Bad line with middle set?

LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 483 ✭✭✭
€1/€1 homegame -- 7-handed
Everyone covers hero (€140)

Preflop
UTG straddles to €2
Hero in UTG+1 raises to €12 with :6d :6h
LJ folds
HJ calls
CO calls
BU calls
SB calls
BB calls
UTG calls

Flop (7 players - €84)
:Td :6c :5s
SB checks
BB checks
UTG checks
Hero bets €35
folds all the way to
UTG calls

Turn (2 players - €154)
:2h
UTG checks
Hero checks

River (2 players - €154)
:AS:
UTG checks
Hero goes all-in (€93)


I think I misplayed this hand big time.

Preflop I made what was in my mind a standard open (usually I would get more respect for my opens) but this is just one of those times everyone calls.

The flop is where I think I messed up. Main reason being is that I never ever have bluffs here, especially for that price. Instead I feel like checking would have been better, either to check-raise or check-call depending on the action.

I came to this realisation on the turn where I was HU with the best villain on the table. It was the first time I was playing with him, but he seemed like a decent player who could definitely hand-read.

With stacks being as they were (I had around 60% pot bet left), I decided to check because:
1. I feel like I can get lighter calls on the river from Tx. I essentially thought he would fold a lot of Tx (maybe not KT or AT) when I barrel turn due to the insane strength I represent, going back to preflop and the flop.
2. I can give a free card without worrying too much about getting sucked out on

Of course this was at the cost of some rivers killing action, like the :AS:, but I think as played this check was fine.

On the river I messed up again.

First of all, I have like 0 bluffs in this spot.

Second of all, I think I will only get called by one hand (AT) which beats my potential AJ-AK bluffs. Then it's also a question whether he would actually check AT here. All other Tx are going to fold. A6 and A5 are unlikely given that he might squeeze those preflop or fold on the flop. In other words, I polarize myself without my opponent having many hands to call me with, and I have no combos on my bluff pole.

Instead, if I bet something like €45 (depolarized), not only might he hero me with a hand like KT, but he will probably shove AT anyway.

So: I think I messed up on the flop, played the turn fine as played, but then made a mistake on the river again. Hope my analysis is correct!

Comments

  • Jordan PowerJordan Power Red Chipper Posts: 429 ✭✭✭
    I don't dislike the c-bet on the flop. You may have 0 bluffs here but do your opponents know this? How skilled are the players in this game?

    And also do you never have 78s here? 89s? I would think there are probably some semi-bluffs you have here even if they make up a small chunk of your range.

    Plus, also with 7 players in the hand, the odds go way up that someone has hit this board, I have 0 issue with betting this flop. I actually may have gone a tad smaller though, maybe 25 euro? Give your 6 opponents a better price to call with overs.

    Based on the SPR, I don't think you should ever be folding regardless of the runout, so I would want to keep as many players in the hand as possible. My two cents, at least.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭✭
    About the flop, I agree with Jordan.

    Just about bluffs:
    I don't dislike the c-bet on the flop. You may have 0 bluffs here but do your opponents know this? How skilled are the players in this game?

    And also do you never have 78s here? 89s? I would think there are probably some semi-bluffs you have here even if they make up a small chunk of your range.
    Both @Jordan Power and @LeChiffre : But aren't AK, AQ, KQs, AJs, - esp. if with bckd FD - bluffs ? ;-)
    Nota bene: I don't propose to bluff with all these combos - you would be way overbluffy, esp. MW - I just want to point out that there are bluffs on flop.
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    The flop is where I think I messed up. Main reason being is that I never ever have bluffs here, especially for that price. Instead I feel like checking would have been better, either to check-raise or check-call depending on the action.
    C-R is the 2nd worst, only better than folding.
    Your range can't - should be able to - polarize enough on T76r for you to check-raise. Villains have all sets and most of 2P, when you have some sets and maybe only 3x 2P (76s). Also if you c-r with TT, you let almost no chance for V to be strong enough, enough of the time, to avoid V overfolding (and you letting value on the table).
    So except if you have reason to believe that V will be too sticky with ok-ish TP or meh draw, allowing you to c-r profitably with overpair or TPTK, I don't think you can c-r. Your hand may allow it, not your range.
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    With stacks being as they were (I had around 60% pot bet left), I decided to check because:
    1. I feel like I can get lighter calls on the river from Tx. I essentially thought he would fold a lot of Tx (maybe not KT or AT) when I barrel turn due to the insane strength I represent, going back to preflop and the flop.
    2. I can give a free card without worrying too much about getting sucked out on

    Of course this was at the cost of some rivers killing action, like the :AS:, but I think as played this check was fine.
    I disagree. You've less than 1 pot size left to bet and turn is a brick.
    So yeah, you could check, but then you don't charge draw that V will never pay with if river bricks.
    Also if you do have bluffs - which I think you can and should, see above - then you want to fire some of them here and allow V to fold bad TX or 88, 76, 98 etc. against your AK or AsJs.
    So I'd shove this turn with all my flop range (which surely have way more bluffs than yours :-) haha)

    If you NEVER have bluffs available, then you shall check or make a super mini bet (like a 20% / 35€ to fake a weak "same bet"). Since flop is super dry, there are really few bad cards, either when they complete a draw or are killing action. (Personally I hate to check and would prefer to mini bet, to be allow to bluff turn for very cheap and easily shove river.)
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Second of all, I think I will only get called by one hand (AT) which beats my potential AJ-AK bluffs. Then it's also a question whether he would actually check AT here. All other Tx are going to fold. A6 and A5 are unlikely given that he might squeeze those preflop or fold on the flop.
    IMHO either your friends are way too tight, or you put them on a way too tight range.
  • Michael EMichael E Red Chipper Posts: 122 ✭✭
    The biggest problem I see is having ZERO bluffs.
    But, like Red said...you can't assume everyone knows this.

    If the UTG player is folding all of his tens to every double barrel...then you need to add more bluffs to your Cbets and run this table over.

    Are all the suited connectors gone from a straddle defend? Straddle defends tend to be quite wide. Bet your hand on the turn in position.

  • obliviusoblivius San FranciscoRed Chipper Posts: 70 ✭✭
    under bet turn with nuts and bluffs to balance..... agreed. Should always get called by most Tx and maybe double floats.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭✭
    Michael E wrote: »
    The biggest problem I see is having ZERO bluffs.
    But, like Red said...you can't assume everyone knows this.
    Maybe you misinterpret my post ? I strongly disagree about having zero bluff. I think Hero has plenty of combos to chose to bluff with.
  • osirus0830osirus0830 Red Chipper Posts: 77 ✭✭
    edited May 14
    I think that you have to bet the flop. If you're not betting your sets here, then you basically have to check your entire range, and I think that checking Jack's and queens here would be bad because they benefit from protection.

    As for the turn, I would bet again. Bet small since there are no flush draws.

    On the river, it depends on villain. If villain is capable of bluffing this spot since a potential scare card came, then I would check. Otherwise, I would bet small again hoping to get called by a ten, or inducing a bluff from someone who would think that our line makes no sense.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 4,004 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Checking range wouldn't be the worst thing.

    Betting smallish make sense as any price offered to a family pot trends poled.

    Turn check is just bizarre.
  • Michael EMichael E Red Chipper Posts: 122 ✭✭
    The biggest problem I see is having ZERO bluffs.
    But, like Red said...you can't assume everyone knows this.

    If the UTG player is folding all of his tens to every double barrel...then you need to add more bluffs to your Cbets and run this table over.

    Are all the suited connectors gone from a straddle defend? Straddle defends tend to be quite wide. Bet your hand on the turn in position.
    Red wrote: »
    Michael E wrote: »
    The biggest problem I see is having ZERO bluffs.
    But, like Red said...you can't assume everyone knows this.
    Maybe you misinterpret my post ? I strongly disagree about having zero bluff. I think Hero has plenty of combos to chose to bluff with.

    Red,

    OP said he has zero bluffs here.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 15

    Maybe you misinterpret my post ? I strongly disagree about having zero bluff. I think Hero has plenty of combos to chose to bluff with.

    Red,

    OP said he has zero bluffs here.

    Either OP didn't see his bluffs or he didn't build a balanced range
    Both situation need to be addressed
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 483 ✭✭✭
    edited May 16
    I'm gonna reply to all comments when I have time but this one stood out to me.
    persuadeo wrote: »
    Checking range wouldn't be the worst thing.

    Betting smallish make sense as any price offered to a family pot trends poled.

    Turn check is just bizarre.

    - How does one determine on which boards to check range? Is it based on range advantage? So if our opponent(s) have more better hands than we do, and/or the runouts favor their range(s)? Or does it involve studying GTO and getting a feel for it that way?

    - Do you mean that by betting this amount we already polarize ourselves so there is no need to go bigger?

    - I'm guessing you think the turn check is bizarre as I should show up with enough bluffs to also value bet. Red has mentioned this, and I agree that I should look into what my bluffs look like.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 4,004 ✭✭✭✭✭
    So if our opponent(s) have more better hands than we do, and/or the runouts favor their range(s)? Or does it involve studying GTO and getting a feel for it that way?
    Well those are both to say the same thing, in many senses. The solver is not magical. Here, of course, is a non-solver, multiway scenario where one's equity share is at its most diluted, compensated by a fairly good board for the PFR with only 3 natural two pairs. Secondly, you can always find bets if you want to, but is it necessary?
    Do you mean that by betting this amount we already polarize ourselves so there is no need to go bigger?
    I don't want to go into it too much but think about what kind of range can offer a price into a field of ranges that exceeds the bettor's range equity, and what kind of price it can offer most efficiently.
    I'm guessing you think the turn check is bizarre as I should show up with enough bluffs to also value bet. Red has mentioned this, and I agree that I should look into what my bluffs look like.
    Fair enough, or perhaps comparatively, would it makes sense to introduce a wide bet fold range into a field that that should have continuance as a whole? If not, and a select range is bet, what happens on blank turns with the most robust parts of that range?
  • EazzyEazzy Red Chipper Posts: 955 ✭✭✭✭
    70 bb deep not huge fan of a 6 bb raise with small pairs from early postion...but eh...if 3 bets are very rare guess its ok....

    On multiway pots any bet looks very strong...even to low stake live players...

    Since i'm checking and giving up so much...I often like to check here..often check raising....given stack sizes probably check raise shove...

    And yes deepening on the bet size, and who bets, I may turn AKs AQs AJs type hand with a back door flush into a check raise bluff.....
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 483 ✭✭✭

    Red wrote: »

    Maybe you misinterpret my post ? I strongly disagree about having zero bluff. I think Hero has plenty of combos to chose to bluff with.

    Red,

    OP said he has zero bluffs here.

    Either OP didn't see his bluffs or he didn't build a balanced range
    Both situation need to be addressed

    Hmm I meant to say that in villain's eyes I probably don't have any bluffs when I jam turn, whereas in reality I absolutely can (hands like 78s or overcards with backdoors). Because of this I considered a turn jam to be too strong, actually expecting him to fold all Tx aside from AT.

    So I was left with underbetting or checking and decided upon checking. Underbetting is a line I don't really employ too much, hopefully I will get to that lesson soon in CORE, but yes, based on all your comments that seems like an option
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 483 ✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    I don't want to go into it too much but think about what kind of range can offer a price into a field of ranges that exceeds the bettor's range equity, and what kind of price it can offer most efficiently.
    I'm guessing you think the turn check is bizarre as I should show up with enough bluffs to also value bet. Red has mentioned this, and I agree that I should look into what my bluffs look like.
    Fair enough, or perhaps comparatively, would it makes sense to introduce a wide bet fold range into a field that that should have continuance as a whole? If not, and a select range is bet, what happens on blank turns with the most robust parts of that range?

    - What kind of range can offer a price into a field of ranges that exceed the bettor's range equity?

    Polarized

    - What kind of price can it offer most efficiently?

    Low price

    - Would it make sense to introduce a wide bet fold range into a field that should have continuance as a whole?

    No

    - What happens on blank turns with the most robust parts of that range?

    I don't really know to be honest. :')

    In case you don't want to get further into it, what kind of literature would you recommend which dives into this kind of analysis? Easy Game a good start?
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,092 ✭✭✭✭
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    Red wrote: »

    Maybe you misinterpret my post ? I strongly disagree about having zero bluff. I think Hero has plenty of combos to chose to bluff with.

    Red,

    OP said he has zero bluffs here.

    Either OP didn't see his bluffs or he didn't build a balanced range
    Both situation need to be addressed

    Hmm I meant to say that in villain's eyes I probably don't have any bluffs when I jam turn, whereas in reality I absolutely can (hands like 78s or overcards with backdoors). Because of this I considered a turn jam to be too strong, actually expecting him to fold all Tx aside from AT.

    If they see you unable to bluff in such spot and fold anything worst than TX, then you have to bluff more (yeah, you pointed out you can - I mean you could even more).

    Also if you (start to) shove turn (more often), you also have to have some hands to protect your shoving range. 66 is a great candidate because you unblock TX. You want V to hold QT and have no idea what to do, wondering if you've AT, AK, 98 or 66.
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    So I was left with underbetting or checking and decided upon checking. Underbetting is a line I don't really employ too much, hopefully I will get to that lesson soon in CORE, but yes, based on all your comments that seems like an option
    I love underbetting. It realize so much. And so many (low stakes) players don't know how to react and will make ton of mistakes.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 4,004 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 19
    - What happens on blank turns with the most robust parts of that range?

    I don't really know to be honest. :')
    In that scenario, the most robust parts want to bet because they can put the most money in the pot. In other words, you should mostly be betting the turn.
    In case you don't want to get further into it, what kind of literature would you recommend which dives into this kind of analysis? Easy Game a good start?
    Easy Game covers the basics but I'm not sure what book to recommend to answer your question.
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,683 ✭✭✭✭✭
    .
    LeChiffre wrote: »
    UTG straddles to €2
    Hero in UTG+1 raises to €12 with :6d :6h
    LJ folds
    HJ calls
    CO calls
    BU calls
    SB calls
    BB calls
    UTG calls

    omg. There was a guy in the parking lot on the way in who wanted to call too, I think you forgot him.

    I will sometimes play the hand "backwards", i.e. the opposite of how others would play. In this case betting the flop which looks like a standard c-bet bluff or sort-of-bluff (after AQ is sometimes the best hand), and then checking the turn. However the way this hand went it's not a good time to do that. The flop bet is fine, but your opponent called you with something, what could it be? The :2H: I suppose is the about the biggest brick you could see on this board. Perhaps a 7, 8, or 9 might be bigger depending on how you view such things as gutterball calls. Technically I suppose there can't really be a brick on this particular board. Having said that, I don't think you checked out of fear of 43 being out there, did you? Because there are tons more options than that that don't beat you. I think another bet is in order here.

    You are talking about him having a T, but from his point of view, A, K, Q or J is a "scare card" on the river. Yes he could have AT, but pretty clearly he didn't or else he wouldn't check the river after the turn went check/check. If you're worried about "insane strength" on your part (I don't really think 40% pot is insane) then it's better to put out 2 smaller chunks of money than a big shove on the river anyway.

  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 483 ✭✭✭
    jeffnc wrote: »
    Having said that, I don't think you checked out of fear of 43 being out there, did you? Because there are tons more options than that that don't beat you. I think another bet is in order here.

    No no, as I said I was worried about looking too strong because of my lack of perceived bluffs. Wasn't scared of 43.
  • LeChiffreLeChiffre NetherlandsRed Chipper Posts: 483 ✭✭✭
    jeffnc wrote: »

    You are talking about him having a T, but from his point of view, A, K, Q or J is a "scare card" on the river. Yes he could have AT, but pretty clearly he didn't or else he wouldn't check the river after the turn went check/check. If you're worried about "insane strength" on your part (I don't really think 40% pot is insane) then it's better to put out 2 smaller chunks of money than a big shove on the river anyway.

    Agreed!

Leave a Comment

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