Completing in loose games

MrBalzterMrBalzter Red Chipper Posts: 38 ✭✭
I'm playing in a loose passive game.
I generally don't complete in the SB but I think this a good exception with a passive BB left to act. The pot odds are good and I don't think I have much fold equity if I try to steal this pre flop.

On the flop I hit a weak top pair, I bet small for protection/semi bluff. My goal was to control the pot and prevent some one from throwing a larger bet at the pot as bluff.

When the BB raises my bet, I get kind of lost.

I decided to call and raise the turn if I improve.
Call down if his bets are small enough.
Fold to any bets over 1/2 pot.
Question?
Should I complete this preflop?
Is leading this flop multiway for this size good?
Any opinions on my thought process when facing the raise on the flop?

PokerStars - $0.10 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (SB): 110.2 BB
BB: 157.1 BB (VPIP: 30.47, PFR: 20.11, 3Bet Preflop: 4.14, Hands: 3,610)
UTG: 110.1 BB (VPIP: 22.23, PFR: 18.19, 3Bet Preflop: 7.91, Hands: 3,942)
MP: 145 BB (VPIP: 14.75, PFR: 9.84, 3Bet Preflop: 3.70, Hands: 61)
CO: 80 BB
BTN: 125.2 BB (VPIP: 53.13, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 33)

Hero posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB, CO posts penalty blind 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 2.5 BB) Hero has T:diamond: 9:heart:

fold, fold, CO checks, BTN calls 1 BB, Hero calls 0.5 BB, BB checks

Flop: (4 BB, 4 players) 4:spade: 8:club: 9:club:
Hero bets 1.1 BB, BB raises to 4 BB, fold, fold, Hero calls 2.9 BB

Turn: (12 BB, 2 players) 4:diamond:
Hero checks, BB bets 8.1 BB, fold

BB wins 11.5 BB

Thanks

Comments

  • RyanH1995RyanH1995 Red Chipper Posts: 32 ✭✭
    fold pre. Your bet size doesn't really get value from worse hands and it looks incredibly weak as well. I think villain would probably raise this sizing with a lot of his range. Also why call the raise and then fold on the turn when the flush does not complete and no over cards come? I think you are too focused on hitting or missing boards and your actual hand rather than playing range v range.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 4,001 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Why would the counter to a passive strategy be more passivity?
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,768 -
    edited July 7
    How often does a Villain that calls your flop 1.1BB into a 4BB pot need to be right when they call?

    How often will you put more money in when *they choose*? (So far with no new positive information, you put in 2.9BB)

    How does this effect the 1.1 into 5.1 (implied odds)

    If they are basically getting access to 7bb for this 1.1 flop call, in the loosest mathematics sense what ratio are they getting?

    There are two reasons to bet in hold'em.

    Make pot bigger in case you win.
    Deny equity.

    The first is critical to understand. To make the pot bigger in case you win implies they call AND they lose.

    The second is that they fold and they would win more frequently than needed to call.

    You rightly termed this a protection bet. I prefer term "protection bet bluff". I call it a bluff because they are almost always ahead when they call.

    While this bet denies equity better than checking, given the implied odds, it barely makes even two overs wrong to call.

    Given the :4S: :8C: :9C: on the flop, what kinds of hands tend to win big pots here? There is 2p+ here by the end frequently.

    What cards are you hoping for? J-Q-K-A are unpleasant, though the jack does give OESD.
    All clubs are scary. Any 7 completes an OESD, GSSD, and reasonable 2p.

    We want 6-5-4-3-2 non club. Given that the 4 elicited a fold, maybe not even that list.

    Oh, we want that kind of cards, twice....

    The crux of the problem is you have non-robust equity (TP-meh-kicker) on a board that holds a ton robust equity potential. You are OOP to boot.

    "Not calling" pre is better, because this problem of holding non-robust equity OOP is a very foreseeable problem with your hand+position+ field size.

    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 2,090 ✭✭✭✭
    It's fun how people ask question without looking for answers first when it's super easy to find:
    https://redchippoker.com/complete-small-blind-in-live-poker/
    SplitSuit wrote:
    The other hand type that I suggest taking out of your SB completion range is offsuit connectors like 98o and 54o. The hands have very little single pair value, and flopping two pair creates an immediate issue. Say you have 76o and the flop is 76x. Regardless of what the X is, there is at least one draw present (if not two with a flush draw). Plus the runoff can get ugly quickly, leaving us confused when we are supposed to build a huge pot with two pair and when we are in more of a showdown value mindset. And don’t even get me started on trying to play draws from OOP again

    Yeah, you still can complete them if the field is super weak. But as seen in your hand, it's hard to continue when facing action

    Doug Hull wrote: »
    There are two reasons to bet in hold'em.

    Make pot bigger in case you win.
    Deny equity.

    Janda rulz, yeah !
  • MrBalzterMrBalzter Red Chipper Posts: 38 ✭✭
    @Red
    Red wrote: »
    It's fun how people ask question without looking for answers first when it's super easy to find:
    https://redchippoker.com/complete-small-blind-in-live-poker/

    "Fun when people don't look for answers first", ok.
    Putting a hand on the forum for review from others does not mean someone hasn't researched the issues they are questioning.

    I thought this was an interesting spot dealing with several dynamics
    - Completing
    - Loose games
    - Protection Betting
    - Multi way pots
    - Under betting

Leave a Comment

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