C-betting with KQo when missing the flop

gl523gl523 Red Chipper Posts: 92 ✭✭
$.02/.04 6 Players
Effective Stack Size: $3.72

Hero is in BU with :KS: :QH:
HJ limps. Hero raises to $.2. Only HJ calls.

Pot: $.46
Flop: :4D: :5C: :TS:
HJ checks. Hero checks.

Pot: $.46
Turn: :KC:
HJ bets $.23. Hero raises to $.8. HJ folds.

Should I have c-betted on the flop? I chose to raise on the turn to price out draws. Was that a sensible move?

Comments

  • MichaelBMichaelB Red Chipper Posts: 211 ✭✭✭
    If he's a player who'll fold too much, bet, if not, checking back in this spot is fine. The turn raise is good, but not to 'price out' draws, you want draws to call you. You're raising because you likely have the best hand and there are numerous weaker hands that will call.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,029 ✭✭✭✭
    Important is not hit or miss - still, it's very board dependent as well - but your overall strategy.
  • gl523gl523 Red Chipper Posts: 92 ✭✭
    Red wrote: »
    Important is not hit or miss - still, it's very board dependent as well - but your overall strategy.

    Could you clarify on your last comment please? I don’t fully understand you.
  • gl523gl523 Red Chipper Posts: 92 ✭✭
    MichaelB wrote: »
    If he's a player who'll fold too much, bet, if not, checking back in this spot is fine.

    What if the Villain is balanced?
  • EazzyEazzy Red Chipper Posts: 951 ✭✭✭✭
    by default...this is a cbet....you have 2 overs and a backdoor straight...your ahead of most of the draws...a3 and A2 is ahead of you but thats it...If a blank hits the turn and he bets...you probably would have to fold....put him in that position not you. If you have some read that he is supper straight forward on the turn when the flop checks through a delayed cbet might make some sense...

    As played on the turn the only reason to raise are if you can get worse hands to call or better hands to fold / and posoably fold out some equity.


    ....I just call and call his river bet (on a safe card) the same money goes in but he can keep bluffing...if he checks you have poskitoin and can then go for some value.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,029 ✭✭✭✭
    gl523 wrote: »
    Red wrote: »
    Important is not hit or miss - still, it's very board dependent as well - but your overall strategy.

    Could you clarify on your last comment please? I don’t fully understand you.
    Sorry, my limited English (3rd language) is sometimes confusing.

    Think about what is a "hit" ?
    It's not only how your hand / range connect with the board for you to get a made hand, but also how Villains do too.

    T54r seems a miss for Hero: in our range, we may have only 3 sets of TT, few TP, many overpairs (JJ+), and no draw (except ev. backdoor). And KQo does give us only overcards.
    MP will but miss this flop often too: only TT, TP and weak pairs are made hands - and let's give some bad draws like naked gutshot. So there is still much junk (hand which didn't connect and are not that great) in his range.
    Now everybody knows or can guess than it's hard to have a strong made hand on T54r. So against a c-bet with perceived none made hands (like KQo), Villain can either float too often with junk or fold too often (allowing H to .
    In this case, KQ is a hit: we are ahead of much of the junk V may float with, and we still have 2 overcards against any pairs V got on the flop.

    On the contrary, KQo will be a miss on 8c7c6h, because this board smashes V's range: we can expect V to often call/float AND with strong made hands or hands with great equity.
    In this case, KQ is a miss, we are badly behind.


    Bottom line
    In your title, you said "C-betting with KQo when missing the flop". My point was that, IMHO, you did NOT miss the flop.
  • gl523gl523 Red Chipper Posts: 92 ✭✭

    Red wrote: »
    gl523 wrote: »
    Red wrote: »
    Important is not hit or miss - still, it's very board dependent as well - but your overall strategy.

    Could you clarify on your last comment please? I don’t fully understand you.
    T54r seems a miss for Hero: in our range, we may have only 3 sets of TT, few TP, many overpairs (JJ+), and no draw (except ev. backdoor). And KQo does give us only overcards.
    MP will but miss this flop often too: only TT, TP and weak pairs are made hands - and let's give some bad draws like naked gutshot. So there is still much junk (hand which didn't connect and are not that great) in his range.
    Now everybody knows or can guess than it's hard to have a strong made hand on T54r. So against a c-bet with perceived none made hands (like KQo), Villain can either float too often with junk or fold too often (allowing H to .
    In this case, KQ is a hit: we are ahead of much of the junk V may float with, and we still have 2 overcards against any pairs V got on the flop.

    On the contrary, KQo will be a miss on 8c7c6h, because this board smashes V's range: we can expect V to often call/float AND with strong made hands or hands with great equity.
    In this case, KQ is a miss, we are badly behind.

    I’ve heard of this concept before but I didn’t fully understand it the first time I saw this. Based on your analysis, it sounds as if the main advantage that Hero has is just having overpairs, am I not mistaken? If I am correct, then there are only 24 more combos that hit the board more than Villain’s. Relative to the total number of combos both Hero and Villain have (since Hero is on the BU), 24 is a rather small number.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,070 -
    How many combos do you figure V has here?
    Moderation In Moderation
  • gl523gl523 Red Chipper Posts: 92 ✭✭
    I would guess that Villain has SC, suited 1 gappers, mid to low PP, and low broadways. With the SC, I would guess that Villain has about 20 combos (54s up to T9s). With the suited 1 gappers, I would guess that Villains has 20 combos (64s to J9s). With the low to mid PP, I would guess Villain would have 42 combos (22 to 99). With the low broadways, I would guess that Villain has 33 combos (JT, QT, QJ). This would give a total of 115 combos. However, I am not very confident with my hand reading skills so I could very well be wrong. Is this hand reading consistent with that of a typical 4 NL player?
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,070 -
    I don't know the player pool, but would think many players sufficiently dislike playing OOP they're going to limp-fold rather than limp-call some chunk of your suggested range.

    The other thing to keep in mind here is that it's not just how many combos in your range that are strong, it's the fact you have range advantage at all.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • gl523gl523 Red Chipper Posts: 92 ✭✭
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    I don't know the player pool, but would think many players sufficiently dislike playing OOP they're going to limp-fold rather than limp-call some chunk of your suggested range.

    The other thing to keep in mind here is that it's not just how many combos in your range that are strong, it's the fact you have range advantage at all.

    So what range would you assign to Villain then? Even if you don’t know the player pool, I am still curious in hearing your thoughts.

    What do you define as a range advantage?
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,070 -
    Range advantage podcast: https://redchippoker.com/range-advantage-podcast/

    As for range I'd trim off the small suited gappers and offsuit broadways.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 26
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,755 -
    My first instinct was that I am indifferent to betting or checking.

    I then looked at the results from Ross' work with GTO+ and ranges.

    https://redchippoker.com/unbeatable-poker-podcast/

    (found here: https://unbeatablepoker.com/)

    With his product, you pick a flop from the book that represents the flop you have.
    T52 rainbow is comparable to T54r

    uppfztmj3f5t.png

    Ross finds a bet on this flop. While not a perfect match, the fact that we are in position gives us more license to bet (the book is based on OOP play)

    Lots of assumptions built into the book, but I would go with this.

    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • gl523gl523 Red Chipper Posts: 92 ✭✭
    TheGameKat wrote: »

    So I read the article twice and despite how clear the presentation of the topic is, it still hasn’t fully clicked for me. I understand that a range advantage means that the person either has more nutted hands in their range or has more turn cards that will help them but I don’t fully understand the cases with Aces and KQ other than folding Aces if a bad turn card comes. Could you clarify on those cases please?

    Also, just to see if I fully understand the concept of range advantage, in the hand that I posted, we have a range advantage we have more nutted hands since we have overpairs and sets that Villain doesn’t, and most turn cards are good for us such as a Broadway card, 5, 4, or 2. Did I get it right?
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,070 -
    Since @Doug Hull was on the podcast I linked to I'll let him attack that.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • __main____main__ Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    Doug Hull wrote: »
    My first instinct was that I am indifferent to betting or checking.

    I then looked at the results from Ross' work with GTO+ and ranges.

    https://redchippoker.com/unbeatable-poker-podcast/

    (found here: https://unbeatablepoker.com/)

    With his product, you pick a flop from the book that represents the flop you have.
    T52 rainbow is comparable to T54r

    uppfztmj3f5t.png

    Ross finds a bet on this flop. While not a perfect match, the fact that we are in position gives us more license to bet (the book is based on OOP play)

    Lots of assumptions built into the book, but I would go with this.



    When you suggest betting KQo on this flop, isn't that applying the book's advice to an unrelated preflop formation, the exact mistake the video preaches against? I would love some additional insight..
  • DeleuzerDeleuzer Las VegasRed Chipper Posts: 25 ✭✭
    __main__ wrote: »
    Doug Hull wrote: »
    My first instinct was that I am indifferent to betting or checking.

    .....

    Lots of assumptions built into the book, but I would go with this.


    When you suggest betting KQo on this flop, isn't that applying the book's advice to an unrelated preflop formation, the exact mistake the video preaches against? I would love some additional insight..

    Yes, this is correct. The ideas in Unbeatable Poker should not be used to make decisions in a context that does not reflect the range and positional considerations on which the book is based. It's kind of like making a video critique of an unfinished book.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,070 -
    Deleuzer wrote: »
    __main__ wrote: »
    Doug Hull wrote: »
    My first instinct was that I am indifferent to betting or checking.

    .....

    Lots of assumptions built into the book, but I would go with this.


    When you suggest betting KQo on this flop, isn't that applying the book's advice to an unrelated preflop formation, the exact mistake the video preaches against? I would love some additional insight..

    Yes, this is correct. The ideas in Unbeatable Poker should not be used to make decisions in a context that does not reflect the range and positional considerations on which the book is based. It's kind of like making a video critique of an unfinished book.

    This appears to be the M.O. of Mr. Lau, who recently gave a detailed and entirely negative review of the Sweeney-Jones "Optimizing AK" book, despite the fact he had only read two pages of it from the promo on Amazon.

    In my capacity as RCP Community Manager I'm flattered Mr. Lau continues to spend so much time and effort denigrating RCP-related material from such minimal information. His interest in us seems almost obsessive. This apparently stems from the time he was a member of this forum and chose to launch unprovoked ad hominem attacks on forum members and mods, which led to him being banned.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,070 -
    As far as I know, Mr. Lau cannot be correct or incorrect here since he hasn't commented on this thread. The author of the book has responded and indicated that Doug's application is likely stretching the results beyond the realm of applicability. I can add that, unlike Mr. Lau, I've read the entire book, and can tell you these kinds of issues are explicitly addressed.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,070 -
    edited April 5
    Got it. What Lau fails to mention, either because he hasn't read it or because his agenda is getting in the way, is that a chunk of the book is devoted to the question of sensitivity to assumed ranges. As to whether the base ranges are realistic, again the book details why they are used and presents data-driven evidence for why they are reasonable.

    I completely agree with your point that all criticisms should be judged on merit. The issue is that here, like the AK book (not to mention another video where he chooses to go after our preflop OR charts which are manifestly no better nor worse than anybody else's), Lau "criticizes" through the scoundrel's trick of selective quotation and taking material out of context. This is simply intellectually dishonest.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I am not sure how there can be a serious diacussion of this until the full text is released.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 23
    I'm not the person to respond to selling questions, but my last impression is that it is available in some sort of "beta" format but not final.

    As for the issue you are pursuing, I have to imagine there is an explanation for the Nit 100 et al, and that taking these out of context is problematic on its face.

    Let me hypothesize, without ever reading a word of Ross' text: It may be valuable as a teaching idea to learn how to handle a small but manageable range over all streets. After all, everyone is a wide range preflop/downbet flop expert these days, and yet most are then immediately lost.

    There could be a dozen more explanations, but the point is that without context, serious critique is questionable.

    This situation reminds me of Kenaces' vendetta against the frequencies recommended in Poker's 1% - which he admitted to never reading, and thus never realized that those frequencies were rarely actually going to be employed, according to the text itself.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,070 -
    @Phil Ebbs I haven't seen the final version of the book either. Further I'm not a solver nor a cash NLHE specialist. That said, in terms of the 4 specific points you raise, the 2nd is false, the 4th is subjective but misrepresents the goal of the charts anyway, the 1st is a starting point, and the third is trivially obvious.

    Moderation In Moderation

Leave a Comment

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