First shot @ 2/5

blindraiseblindraise Red Chipper Posts: 144 ✭✭
edited April 1 in Live Poker Hands
Live 2/5
8 handed

Hero raises to $15 UTG w/ :9H::9C:
UTG+1 calls
CO calls
But calls

Flop ($65):
:TH::7S::4D:

Hero bets $35
But calls

Turn($100):
:3H:

Hero checks
But checks

River($100):
:JC:

Hero checks
But. bets $100
Hero folds

notes*
So its my first shot at 2/5, im pretty nervous and focusing on just trying to make the best decisions. I'm kinda hoping to be dealt garbage hands for a couple of orbits so I can figure out what the standard PF raise sizings are, what other players post flop lines are looking like, and how straight the game is being played on this table. But then I grabbed pocket 9s and decided to play it as I usually do, I made what turned out to be too small of a PF raise (looking back I think I'm going to shoot for $25 as my standard raise for 2/5 games) with plans to setmine and to play passively to anybody representing a face card. The flop came I bet, everyone but the button folded, im thinking cool. The turn bricks off I decide to check to see if Button is representing the ten with his call on the flop. He checks back which surprises me, I thought forsure I was going to face a bet. The river card is one of my least favorite cards, I have no clue where I'm at so I check. Button fires out with a polarizing bet and I tank. I'm blocking the straight but I dont have any info on my opponent. He could've slowplayed the ten all 3 streets, he could've slowplayed 56, he could've came in with some stupid hand like J6s and nailed the river, or he could be running a stone cold bluff. I feel like I'm being messed with, but I've heard plenty of times this is common when you move up in stakes and you usually aren't being messed with as much as you think. I go ahead and give him credit, a couple hands later I watch him bluff half his stack (close to $800) in 3 barrels on a broadway connected board with 45o. Think I should've called.

Comments

  • blindraiseblindraise Red Chipper Posts: 144 ✭✭
    Forgot to include stack sizes
    Hero is $700 eff.
    But. is $1400ish
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 429 ✭✭✭
    edited April 1
    In your analysis you kind of skipped over your c-bet. Why did you c-bet? If you are expecting a bet on brick turns, do you still like c-betting? Were you gonna check-call if villain bet turn?
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,923 ✭✭✭✭
    blindraise wrote: »
    But then I grabbed pocket 9s and decided to play it as I usually do, I made what turned out to be too small of a PF raise (looking back I think I'm going to shoot for $25 as my standard raise for 2/5 games)
    You don't need to size up too big playing 2/5$.
    First because usually your open bet are more respected than against the 1/2-1/3 field. So no need to pump up your bet size just to get the needed FE.
    Yet you also have to think about what your bet sizing means for your range (in short: bigger bet, smaller range) and for your postflop action (bigger bet, smaller SPR) - which means a lot to your strategy.
    blindraise wrote: »
    But then I grabbed pocket 9s and decided to play it as I usually do [...] with plans to setmine and to play passively to anybody representing a face card. The flop came I bet ...
    If you decided to set mine (which is barely accurate, but we get the idea), then why did you decide to fire when you miss ? (And why on this board, and why against 3 V?)
    blindraise wrote: »
    The river card is one of my least favorite cards, I have no clue where I'm at so I check.
    This is highly problematic. Whatever stakes you're playing, you should always have a plan. Foresee all your and V's actions. Even if at the end your were wrong (losing or winning the hand is not relevant), you had a plan and you can adapt your strategy based on all information collected.
    If you are that lost, then it's not a matter of stakes, it's a matter of lack of studies ; I'd say esp. lack of board texture reading and hand reading skills.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,889 ✭✭✭✭✭
    As everyone noted, you are cbetting into 3 opponents without a particularly compelling reason, with SDV and blocking draws.
  • blindraiseblindraise Red Chipper Posts: 144 ✭✭
    I cbet on the flop to try and take down the pot and to represent my range. I have a few Tx holdings here as well as plenty of overcards and overpairs. I'm OOP and would rather have my opponents play the guessing game if any face card or draw card falls on the turn. Im still gonna play passively to anybody representing a face card, but if the turn was the :AX: im gonna bet and play the river passively or fold to a raise. Against a brick card I'm likely calling a bet on the turn and evaluating on the river. But yeah my original plan was to fire 3 barrels as I usually do with hands like pocket 9s OOP but I didnt want play for stacks in a stake I'm not used to with a low pair on a straighty-two pairy board.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,889 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I cbet on the flop to try and take down the pot and to represent my range.

    A description of what you did isn't an argument.

    It's good that you recognize this will be a three barrel if you start because you are near the bottom vs turn calls and may have some 98 to group with, but it was never a great choice of combo to begin with.
  • Phil EbbsPhil Ebbs Red Chipper Posts: 217 ✭✭✭
    edited April 1
    blindraise wrote: »
    But yeah my original plan was to fire 3 barrels as I usually do with hands like pocket 9s OOP

    Is this serious, or are you being sarcastic? Can you articulate why you would normally triple barrel with mid pocket pairs?

  • RCP Coach - Fausto ValdezRCP Coach - Fausto Valdez RCP Coach Posts: 818 ✭✭✭✭
    @blindraise one of the best things you could for yourself when shot taking is to go in 100% as you would your original stake and not overthink but simply take it as it comes. This way you have a foundation to work with and then you could adjust based on that.

    If you go in nervous (although understandably) and make to many adjustments from your original strategy, then it will become harder to pinpoint what's exactly going on especially.

    If you do it the first way, your adjustments mentally or strategically will become more clear.
    COACHING NOW AVAILABLE HERE
  • blindraiseblindraise Red Chipper Posts: 144 ✭✭
    edited April 2
    Phil Ebbs wrote: »
    blindraise wrote: »
    But yeah my original plan was to fire 3 barrels as I usually do with hands like pocket 9s OOP

    Is this serious, or are you being sarcastic? Can you articulate why you would normally triple barrel with mid pocket pairs?

    The majority of my field tends to have kicker problems and I usually dont. I like to exploit my image since my range is fairly tight; my UTG raising range is going to include pocket pairs and big aces, me firing a triple barrel that continued from this type of flop seems to me like a line only overpairs can take and open-enders, overcards, 2pair+, BD's with maybe some additional equity, and stone cold bluffs are the only ones calling. Maybe a gutshot here and there. But my intentions are to bet bet bet and hope I have an opponent to chase his draws or call down with ace high.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,923 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2
    Throwing chips at their face until they fold.

    Fun and could make you win... until you face basic competent players.
  • RyanH1995RyanH1995 Red Chipper Posts: 15 ✭✭
    Your thought process is really all over the place. Yes an UTG open is supposed to be a tight range but you can't rep nearly as many hands as you think. The most obvious draws are 89 and 56 and 56 gets there on the turn but you don't barrel the turn which makes no sense if that is what you are trying to rep. Also it is unlikely you are opening those UTG. You can't represent any two pair combos on this flop either. When you check the turn it mostly looks like you took a stab with over cards as you said you would triple barrel with over pairs. Blindly triple barreling with your entire UTG range without considering board textures or villain tendencies is just lighting money on fire. I think studying board textures could really help you plan more +EV lines.
  • Phil EbbsPhil Ebbs Red Chipper Posts: 217 ✭✭✭
    blindraise wrote: »
    Phil Ebbs wrote: »
    blindraise wrote: »
    But yeah my original plan was to fire 3 barrels as I usually do with hands like pocket 9s OOP

    Is this serious, or are you being sarcastic? Can you articulate why you would normally triple barrel with mid pocket pairs?

    The majority of my field tends to have kicker problems and I usually dont. I like to exploit my image since my range is fairly tight; my UTG raising range is going to include pocket pairs and big aces, me firing a triple barrel that continued from this type of flop seems to me like a line only overpairs can take and open-enders, overcards, 2pair+, BD's with maybe some additional equity, and stone cold bluffs are the only ones calling. Maybe a gutshot here and there. But my intentions are to bet bet bet and hope I have an opponent to chase his draws or call down with ace high.

    This doesn't really answer my question. Why are you choosing pocket pairs (that have SDV, I might add) to triple barrel with, instead of a hand like, say, KQ, that has very little SDV (and really good blockers)? Or are you triple barreling with KQ and other non-ace overcard holdings also?
  • blindraiseblindraise Red Chipper Posts: 144 ✭✭
    Phil Ebbs wrote: »

    This doesn't really answer my question. Why are you choosing pocket pairs (that have SDV, I might add) to triple barrel with, instead of a hand like, say, KQ, that has very little SDV (and really good blockers)? Or are you triple barreling with KQ and other non-ace overcard holdings also?

    Yes this exactly^ I know balance is not entirely optimal in games with wider ranges and softer fields but I still want to represent all my holdings and I usually do so by firing 3 barrels following an UTG open(my UTG opens tend to be rare enough I can get away with alot). I agree I need more work in handling post flop lines after considering board texture but as dry as this flop started I'm fairly confident in a 3 barrel. I still think I shouldve called the river bet, against a range with a lot of bluffs im seeing about 40-50% equity. It seems like the general consensus is I shouldve been bluffcatching since the flop though.
  • Phil EbbsPhil Ebbs Red Chipper Posts: 217 ✭✭✭
    edited April 5
    blindraise wrote: »
    Phil Ebbs wrote: »

    This doesn't really answer my question. Why are you choosing pocket pairs (that have SDV, I might add) to triple barrel with, instead of a hand like, say, KQ, that has very little SDV (and really good blockers)? Or are you triple barreling with KQ and other non-ace overcard holdings also?

    Yes this exactly^ I know balance is not entirely optimal in games with wider ranges and softer fields but I still want to represent all my holdings and I usually do so by firing 3 barrels following an UTG open(my UTG opens tend to be rare enough I can get away with alot). I agree I need more work in handling post flop lines after considering board texture but as dry as this flop started I'm fairly confident in a 3 barrel. I still think I shouldve called the river bet, against a range with a lot of bluffs im seeing about 40-50% equity. It seems like the general consensus is I shouldve been bluffcatching since the flop though.

    If you are triple barreling all your hands (as you seem to imply, both PP and overcards?!) after an UTG opening, you are bluffing way too much (on a particularly terrible board in this case, I might add), and to be frank, may be a losing player at 2/5. Ironically, it is the unbalanced approach here that is going to cost you money.
  • blindraiseblindraise Red Chipper Posts: 144 ✭✭
    @Phil Ebbs If I'm opening the top 7.84% of my range UTG and triple barreling with a 70-80% frequency is that really unbalanced? And what is it about this board that makes it such a terrible board to bluff? Is it the fact theres no face cards or the fact its static? In my mind this is an excellent board to represent the overpairs that are usually held by an UTG open. Whatever the case youre right, I'm not ready for 2/5 yet, I sat at the table for an hour and switched back to 1/2, just didn't feel comfortable. Feels like im going to have to get in there and get felted a couple times, I feel like ive learned pretty much all i can learn from the recs at 1/2, occasionally ill get a challenging 1/2 table but the usual challenge is the natural variance that comes with unstudied players who dont mind playing for stacks.

    As for off table study regarding flop textures, any recommendations how to study this effectively? What i usually do is grab a deck, give myself a specific hand, deal flops until the deck runs out, and try to order the flops from least to greatest equity vs. a specific range, then ill pull up flopzilla and compare my recordings.
  • Phil EbbsPhil Ebbs Red Chipper Posts: 217 ✭✭✭
    blindraise wrote: »
    @Phil Ebbs If I'm opening the top 7.84% of my range UTG and triple barreling with a 70-80% frequency is that really unbalanced? And what is it about this board that makes it such a terrible board to bluff? Is it the fact theres no face cards or the fact its static? In my mind this is an excellent board to represent the overpairs that are usually held by an UTG open. Whatever the case youre right, I'm not ready for 2/5 yet, I sat at the table for an hour and switched back to 1/2, just didn't feel comfortable. Feels like im going to have to get in there and get felted a couple times, I feel like ive learned pretty much all i can learn from the recs at 1/2, occasionally ill get a challenging 1/2 table but the usual challenge is the natural variance that comes with unstudied players who dont mind playing for stacks.

    As for off table study regarding flop textures, any recommendations how to study this effectively? What i usually do is grab a deck, give myself a specific hand, deal flops until the deck runs out, and try to order the flops from least to greatest equity vs. a specific range, then ill pull up flopzilla and compare my recordings.

    Yes, it's unbalanced overbluffing - and it's not even close - when only 30% of your opening range is an overpair or better, and you are tripling off with 75% of your holdings. And that's already overbluffing vs. one opponent, you should be bluffing far less frequently against multiple opponents.

    I don't love giving too much information on the forum that a lot of poker coaches have worked hard for and (justifiably) sell, so when you ask why this board is such a terrible board to bluff, I will simply ask you this: if you knew that chips were going in three streets here, whose range would you rather have on this board? The CO flatter or the UTG opener?

    As for studying flop textures, equilab is decent, I have not used flopzilla much, and obviously PIO is one of the best tools if you have $250 to buy it (and, importantly, know how to use it). Otherwise I'm happy to recommend guys who I think are good coaches and have done the work that it takes to help low stakes players move up.

Leave a Comment

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