88 turned flush on monotone board in 3bet pot facing turn c/r

Michael WMichael W Red Chipper Posts: 135 ✭✭
edited November 2018 in Online Poker Hands
interesting hand i played recently and i´d like to have some feedback on my thinking.

the CO (25/20 vpip/pfr and 30% ats overall) open raises 2.4 BB and i am otb w :8c :8h .
CO has roughly 200 BB stack and i cover. most of the times i call here but...:

a) the BB is a pretty laggy squeeze-happy guy. so when i am likely to face a squeeze, i rather trapcall the CO open with QQ+ to backraise (and if i think its necessary i add some bluffs with blockers like KQo). but 88 doesnt fit here cause i dont block when backraising, i dont really bluff either but i also cant comfortably call a shove). something i am doing for several weeks now is 3betting pretty much my entire calling range otb vs a CO open in a situation like this.

so here is question nr1:

is "3betting for squeeze-prevention" a reasonable concept? the thing is that i am turning my ranges upside down. while my value 3bets are now calls to trap the squeezer, my pre calls become 3bets now. actually it feels good when i do it but i couldnt defend it as a concept theoretically because i lack.....knowledge(?)/experience(?).

b) the SB is a midstack fish. so i might be aware of him just shoving pre w stuff like A7o/55 etc.
although i would snapcall his shove when headsup (88/ATs being the bottom of my calling range here), i couldnt continue when i call the CO, SB squeeze-shoves and CO calls because i now cant reasonably come over the top because my range is perceived capped and we are deep and i also cant really call cause of the spr issues.

so the 2nd reason to 3bet the CO is to increase the chance to have a HU call when the SB shoves AND to uncap my range in case the CO would only call the SB shove (few players on 5 NL zoom would flat SB shove w premiums here to keep me in).

question nr2:
so when i 3bet the CO and the SB shoves and then the CO only flats the shove, would it be reasonable to come over the top because being deep he might fold 99-JJ/AQ and maybe even AK?

back to the hand:

so i 3bet, blinds fold, CO calls. i have seen him calling 3bets oop w 22 and A5s, so ye, my 3bet is for value.

PokerStars Zoom, Hold'em No Limit - $0.02/$0.05 - 6 players
Replay this hand on Upswing Poker

UTG: $4.76 (95 bb)
MP: $5.19 (104 bb)
CO: $9.80 (196 bb)
BU (Hero): $10.50 (210 bb)
SB: $2.38 (48 bb)
BB: $8.25 (165 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BTN with 8 8
2 players fold, CO raises to $0.12, Hero 3-bets to $0.43, 2 players fold, CO calls $0.31

Flop: ($0.93) K 6 3 (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets $0.29, CO calls $0.29


so here is a thing i´d like to have confirmed. on a monotone board the ranges shift quite a bit. some of my protecion check backs now become a mandatory cbet, e.g. on a rainbow K high i would check back KK but here i think i must cbet it for protection and value. although i still block all TP in my opponents calling range and a lot of unpaired broadways (those w/o a h) are now going to fold, villain is calling with all single hearts (and a lot of them would fold on a rainbow board).

so i cbet all sets, all pairs with a heart that profit from protection vs unpaired non-heart hands e.g. 8h8x vs JdTd). i also cbet weaker unpaired FDs with BDSD (i dont have many of them since they are offsuit, QxJh comes to my mind, AxTh). i also cbet pure SD like non heart 54s and BDSD w/o FD like 87s.

i check back weaker Kx like KTo/K9s, NFDs (not sure if all or just the stronger ones) and i think i can even check back AxQh and AxJh since i block the stronger NFD in my opponents range. do i check back AhAx and cbet all AA without the Ah or quite the opposite? i could make points for both approaches.

ok, so usually i put pair+draw in my checking range, with my particular hand on this board i find cbetting for value and protection better. and since i have additional FE vs some of villains range and the natural c/r protection on monotone flops AND i dont need to balance my betsizes on this limit, i wnt for 1/3 pot. villains calls.


Turn: ($1.51) A (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets $0.48...

now i know my opponent not only has KhXh but also not AhXh. the nuts is now the Qh and he only has QhJh as the only suited combo in his range. he has AxQh and KxQh. thats all the nut combos. i dont think he is calling QJo/QTs pre.
but i have all those Qh in my range and even more.

question 3: my assumption on this turn card was that my opponent now doesnt have any A anymore in his range (w the exception of A3s) since all unpaired non heart Ax should have folded the flop. is that correct or does villain have to defend AJo without a heart vs my small cbet?

so i decided to bet the turn again and again for a depolarized sizing for 3 reasons:

1) i want to keep is range wide (worse pairs w a heart)
2) i want to set the price for the showdown myself.(if i check back i might face i bigger river lead)
3) he has few combos (7?) with the Qh, i dont fear a c/r

...CO raises to $1.69....

ok, so here i decided to call because he has so few Qh and he cant c/r anything else. so i was like: i probably induced some weird bluff from a non heart TP that cant call but hates to fold. also the raise size isnt that big.
the only issue: my range is well protected by more Qh than my opponent has. does that mean i dont have to and shouldnt defend 8h here?
or is my thinking that he doesnt have many Qh and my sizing might have induced and the raise isnt big the stronger data point?

Hero calls $1.21

River: ($4.89) 8 (2 players)
CO checks, Hero checks

on the river i make a set, but that obv. doesnt change anything and i dont think betting makes much sense because only flushes call and there are more combos that beat me and not all combos i beat are going to call.



Comments

  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,832 ✭✭✭✭✭
    A lot of really strong poker reasoning pre and on the flop, nice.

    The criticism comes in on the turn where many of your made hands can now check in position, flush and non flush, as they want to be able to play the river without an overplayed range. You correctly reason he has few flushes which allow for a bet, but now he also has fewer calls, so the reasoning is only half complete. Once this bet/call goes in, the wheels have come off. The profitablity of bluffcatching here is questionable, unlike the profitablity of calling a river lead with what could have been a protected check back earlier.
  • Michael WMichael W Red Chipper Posts: 135 ✭✭
    ok, so 3betting for squeeze prevention and therefore turning my ranges upside down is correct?

    about turn and river:

    i am aware that i keep my opponents range wide when i check back the turn and therefore can call a river lead easier because my opponent now has more bluffs in his range.
    the problem is, that we might face a big river bet and have a really tough decision with an 8 high flush. because we just dont know if our opponent is like: oh, he would have bet the turn if he had a flush so i just pot my 5h5x here. and we´ll probably never know what our opponent considers value otr. so how would i make a decision on the river?
    is a small showdown bet on the turn always wrong with my medium srtrength hands?
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,832 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, you call it squeeze prevention because you came up with it yourself, and that is great, but that idea is always an aspect of raising, because you sell your range at a higher price than the squeezer might want.

    I would be aware, however, that it doesnt necessarily work that easily, as in this formation you can still face light 4 bets that force errors from you. Your reasoning is fine, in my opinion, it's just simpler to call it isolation or value vs a correct co range. It's just a good decision overall, words aside.

    Anyway, as for your turn play, i think a small bet when the nuts change is fine but it should be self-evident that it doesn't save any money if you aren't willing to b/f or b/c/f the middle of your range a significant part of the time. You create complexity any time you veer away from polarization, even if you gain EV with your showdown bet. This spot certainly demonstrates that, and i'd prefer to use the advantage of position by betting zero with more hands, myself.
  • Michael WMichael W Red Chipper Posts: 135 ✭✭
    mmh, yes. i always find playing the poles of my range rather trivial and the middling part is where it gets complicated, especially the hands that are at the boundaries between value and medium strength.
    i found that the strength of the 8h flush went up when the Ah came in. oth vs all my opponents flushes i am slightly behind, vs his entire flop calling range i am at ~58% at the turn (before my turn bet).
    so the truth is, that i wanted to make my river decision easier with my turn bet. something i do quite often unfortunately......i guess its some kind of bluff-prevention and i dont even know if it makes sense really.

    in this particular hand, if i would check the turn and then face a reasonably river bet, i dontg have any data points to do the math because how the heck do you figure out if my microstakes opponent is valuing his hand. he might value bet a hand that he in fact is turning into a bluff without knowing that he is doing that.
    so one of the strongest data points (when a microstakes player leads big into you on thje river, he usually has it) doesnt apply here. even more so as i opened the door for the river bet with my turn check.
    i just hate capping my range.

    whats the worst hand you would value bet on the turn? Jh? Th?
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,832 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ok, i think i've made my points. The jh for me, since you are curious.

    However, one important thing from your last post - betting merged on the turn doesn't uncap your range necessarily. That's too simple. In fact, it might even cap it more than a check.

    GL.
  • Michael WMichael W Red Chipper Posts: 135 ✭✭
    yes, you made your points and you probably dont know how much i appreciate it that you comment on microstakes hands. so thanks for that

Leave a Comment

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