AcJc floating oop

AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
UTG Hero ($700) :Ac :Jc opens $20
Mp1 ($220) calls $20
Btn ($1k) calls $20
BB ($800) calls $20

Flop ($80) :9h :4c :2d
Bb ($780) checks
Hero ($680) checks
Mp1 ($200) bets $25
Btn folds
Bb folds
Hero calls

Turn ($130) :9h :4c :2d :Qc
Hero ($655) checks
Mp1 ($175) bets $50
Hero raises to $175

Villain recreational player and has been passive so far. Semi loose with limping, but usually folds to pressure. There was a spot earlier where he folded JJ on river Ace, board like 9842A where villain called twice then donk bet river.

This flop is "Dynamic" but dry and I have some back door equity. I was slightly worried about a set but think he uses larger sizing against these other sticky players.
«1

Comments

  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,973 ✭✭✭✭
    I think if you've enough reason to float check/call OOP, you have enough reason to c-bet as well.

    On the turn, I prefer a donk than a check-raise. Q is better for our range, and we block many FD.
  • RoblivionRoblivion WisconsinRed Chipper Posts: 281 ✭✭✭
    I slightly disagree with @Red. C-betting this board can get us in some sticky situations, especially considering MP's stack size, but when he bets 25 and it gets back to us, we now know that everyone else is out, we're getting excellent odds, and we close the action.

    I do however agree that donking is probably best here. Don't let him bet and feel more committed to the pot.
  • VegaVega Red Chipper Posts: 31 ✭✭
    Random thoughts as I find this spot interesting and happens frequently -

    With the turn check-raise, even though he is a recreational player, can he get away from basically being pot committed in this spot? Based on what you say, you think so, but what if you didn't think you had any FE, do you just call instead?

    Is it safe to say in this spot, since he doesn't have much behind that donking is better? It seems you would get more FE from over pairs and such, but if you check-raised instead, they feel more committed and would continue with over pairs and hands like A9.

    In my head, donking seems better with a shorter stacked villain, whereas a deeper stack check-raising seems better.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Didn't think about donking honestly. I am not sure it gives us extra FE and doesn't make much sense honestly in terms of value. If we had a slow played set or AA do we want the extra FE?

    Not sure what to think about the donk bet... Seems fishy
  • VegaVega Red Chipper Posts: 31 ✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    If we had a slow played set or AA do we want the extra FE?

    That's a good point...

    Even if he did call here, the worst we are probably looking at is 35%? Since he is playing rather fit or fold poker, we should be fairly EV here with 35% + FE. With him probably playing 98, T9, our J is live here a good percentage of the time.

  • RoblivionRoblivion WisconsinRed Chipper Posts: 281 ✭✭✭
    It doesn't look like a slowplayed set or AA, but it does look reasonably like a QX float. The main reason I would favor a donk over a checkraise is that you can pick the size. If you check and he bets 50, it's not a terrible spot to jam on him, but what if he bets something like 80? Raising sucks, calling kinda sucks...
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Roblivion wrote: »
    It doesn't look like a slowplayed set or AA, but it does look reasonably like a QX float. The main reason I would favor a donk over a checkraise is that you can pick the size. If you check and he bets 50, it's not a terrible spot to jam on him, but what if he bets something like 80? Raising sucks, calling kinda sucks...

    Good point. Also if we bet say $60 into $130 and he jams for $175, this also kinda sucks. Would be $115 to win $365, also kinda sucks.
  • RoblivionRoblivion WisconsinRed Chipper Posts: 281 ✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    Roblivion wrote: »
    It doesn't look like a slowplayed set or AA, but it does look reasonably like a QX float. The main reason I would favor a donk over a checkraise is that you can pick the size. If you check and he bets 50, it's not a terrible spot to jam on him, but what if he bets something like 80? Raising sucks, calling kinda sucks...

    Good point. Also if we bet say $60 into $130 and he jams for $175, this also kinda sucks. Would be $115 to win $365, also kinda sucks.

    Yeah, I think it's better to bet like 75-90. His 98 type hands should either shrivel up or just call and then you can decide whether to fire another barrel on the river. If he jams, I guess yuck...
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,973 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    Roblivion wrote: »
    It doesn't look like a slowplayed set or AA, but it does look reasonably like a QX float. The main reason I would favor a donk over a checkraise is that you can pick the size. If you check and he bets 50, it's not a terrible spot to jam on him, but what if he bets something like 80? Raising sucks, calling kinda sucks...

    Good point. Also if we bet say $60 into $130 and he jams for $175, this also kinda sucks. Would be $115 to win $365, also kinda sucks.

    I disagree it sucks. I'm happily playing for stacks here. Fact is having 175$ left with a 130$ pot, we have to chose if we want to play for stacks or not (=fold). If we want to play, we can chose the terms: donking ? c-r ? calling down ?

    Donking is imho way better: If we had QX, we don't want to go check-check. We loose value and it's hard to play for stacks on river (175$ for a 130$ pot). But If Villain has 9X - which he should considering the flop board and how he stabbed and his passive profile - it will go check-check often as he may fears QX (and better 9X). Also since we hold AcJc for real, we are sure he can't have improved with :CLUB: (only reasonable FD would be Ac2c and Ac9c, which we block). So with QX, donking merged is better than calling down or checking.
    Since we don't have QX (and we have to balance our donk range), AcJc is great. We block the best hands Villain could peel the turn (improved turn with :CLUB: FD) and we have tremendous equity against his 9X range.

    Calling down is - based on previous paragraph - not that great since we don't really have showdown (if Villain is mostly on 9X type of hands). Also if we had QX, we don't really want to just check down as we let value on the table. So meh...

    What I dislike is c-r as you did. Because - as said @Roblivion - Villain could feel committed after turn bet and never fold. Which we don't want. Agree with Roblivion that lack of stack deepth is the issue with c-r here.

    Last but not least: if I donk, how much? I think we can go for the overbet shove. More pressure on Villain and more FE (more than underbetting twice or half pot donk turn and almost nothing for river). And easy to balance with QJ/KQ/AQ.
    I'm nota fan of underbetting twice maybe only in an exploitative play with a bad QX targetting 9X
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Red you said balance your donking range with Qx and AcXc, but how do you balance your checking range? I agree villain isn't likely bluffing here, but donking makes zero sense. If we did have Qx wouldn't you want villain to feel committed to get value from 9x or a hand like TT?

    Maybe @kenaces or @Christian Soto can help me better explain why checking here is better than donk betting as an overall strategy.

    Maybe donking as an exploit vs a sticky villain likely to call down. I just can't see it making much sense. Other times you value own yourself against sets.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    @Austin
    What do you think of this Flop stab? What range is that in your opinion?
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2018
    This may seem a little OOL, but I kind of want to play for stacks on the Flop to be honest.

    I think his stab is like weak 9x, middle pocket pairs, and some Ace Wheel hands.

    We have OK equity versus 9x and I think he may release it sometimes.

    It’s important to understand his profile though. He needs to be the type to bet for protection/denial but also not be the “f*ck it I call type for this to be a play I would advocate for.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,973 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    @Red you said balance your donking range with Qx and AcXc, but how do you balance your checking range?
    The question is WHY do you want to balance your checking range aka why do you want to build a balanced checking range on turn ?
    You open UTG (with a strong range), check/float OOP against a weak underbet stab, and you want to check again when a Q pops up??

    I don't know for yours, but at this point, my range is so that, against a weak straightforward Villain with a short stack, I can only see a donkbet or a check-fold.
  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    I'm not donking this turn; I'm all on board with how @Austin played the turn.

    This thread presumes that V will double-barrel when ahead on the turn and check when behind. It can't be both. Given Hero's play to this point, it is entirely unknown how strong he is.

    If V double-barrels a big bet, then Hero can find a fold. But, how many players are going to put a $25 bet into the $80 flop pot and then bet 3/4 pot or more on the turn? Not enough that I'd worry about it.

    If V bets in the $50 range, then a re-raise shove fits the mold of not knowing what Hero has. It could be a draw, it could be a set, it could be a.... And there is obvious equity-when-called since I would imagine that V is capped and that Hero's ace or jack are likely good, too,.

    Finally, if V checks the turn, then Hero can lead out almost 100% of the river cards profitably.

    Bottom line: There just aren't a lot of strong/made hands that would ever donk here, so I'd be checking (and likely raising), too.
  • Fernando OFernando O Red Chipper Posts: 77 ✭✭
    With positional protection , the short stack (fish) to your direct left, and that board texture, I prefer a cbet on that flop. Of course the btn will have incentive to float a bit more due to a possible subsidy from the shortie, but so what, you still have plenty of ways to win the hand down the road.

    As played you ended up in a spot in which you got snared by backdoor equity and have to figure out if your reaction to him is 'Good enough Dude.*

    * I wouldn't have taken your line but shoving, as you did, will probably be good most of the time** -your pot equity and fold equity only are in bad shape vs his sets and Tc9c, 9c8c, 9c7c.

    ** Say you have about 25% equity, meaning your shove risks ~$65 to win $180 so you need him to fold ~24ish% of the time. Now say the fish has 99,44,22, AQ, KQ, T9:cc, 98:cc for a total of 32 combos he never folds to a shove. I think you can come up with about eight or more combos that shortie folds, leaving your reactionary play in +EV territory.

    F
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    x/c flop set this hand up poorly. There are cards it wants to barrel through, especially as 942r has few natural value hands and too few draws to be raised with a worse hand often. A x/r there is possible, although the short stack makes this slightly worse than usual.

    While a donk bet can make sense on the turn in many situations, the hands that need the cover of aggression on the flop hit the queen more often than all the floats; for instance, KQ, QJ don't make good x/c.

    Hence is it a better spot for value/protection on the turn as a donk bettor. (Floating against short stacks, like MP1, in a general sense, doesn't work as well anyway.) This strengthens the desirability of x/r turn, because now we can allow ourselves more bluffs, but it's just an abstract idea as arriving here with this exact hand is less desirable in the first place.
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,387 ✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    x/c flop set this hand up poorly.

    +1

    In 4 way pot, this seems like XF on the flop.

  • moishetreatsmoishetreats Red Chipper Posts: 1,819 ✭✭✭✭
    kenaces wrote: »
    persuadeo wrote: »
    x/c flop set this hand up poorly.

    +1

    In 4 way pot, this seems like XF on the flop.

    Not check-calling and check-folding are two different things. Check-folding (since Hero is closing the action on the flop) seems terrible. Cbetting or check-raising -- even check-calling --is better than check-folding, IMO.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The question is WHY do you want to balance your checking range aka why do you want to build a balanced checking range on turn ?

    @Red If I put myself in villain's shoes where I bet the flop and UTG check called. Then UTG decides to lead out on the turn, I am almost never folding. It makes so little sense to me that I am going to be calling down really light and gives UTG bluffing range less fold equity.

    Check calling on the flop I am getting 4:1 with 24% equity. I know I might not be able to realize all that equity by the river, but it doesn't take much to make up for it in terms of implied odds. I think if I had a player behind me left to act, then this becomes an easy check / fold spot. As @moishetreats said I am closing the action. There are probably more cons being oop and against a short stack, but in general his bet is just too weak to fold imo.
    @Austin
    What do you think of this Flop stab? What range is that in your opinion?

    This may seem a little OOL, but I kind of want to play for stacks on the Flop to be honest.

    I think on Flop ($80) :9h :4c :2D: villains range is going to be 66, 77, 88, TT, 97s, 98s, 22, 44, A9s, K9s, Q9s, J9s, ... I don't think he is betting too many wheel aces as he is more on the passive side.

    With that said some Ace or Jack on the turn might not be good for me, but I think I can pick up some information based on his sizing. Rec players are not very balanced with their sizing, so if he has a strong hand I expect a larger bet.

    As for cbetting into 3 other people ..... Doesn't sound like the best idea. Yes, I can rep some over pairs, I just feel its higher variance in general. I'll do it from time to time, but prefer a flop like T42r when doing this where I can have a bdsd at least.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    While a donk bet can make sense on the turn in many situations, the hands that need the cover of aggression on the flop hit the queen more often than all the floats; for instance, KQ, QJ don't make good x/c.

    Hence is it a better spot for value/protection on the turn as a donk bettor.

    @persuadeo I think this went over my head a little bit. Can you explain or give some examples of ranges you are thinking in? I agree KQ and QJ are not in my c/c range on the flop. I think that leaves hero with checking a lot on the turn when the Q hits because there is really only AQ in hero's range. I don't understand how donk betting is better here with so few Q's in my range.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Reread it, I said it was not a good spot for a donk bet given line and hand and board.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Running this hand through Snowie.

    FLOP
    iqghcacb8fqr.png

    Flop Part 2
    1p0td579b0pj.png

    Turn Part 1
    mdkuz1gihybf.png

    Snowie
    Donk betting 50% pot
    Ac3c, QQ, Ac5c,

    Everything else is basically checking. AQ is betting at 33%.

    Turn Part 2
    c05zg6w8vcwu.png

    Snowie has QQ as the only all in hand. Calling with club wheel aces and AcKc hands.



  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    So Snowie agrees w me on CR’ing sometimes and no one even wanted to do that here so I’m still goat and I like that
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    So Snowie agrees w me on CR’ing sometimes and no one even wanted to do that here so I’m still goat and I like that

    Snowie was check raising the QTs, KJs, KQs, but not the Axs unless its wheel.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2018
    Austin wrote: »
    So Snowie agrees w me on CR’ing sometimes and no one even wanted to do that here so I’m still goat and I like that

    Snowie was check raising the QTs, KJs, KQs, but not the Axs unless its wheel.

    I’m adding it

    I thought Flop Part 2 showed it wanted to CR Flop 39% of the time?
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    So Snowie agrees w me on CR’ing sometimes and no one even wanted to do that here so I’m still goat and I like that

    Snowie was check raising the QTs, KJs, KQs, but not the Axs unless its wheel.

    I’m adding it

    I thought Flop Part 2 showed it wanted to CR Flop 39% of the time?

    You might be right, seems like it's raise / fold. Doesn't make sense to fold it and raise the others. Unless it's doing future run outs since QJs picks up a lot of equity on different turns.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Your screenshot is referencing a x/r at 41%, which i mentioned in my post above. Worsened by effextive stack of flop bettor who will jam more.
  • Christian SotoChristian Soto RCP Coach Posts: 2,195 ✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    Your screenshot is referencing a x/r at 41%, which i mentioned in my post above. Worsened by effextive stack of flop bettor who will jam more.

    Which is why I think C/Shove is the option if we going to CR because I think that will release his stabs where as a CR small won’t.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    Your screenshot is referencing a x/r at 41%, which i mentioned in my post above. Worsened by effextive stack of flop bettor who will jam more.

    Which is why I think C/Shove is the option if we going to CR because I think that will release his stabs where as a CR small won’t.

    X\r 2x pot with what range? Over pairs and what else?

Leave a Comment

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