Q T 7 Board

SullySully Red Chipper Posts: 676 ✭✭✭
1-2 live

Hero- $300
Villain SB- $200

UTG straddles for $5

folds around to Hero

BU Hero raises to $25 :8d :9d
SB calls- older gentleman, just sat down 30 minutes., looked competent. call surprised me. I was not sure how wide his calling range was
UTG calls- this could easily have been 30%-35% of hands
pot $75

Flop :Qd :Ts :7h

Checked to Hero
I don't like this board outside of obvious benefits to me. I will check this board quite a bit. It's not 7,8,9 board but it looks like a villain board
Hero checked

Turn: :Ac
Checked to Hero
Hero bets $40
SB goes all in
Hero folds

Betting this :Ac was a horrible idea. I ran some things through equilab and it's even more horrible than I first thought

My questions are:

1. Should I bet flop? I will raise pre flop with 27%-30% of hands in situations like this for many reasons including to increase my fold equity post flop. I didn't take advantage of that this time. I am c-betting 70%-80% depending on the board. Is this board more friendly than I think? Does it matter when I get a good hit like this? Just barrel away?
2. If called what cards do I like on the turn to barrel. Low cards only?

I played this hand poorly

Any and all comments welcome

Comments

  • FilthyCasualFilthyCasual Red Chipper Posts: 871 ✭✭✭
    edited January 2016
    So, if you aren't going to cbet an OESD, what kind of flop are you looking to cbet? That is my biggest issue is I don't think we should be raising pre if we aren't going to be barreling oesd, imo. Without running it through flopzilla, I get a feeling it is going to butcher our frequencies.

    I think the cbet is also going to allow villains to check to you on the turn when they normally wouldn't, allowing the flop bet to often get you 2 cards in position if you don't decide to 2nd barrel. Of course this might be a way my villains play against me, because I fire the second barrel often

    Just to add a little more reason not to bet the ace, the Ace effectively turns your oesd into a gutshot. Not saying your straight is always going to be bad when the J comes, it's just rarely going to get paid when it is good.
  • Skors3Skors3 Red Chipper Posts: 662 ✭✭✭
    -ev wrote: »
    So, if you aren't going to cbet an OESD, what kind of flop are you looking to cbet? That is my biggest issue is I don't think we should be raising pre if we aren't going to be barreling oesd, imo.

    I think this is an interesting point. From what I've been reading lately we should be c-betting/not c-betting based on our range, not on whether or not we actually hit the board.

    So say you raise with :8d :8c and catch a :8s :7c :6h board. Some would argue for us not to bet here, but I struggle with wanting to build a pot with a huge hand.

    I realize other factors are at play: stacks, position, number of opponents.

    I feel like this is a good example of this idea.

    I hope this thread gets some traction.
  • SullySully Red Chipper Posts: 676 ✭✭✭
    Yeah, good stuff.

    Here is another I would like some thoughts. Here I don't hit so hard:

    Hero raise BU with :Ah :7h
    BB call
    MP limp call

    flop: :Th :7d :6s

    C-Bet? Board again doesn't look favorable for my perceived range but I have middle pair and BDFD

    I should be repping uncapped whenever I can the times I'm OR and getting limp/calls or OOP calls

  • FilthyCasualFilthyCasual Red Chipper Posts: 871 ✭✭✭
    Skors3 wrote: »
    I think this is an interesting point. From what I've been reading lately we should be c-betting/not c-betting based on our range, not on whether or not we actually hit the board.

    So say you raise with :8d :8c and catch a :8s :7c :6h board. Some would argue for us not to bet here, but I struggle with wanting to build a pot with a huge hand.

    I realize other factors are at play: stacks, position, number of opponents.

    I feel like this is a good example of this idea.

    I hope this thread gets some traction.
    At 1-2, I'm not too concerned about playing in an exploitable fashion. Flop texture based betting is an interesting concept to remain unexploitable, but personally think their is going to be a higher EV line in a given situation than just following a predefined strategy for flop XYZ given villains tendencies. It's something I keep in mind, but really feels like I'm losing the option to exploit and at least some of the enjoyment I get from poker if I follow it to a T.
  • FilthyCasualFilthyCasual Red Chipper Posts: 871 ✭✭✭
    Skors3 wrote: »
    I think this is an interesting point. From what I've been reading lately we should be c-betting/not c-betting based on our range, not on whether or not we actually hit the board.
    Let's say flop comes AK5r, we have a range advantage because we have more Aces and Kings in our range, but barring some runner runner options, we have two napkins currently. I would rather bet this because I think a villain would fold than bet because I have range advantage with near zero actual equity with the 98dd.

  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,315 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think you attempt to recognize what is optimal and then deviate to exploit weaknesses or level someone. It's well worth knowing what is theoretically sound, not so that you are constricted by annoying guidelines, but so that in fact your eyes are fully open to all the possibilities.

    So, this board is not a slam dunk cbet, but it's not necessarily a check either. Look at all the hands that are in raising ranges that can cbet in position, JJ-AA, AK, sets, QT, KJ. On the other hand, you should expect a lot of calls on this board, so you have to choose carefully what hands to go with. With many things being equal, it's up to you to recognize if villain is making calling or folding errors, and decide how to play. If OP has tons of hands in his range, as he indicates, he may have to cbet less, not more.

    I personally think OP played it really well and should not feel bad at all. It's also up to him what kinds of hands he wants to check back with, for instance, some queens, tens, and weak draws, or pairs that block draws might make sense. I would include 89dd, because he can realize backdoor flush equity in the event he was going to get check raised on the flop. He also blocks 88 and 99 which will fold on the turn to a delayed cbet anyway, especially if bigger cards come in. Once OP didn't pick up equity on the turn, he attempted to represent KJ or an Ace, and there is no way that raise is a bluff, which I think means villain interpreted him as being strong, which means the semibluff was good, looked strong, and so he folded correctly, and may have even been drawing dead. Where's the problem?

Leave a Comment

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