the time)
    which one is it?
    he can't be both at the same time.
    either we give him credit for a strong range - to which our hand plays poorly
    or we give him a range of strong and weak hands - to which a 3-bet probably wins us the pot without seeing a flop (very desirable)
    calling - imo - is the worse option
    Yanming Z wrote: »
    And I don’t think we should avoid the V because he is sticky on the flop with 2 over cards. We should be looking to exploit it. Which means more double barreling on a board that we have a range advantage. In this particular hand the V got the perfect runout on the turn and the river allowed him to continue, but most of the time we are just gonna pick up whatever he called us on the flop with on our second barrel.
    If V is sticky - and will call with any pp, any K or A-high... then we're going to have to hit our hand to win. odds are against us in this situation

    Yes, stack depth matters - but if we're calling to hit a hand, we're playing Bingo! and not poker. Stats tell us that a J or higher card will hit the flop more than 50% of the time. So more times than we care to believe, we'll have 2nd or 3rd pair at best (that's if we hit). Me don't like dem odds.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,609 ✭✭✭✭
    Agree with @kagey .

    I'd also add and it's IMHO important when thinking about 3betting 86s:
    Yanming Z wrote: »
    I’d also lean toward calling instead of 3 betting, because if H truly believes the V is a TAG (which we found out later that he isn’t, because the guy raised KQo from +2, but we don’t know this during the hand), V’s range should be fairly strong from EP. 3 betting will likely get little folds, and sometimes will invite a 4 bet.

    His range being strong means little in our decision to 3bet. What matters a lot for our 3bet with 86s to be +EV isn't the strength of his range, but our preflop fold equity aka his fold-to-3bet %.
    • If Villain is opening a 20% of range but gives action with a 18% range, 3betting 86s is bad because he is folding only 10% of the time despite his range being not that strong.
    • If Villain is opening a 10% range but gives action with a 4% range, then 3betting 86s is way better because V is folding 60% of the time even if the range is way stronger than above.

    It's not the only thing that matters (fold-to-c-bet % is important too for ex), but I wanted to clarify this in your post.
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 26
    Austin wrote: »
    Austin wrote: »
    kagey wrote: »
    Learning tight should definitely come first. I'm just responding to what seems like responses that suggest that folding or 3betting are the only good options. They're just not.

    actually, @moishetreats - they are
    86s plays awful against an EP limping and raising range...
    and with everybody folding - we're not getting any overlay to our call

    since we know that playing Bingo! is not the correct way to play poker
    we need to create a plan before we put money in the pot
    3-betting sets us down the path of telling a story that we've got a monster hand which will help us with fold equity later

    calling doesn't.
    so when we call, we've basically got to hit our hand against a V who's sticky
    imo, this isn't profitable ever

    I hear ya', @kagey. But, I'm not there yet.

    1) We don't have an accurate profile of V. According to OP, he's "tight aggresive player, doesn't get out of line too much" but also raises from UTG+2 with KQo then check-calls the flop. Yes, maybe his play on this hand was anomalous. But, I'm not putting too much stock into V's profile at this point.

    2) Let's say that OP and you are correct that V is a sticky TAG. Then, deep-stacked with 86s would be a great hand, IMO, with which to call on the button. It means that OP would get paid off on the turn or river by an overpair were the straight to come in. It also reduces reverse implied odds. KK vs. 86s -- it's hard for the 86s suited to lose on a board where OP's draw hits.

    3) If your and OP's image of V is off and V is much wider, then I would certainly not remove calling from the toolbox depending on how V plays. Based on this hand alone, I'm not sure that it's optimal; I'd rather flat-call in position against a V who is likely to cbet, double-barrel, or even triple-barrel with air. That doesn't seem to be the case.

    Here are couple of things where we agree. Flat-calling pre-supposes very strong post-flop play -- hand-reading, range-reading, and V-reading -- and awareness of deeper-stack play. In addition, flat-calling, IMO, shouldn't be the default play.

    But, I DO believe that flat-calling is a tool in the box that should not be eliminated. Against an opponent who gets sticky with top pair or more or against an opponent who barrels wildly, there is room for tremendous profit calling rather than bloating a pot when V might do it for you -- and enabling you to apply pressure later in the hand by being deep-stacked.

    I'm not sure that the conditions fully apply here but neither do I think that there is no room for its consideration.

    Reads like your trying to make a hand vs a sticky opponent and hoping there are enough implied odds due to stack depth. Not sure there is.... Maybe with 76s but not 1 gappers.

    That's exactly what I am trying to do (depending on skill level, of course). And why on earth aren't there enough implied odds here given the stack depth??

    What are the odds of 2 pair or better and villain having a hand to pay you off with? 9 out of 10 times you don't flop anything. The 1 time is a flush draw and who knows if villain doesn't make a boat or higher flush. Hands benefit from FE not making hands. It's the playability aspect of it, not the fact you will make a flush 6.4% of the time.

    First off, I agree with you 100% on all these questions and observations. Remember that my recommendation to call is predicated on out having enough post-flop skill to out-play your opponent. If that is the case, then you do not need 2-pair to win. How does this V respond to pressure on a wet board with an overpair? How does this V respond to pressure?? Does this V tend to double- or triple-barrel too often?

    The responses to THOSE questions, IMO, dictate whether or not flat-calling should be worth considering. Against an opponent who triple-barrels too often, then even a six hitting might be enough to call down with. Against an opponent who "just needs to see it", then flat-calling makes a lot of sense -- the times that you miss, you won't lose much, and you'll get paid off when you hit.

    Again, my consideration of flat-calling pre-supposes recognizing how to use board texture, opponent style, and stack depth to either steal a pot or maximize your payout. If someone is not comfortable with any of those -- let alone all -- then I would agree that flat-calling is the worst of the three pre-flop options. I just wanted to make sure that all options were given due consideration initially.

    While I would definitely give a flat-call strong consideration here given what I know about V, I would definitely not recommend it to OP or as the default play.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file