bluff vs checkrange

BubbleboyBubbleboy Red Chipper Posts: 21 ✭✭
Im doing a few of my first frequency based handrange analysis and this next one has litterally kept me awake at night.

In the hand im analyzing, i am opening from the CO and the BB calls. I have this range:
pqcn30eon005.png

The flop is
:Ad :3s :2d

Question: When filling in the bluffing part of the range, do you prefer hands like KK-44, or the offsuit broadway hands?

The offsuit broadways have the most to gain from a fold as they have very little showdown value. In that sense you might prefer those. The pairs have more showdown value so you might want to put those in your checking range. But you could also use them as bluffs as they have some equity when called (especially 44/55) and have the potential to win stacks when they do hit.


Comments

  • NinjahNinjah Red Chipper Posts: 1,126 ✭✭✭✭
    I don't know that this flop is the greatest example as you could justify checking your entire range here but whatever you choose to do, one of the most important parts is to make sure that both ranges (betting and checking ranges, not bluffing and checking), have strong hands that protect your weak hands so that it doesn't become obvious that when you always check that it means your weak.
  • BubbleboyBubbleboy Red Chipper Posts: 21 ✭✭
    Yes, i have AA and a few Ax hands in my checking range here.

    But in order to maintain the right betting to checking ratio in the right value to bluff ratio that poker's 1% talks about, i need either the pairs or the broadways in the bluffing range. Which would be the best concidering everything in my first post?
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭✭
    Bubbleboy wrote: »
    But in order to maintain the right betting to checking ratio in the right value to bluff ratio that poker's 1% talks about, i need ...
    Don't take the 70% as a rule, but as a guide-line. It's merely a range exercise at the end.
    It depends on Villain (play style and mistake propensity) as well as on the board texture.

    Now both broadway and PP have reason to bet - but different ones.
  • RoblivionRoblivion WisconsinRed Chipper Posts: 288 ✭✭✭
    44 and 55 would both be pretty good candidates, as well as some diamond draws. I would sooner fire something like 87s than I would something like KQ because KQ is going to win a lot more against V's checkdown range, and if a bet gets through with 87s it's virtually guaranteed that the villain will be sacrificing equity - of course, that would be a one and done bet, because there are almost zero good runouts for the hand.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 1
    @Roblivion : Maybe raw equity, KQ is better than 87 against Villain's checking range. But once you've checked flop, don't hit K or Q on turn and V pot bets, what do you do ? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • RoblivionRoblivion WisconsinRed Chipper Posts: 288 ✭✭✭
    @Red it's villain dependent, but most likely I would fold, similar to if I hit the 8 or 7. My point is 87 has more to gain by making V fold right now than KQ does.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭✭
    If you fold KQ on turn, then KQ and 87 aren't that different :)
  • BubbleboyBubbleboy Red Chipper Posts: 21 ✭✭
    Thanks for the discussion, very educational. This is what i've come up with so far. Seems fair? (also i've counted 2 combos twice but couldn't spot my mistake. Anyway this should be close enough)

    257 combos, semi static in pos (bad event)—> 65% —> bet 167 (55/112)

    Value: 59/55
    - 22-33 (6 combos)
    - A3s-A2s (5 combos)
    - AK-AT (48)

    Bluf: 108/112
    - Flushdraws (15 combos)
    - KQo-KTo, QJo (48 combos)
    - 44-55 (12 combos)
    - Every backdoor FD without an ace (15 combos)
    - A5s-A4s (6 combos)
    - 98s-76s, 97s-86s of H and C(12 combos) <--- lowest sdv hands

    Check: 92/90
    - AA (3 combos)
    - KK-66 (48 combos)
    - A9o (9 combos)
    - A9s-A6s (12 combos)
    - KQs-T9s, KJs-T8s, KTs-K9s of H and C (20 combos)
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭✭
    What is the difference between KcTd, KhTs, KhTc and KhTh? And why do you bet some but check others?

    If V has 99 or a :DIAMOND: FD, which / how many combos do you want to bet for value ?
  • RoblivionRoblivion WisconsinRed Chipper Posts: 288 ✭✭✭
    Red wrote: »
    If you fold KQ on turn, then KQ and 87 aren't that different :)

    They aren't that different in the scenario you presented, where we pair up on the turn and villain leads for a pot sized bet.

    If we bet the flop, villain will be folding many hands like JT, QT, QJ, KJ, etc. that have little equity against KQ but a lot against 87. If a hand checks all the way to the river, KQ stands a good chance against these hands and 87 will almost certainly lose. If we hit a Q on the turn or river and villain has a smaller Q, we can call a smaller bet, or wring out a little value with a small bet on turn or river from QT sometimes.

    Saying they are the same would be ignoring a lot of other scenarios.
  • BubbleboyBubbleboy Red Chipper Posts: 21 ✭✭
    Red wrote: »
    What is the difference between KcTd, KhTs, KhTc and KhTh? And why do you bet some but check others?

    If V has 99 or a :DIAMOND: FD, which / how many combos do you want to bet for value ?

    You're right they aren't. It was just a starting point to put all the broadways in as bluff. Now i think about it. I like those combos more than the low suited connectors. So maybe check them behind for a little sdv and bet all the low suited connectors as a bluff.

    Against 99 and FD i would just bet all my value hands. I think the value part is pretty standard. Would you do it differently?
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,094 ✭✭✭✭
    Roblivion wrote: »
    Red wrote: »
    If you fold KQ on turn, then KQ and 87 aren't that different :)

    They aren't that different in the scenario you presented, where we pair up on the turn and villain leads for a pot sized bet.

    If we bet the flop, villain will be folding many hands like JT, QT, QJ, KJ, etc. that have little equity against KQ but a lot against 87. If a hand checks all the way to the river, KQ stands a good chance against these hands and 87 will almost certainly lose. If we hit a Q on the turn or river and villain has a smaller Q, we can call a smaller bet, or wring out a little value with a small bet on turn or river from QT sometimes.

    Saying they are the same would be ignoring a lot of other scenarios.

    Except if V totally whiff the board, don't expect to be able to go free to showdown.
    When you don't hit K/Q on turn (or at last on river), you gonna have a hard time to call any significant bet.
    BB still has all AX in his range except maybe AQ/AK; and because he will flop check to the PFR, he still hold them all. So even if you hit K/Q, you still can lose a significant part of the time against AX.
    ... So yeah, KQ has more raw equity than 87 against BB's junk on flop, but I don't think the have a significant different realizable equity.

    Your way of thinking is right: better bet the worst because they take a better advantage of equity denial; but (IMHO) you misapply it: you see KQ being much stronger that 87, when the difference is pretty little.
    This argument about equity denial is correct but with hands with acceptable equity: like betting 66 or 7d6d more often than AQ and KdQd. Not that much when you play with napkins.
    Bubbleboy wrote: »
    Red wrote: »
    What is the difference between KcTd, KhTs, KhTc and KhTh? And why do you bet some but check others?

    If V has 99 or a :DIAMOND: FD, which / how many combos do you want to bet for value ?

    You're right they aren't. It was just a starting point to put all the broadways in as bluff. Now i think about it. I like those combos more than the low suited connectors. So maybe check them behind for a little sdv and bet all the low suited connectors as a bluff.

    Issue then is that you could be too many bluff. If you c-bet those and you get called, what do you know on all these turn you don't improve (much) ? Or when it helps V's (perceived) range (4, 5, 6, :DIAMOND: , secondarily 7-T)
    Bubbleboy wrote: »
    Red wrote: »
    What is the difference between KcTd, KhTs, KhTc and KhTh? And why do you bet some but check others?

    If V has 99 or a :DIAMOND: FD, which / how many combos do you want to bet for value ?
    Against 99 and FD i would just bet all my value hands. I think the value part is pretty standard. Would you do it differently?
    My point is: you proposed to check, 66-AA when you can bet them. And most of them prefer to bet than check.
    Ok, we can delay the c-bet with AA (yet, maybe not all the time) ; but other want to bet - to deny equity and to build the pot.
    Otherwise:
    -> When you check with 77 and turn is 8, BB leads for 55% pot bet size, do you fold?
    -> When you check with QQ and turn is :DIAMOND: , BB leads for 2/3 pot, do you fold?
    -> When you check with TT, turn is 5, BB leads for 2/3 pot, do you fold?
    -> When you check with TT, turn is 6, BB leads for 2/3 pot, do you fold?
  • BubbleboyBubbleboy Red Chipper Posts: 21 ✭✭
    Those are all bad spots indeed. Which leads me back to my original question, do we bluff with the pairs or the missed (broadway) hands. Pairs can indeed get some extra value of we bet them and get a call from a FD. Or maybe a combo of both? Say we bet the more vulnerable pairs like 44-TT and some low suited hands, and check JJ-KK for some sdv and the higher missed hands?
  • porterporter Red Chipper Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    edited July 2
    The difference between KQ and 87 is substantial. KQ is likely ahead of your opponent's range on this flop while 87 is almost always behind. 87 is therefore better off denying the equity of naked overcards on this board, while KQ is obviously ahead of those hands.

    There's also a significant difference in equity realization between the two. Your opponent should be bluffing more often on a turn 8/7 than a turn K/Q because your range should be able to raise a turn bet more often on K/Q.

    Further, you shouldn't be folding when you check back and make a pair on the turn with either of these hands. First, your opponent retains their full range when the flop is checked through (plenty of available bluffs). Second, your opponent shouldn't be able to go overboard with turn bluffs because your range should be protected.

    If your opponent is a moron, or face up, of course that is an exception. But don't make that assumption lightly.

    It should also be fairly common for your opponent to check the turn, in which case KQ should actually be able to get some value on the turn or river. That will never be the case for 87 unless it makes two pair.
  • porterporter Red Chipper Posts: 312 ✭✭✭
    Bubbleboy wrote: »
    Thanks for the discussion, very educational. This is what i've come up with so far. Seems fair? (also i've counted 2 combos twice but couldn't spot my mistake. Anyway this should be close enough)

    257 combos, semi static in pos (bad event)—> 65% —> bet 167 (55/112)

    Value: 59/55
    - 22-33 (6 combos)
    - A3s-A2s (5 combos)
    - AK-AT (48)

    Bluf: 108/112
    - Flushdraws (15 combos)
    - KQo-KTo, QJo (48 combos)
    - 44-55 (12 combos)
    - Every backdoor FD without an ace (15 combos)
    - A5s-A4s (6 combos)
    - 98s-76s, 97s-86s of H and C(12 combos) <--- lowest sdv hands

    Check: 92/90
    - AA (3 combos)
    - KK-66 (48 combos)
    - A9o (9 combos)
    - A9s-A6s (12 combos)
    - KQs-T9s, KJs-T8s, KTs-K9s of H and C (20 combos)

    Lost here is your opponent's range. When they most likely have 6 combos of sets, 5 combos of two pair, plenty of top pair, and 4 combos of the nut straight (you have none), this seems like a very bad event (in Miller's terms) that should significantly curtail your flop betting frequency and size. Your opponent should be check-raising this board at a high frequency even if you construct well.

    That doesn't mean you can't bet but you should carefully consider what price you lay, how your equity will fare over streets, and counters by your opponent.

Leave a Comment

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