Barreling practice against the Jolly Guy (live $1-3 K8s bluff decisions)

AKQJ10AKQJ10 Red Chipper Posts: 16 ✭✭
edited July 21 in Live Poker Hands
Live $1-3, 8-handed

Jolly Guy (covers me at $1000), three seats to my right : Affable, entertaining, the perfect poker opponent. Seems to play very loose preflop but often fold postflop. Has talked repeatedly about how he’s playing for three days straight, about how he’s been driving a truck for years and has saved enough money to enjoy some of it at poker. He went through $200 buyins when I showed up, then hit some hands to get this nice stack.

Straightforward Button ($275): Nice guy, seems loose pre and fairly straightforward post. Only hand with him so far was when he arrived at the table and straddled in on the dead button (house rule). I opened KQs from the cutoff, he called, I declined to cbet some sort of highly coordinated flop, and he took it down with a flop bet.

Hero ($475) CO with :KD::8D:

Preflop:
F, Jolly C $3, F F, Hero ???

I decided to isolate with a raise, which I think is clearly correct given the opponent, but raised too small.

Hero R $12, Button C, F F, Jolly Guy C

Flop (3 ways, $40, SPR=10 and 17)
:Qs:Jd:7S:

I decided to cbet bluff on this semiconnected, semidynamic board because I have backdoor FD, backdoor SDs, and an overcard. I don't often expect to take the pot down on this kind of board, and I plan to barrel if I improve my draw or get a credible scare card such as a nonconnecting spade and check/give up otherwise.

X, Hero B $25, Button C, Jolly Guy C.

Turn ($115, eff stacks $238 and $438)
:3S:

Jolly Guy X, Hero ???

Comments

  • KeWickKeWick Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    Non connected spade eh? Careful what you wish for.

    Is this something you think can be done in two barrels or does it require a third barrel that needs to be set up with a specific turn bet size? If they are both going to fold, you don't care so much which street they fold on.

    That the shorter stack is still to act after you on the turn feels like it hampers your room for creative maneuvers. My guess is that you have to solve that problem first and see what the solutions to that represent to the Jolly Guy.

    Good luck!
  • KossKoss Red Chipper Posts: 82 ✭✭
    The ISO raise is fine. In most 1/3 games the sizing should probably be a bit bigger like you said, I'd just grab 3 red chips and call it good, but that's not a huge deal. I'm probably just giving up on this flop. There's not a lot of great runouts for this hand and it hits their ranges pretty hard. The backdoor straight is tainted by potential flushes, and 1 card straights don't have very good implied odds. King outs are also tainted and have poor implied odds.

    I'm not sure the plan to bluff on a spade is that great, given that the backdoor (or even front door) spades might make a decent portion of the calling ranges on this flop. You're basically counting on them both to have medium strength hands you can barrel them off.
  • RoblivionRoblivion WisconsinRed Chipper Posts: 345 ✭✭✭
    I really don't think the choice to iso is a great one. If dude is really super reliably calling too much and then folding way too much on the flop, AND the button isn't going to come along much, AND the blinds are relatively chill, it's probably good. You know all that dynamic better than me though.

    I also agree with Koss that this flop should just be a give up, for all of the reasons listed. You're almost never going to get through both of them on the flop, and you're often going to get called in both spots, and the turn is rarely going to help you - when it does, it's often going to just upgrade you too being in a tough spot.

    On the turn, I'd be looking to shut down if called by just the jolly guy. When you get called in two spots, it is absolutely time to pack it in. Also, I do not think spades are your best bluff cards when you get called in two spots - there are plenty of spades either of them can have, especially with no ace on the board.
  • AKQJ10AKQJ10 Red Chipper Posts: 16 ✭✭
    Thanks for the feedback, all 3 of you.

    Let's say that this was a bit of an experiment in putting some of CORE 2.0 and stuff from Miller's Course into practice. And there are a lot of these semiconnected (Type 2), two-flush flops so in some ways this is very generalizable, in other ways no.

    So the two main principles I was exploring here are:
    • Flush draws/flushes with both hole cards aren't nearly as common as many $1-3 players fear.
    • Many small-stakes players are so exploitable on many boards that you really can bet almost without regard to your own hole cards.

    There are some good points made about declining to cbet the flop, and in tougher games that somehow get to this spot I think checking is the way to go. Here, given my read on Jolly (I also read him as sticky on the flop, but not at all by the river) I'm not yet convinced my flop plan was faulty.

    However, when I bet and get both callers, I think that is the new info that is my cue to give up on this turn. Button won't always call, so I'm not burning money to bet flop with intention of giving up if both call.

    If Button folds and Jolly calls the flop, I actually still think this is a good barreling card OTT. Two spades or one big spade aren't that much of Jolly's very wide range here.
    --

    So what happened on the turn? I bet $75, Button tank-folded, Jolly Guy did what he'd done several times before (took a few moments, then said, "I'm gonna let you win this one," in an Alabama drawl), and the dealer pushed me the chips.

    Later on Button asked, "Did you have at least one spade? Because I folded a spade there." "Let's just say I had a really good hand," I replied.

    So then... my optimism gets rewarded and my lack of poker sense goes unpunished, this time. :) I'm glad I played it this way for my poker development, but I agree I should dial back the barrelling just a tad.
  • KeWickKeWick Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    Wait, if it worked, why are you dialing it back? Because you think it shouldn't have worked? Are your assumptions wrong?

    I admit that a sample size of one isn't much to go on, but if you have identified a spot where players in your game are not calling enough (non-connected-flush-making turn cards), drive a truck through that hole until a) someone notices AND b) someone does something about it.

    Just be objective about it, bank roll for the additional swing, and keep an eye on basis of your assumptions (opponent's behaviors don't change, until they do. Mr. button may want to call you next time).

    More power to you!
  • AKQJ10AKQJ10 Red Chipper Posts: 16 ✭✭
    edited July 22
    KeWick wrote: »
    Wait, if it worked, why are you dialing it back? Because you think it shouldn't have worked? Are your assumptions wrong?

    I think I made some optimistic assumptions that just happened to work out here, yeah. While I at least had a coherent plan, the fact it worked this one time doesn't mean it was the best plan.

    That said we should use results to update our priors. In this case, the update is to reinforce my prior that Ed Miller and SplitSuit are right, and that you often can build pots and claim them through aggression on scary boards -- even against "loose" players who aren't really that loose on later streets.

    So next time in this exact spot I might not barrel twice but in a spot where barreling is 10% more favorable, I will continue barreling.
  • KeWickKeWick Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    Maybe, But you might be selling yourself short. Which one of your assumptions was inappropriately optimistic?

    I just got through Miller's barreling presentation tonight. After that, I like your play even more. His 2nd example seems to mirror your hand pretty closely. (https://redchippoker.com/topic/barreling/ at 34 minute mark)

    But back to your original question, you planned to barrel, you got a barrel card, what bet size should your barrel be?

    Well, what bet size would you use if you actually had the hand you are representing, the strong or nut flush? Miller advises that two small bets and a huge river bet are the bets that look like the nuts in this situation. The small(ish) turn bet is designed to price in the As X(not spade) hands who won't get there often enough on the river to make it worth it. If I understand him correctly, it also sucks in the lower made flushes that are just hoping that you don't make the big river bet they don't want to call for their stack.

    Here is where Button's small stack gets tricky. I think we can ignore Jolly's deep stack now as his turn call tells us that he doesn't want to play for his stack. (If he check raises, we are toast anyway.)

    We don't know if Button wants to play for his stack but our assumption is that he rarely will with anything that is not the nut flush. To quote Miller: "If you 'don’t know,' keep barreling."

    Turn: $115, eff stacks $238 (Button's)

    If you bet 2/3 pot (~80) you leave him on the River with $155 to call a shove into a pot of $265 plus your $155, giving him 2.7:1

    If you bet 1/2 pot (~60) you leave him on the River with $175 to call a shove into a pot of $235 plus your $175, giving him 2.3:1

    If you bet 1/3 pot (~40) you leave him on the River with $195 to call a shove into a pot of $195 plus your $195, giving him a straight pot sized bet for 2:1.

    If your plan is to finish this on the second barrel, your $75 bet feels right. If you are committing to the 3-barrel plan, the smaller bets fell better. It makes his big river fold easier (and saves you a bit when the rare turn raises do come in from either player.) Caveat: a bet this small is designed to get a call by Button and if successful, might also be enough to get Jolly (with last action) to call the turn as well. So maybe is too small. But whatever, this answer has gone on long enough.

    Thanks for the hand.
  • KossKoss Red Chipper Posts: 82 ✭✭
    AKQJ10 wrote: »
    Later on Button asked, "Did you have at least one spade? Because I folded a spade there."

    He probably had something laughable like A9 with the 9 of spades and thinks he just made a tough fold.

    The challenge with this hand was like you said, it's multiway, and you are OOP vs. a straightforward button player. Now your bluff has to get through two people, one of whom you are OOP against. There certainly are players like the Jolly fellow you described who will play way too wide and go too deep into hands but give up when the bets get big, and by all means barrel away. But one thing to think about is that even if guys maybe fold too much, say 60% of the time, when you have to get through 2 people, now it's 0.6x0.6=0.36 so your 60% success rate is now 36%. And this is on a board that's going to hit a lot of their hands. I will retract part of my previous comment though, I don't think barreling a spade is that bad of an idea, assuming you had only gotten one call on the flop. But when both call the flop the chances that you are up against a flush draw or a strong BDFD go up immensely.
  • KeWickKeWick Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    But when both call the flop the chances that you are up against a flush draw or a strong BDFD go up immensely.

    You want flush draws to call your turn bet, even nut draws. They only get there 19.5% of the time and don't want to play for stacks otherwise. See Miller @ 39:30. Of course, this assume you have the capacity to pull a third barrel.

    Yes, our position isn't perfect. Yes, it is harder to get a bluff through 2 players than 1. Yes, the flop can hit their ranges. But whatever hope the flop gave them, the turn took away the value of most of those hits.

    Yes, you are going to lose this hand some times if Straight Forward Button is sticky or if either player is sandbagging the nuts. But I need to know more about where your 60% figure comes from before I find your position persuasive.
  • RoblivionRoblivion WisconsinRed Chipper Posts: 345 ✭✭✭
    KeWick wrote: »
    But when both call the flop the chances that you are up against a flush draw or a strong BDFD go up immensely.

    You want flush draws to call your turn bet, even nut draws. They only get there 19.5% of the time and don't want to play for stacks otherwise. See Miller @ 39:30. Of course, this assume you have the capacity to pull a third barrel.

    I believe the point he was making is that two callers makes it much more likely we were called by a flush draw on the FLOP, making an actual made flush on the turn.
  • KeWickKeWick Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    Thank you. I missed that point.

Leave a Comment

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