Differentiation Practise: Playing against FP on an A-high flop

(I'm using myself as the opponent, because it means we can discuss around a very specific read; my read on myself.)

Setting: A five-handed shorthanded limit hold 'em game. You're in the big blind and you're dealt something.

I'm under the gun, and I raise. It's folded to you.

Scenario 1: The flop comes [Ah][5s][6s].

Scenario 2: The flop comes [Ah][9d][4s]

Both cases, you check, I bet and you checkraise. In which scenario am I more likely to fold and why?

A few pointers:

* UTG in a five-handed game, I raise QJs/KTs+, 66+, KJo+, but may sometimes throw in a few more hands (or take away some) depending on who are in the blinds.

* I will (almost always) go to showdown with any ace, regardless.

FP,

I think you would more likely fold to the second scenario. My reasoning would be you have the connectors in the first and most likely with the hands you have played previously you like those suited connectors ALOT! And I don't think you had an ace or you would have reraised me most likely.

Scenario 1 is a more dangerous flop with a flush draw and straight draw possibilities.
Scenario 2 is much less of a scare flop.

But unless you have pocket nines or another pocket pair I can see you folding scenario 2 as according to yourself, you will be holding suited paint or off suited paint and are less likely to have hit anything on the flop.

While scenario one looks like it has more pitfalls than scenario two, it also has more possibilities for the kind of holdings you described that you might be holding.

You're right, I'm much more inclined to fold the second scenario. And although you've touched on why, the reason I'm more likely to fold the second flop doesn't have as much to do with my own cards.

Raising back with the second seems scarier to you since there are not flush/straight draws that I'm betting at, implying I've got a set, two pair, or pocket pairs higher than 9s.

There are some hands you're not going to fold no matter what, but, if I raise back on the second flop I think there are fewer hands that I'm going to do that with.


On the other hand, in Senario 1 you're saying you wouldn't likely be playing connectors low enough for to reach a 56, but, as the BB, might I? Even after you raise preflop?

NineLions said:

Raising back with the second seems scarier to you since there are not flush/straight draws that I'm betting at, implying I've got a set, two pair, or pocket pairs higher than 9s.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree with this. Checkraise in the first scenario is less convincing because I'm somewhat less likely to check the first scenario with a hand because of those draws. In the first scenario, a checkraise could often mean I'm only on a draw.

(Note, I play No Limit, and am not experienced in Limit, so it's possible my reasoning is not as correct in this case? I'm really not for sure.)

Yup, a flushdraw or some kind of straight draw may well play back at me on this flop and I could conceivably peel to see what the turn brings. Playing suited connectors out of the BB is fairly standard in a five-handed game.

I don't attempt to bluff boards with drawy textures anymore, specifically because making plays with strong draws (up-and-down straights and flushdraws) is so common that "no one" seems to fold when you do it. Better then to just call the flop bet and try to keep your implied odds somewhat intact for when you hit it.

I've been thinking about this, FP.

You say that ordinarily you wouldn't play suited connectors from UTG, but that suited connectors are often played from the BB in this situation.


Is this a difference between you and other players, or would you also often play suited connectors from the BB in this situation?

If so, are you defending the blinds, or using your position as last to bet preflop?

NineLions said:

Is this a difference between you and other players, or would you also often play suited connectors from the BB in this situation?

If so, are you defending the blinds, or using your position as last to bet preflop?

Click to expand...

Aha. Glad you asked!

The short answer to your question is that yes, I play suited connectors out of the big blind in this situation (presuming that I'm closing the action), at least 7-6 suited and up. If I'm up against a very loose and aggressive opponent (and someone who open-raises UTG usually isn't tight/passive, at least) I may go down to even 6-5s, but unless I'm certain to be up against a tilter, I fold lower than that.

Here's why:

I'm being offered (at least) 3:1 on my money. Against non-dominating hands, I'm usually in much better shape than 25% to win. Of course, this holds true even for 7-2o, but I still wouldn't play that. So what's the difference?

The reason I won't play 7-2o in this position has nothing to do with its actual strength (which is usually better than 25% to win) but the fact that it's a difficult hand to play well post-flop. I can flop a deuce, and incorrectly fold to a continuation bet from AK that missed. Or I can go to the river and look up JJ. I won't know. Suited connectors are much better in that I will be much more able to play them perfectly after the flop. If I miss with 8-7 of hearts, I can fold and not worry about accidently laying down the best hand. If I flop a straight and/or flush draw, I can play the odds. They're easy to play => I make few mistakes => I make good money.

The same holds true, of course, for small pocket pairs.

It's imperative that I'm closing the action though. Perhaps goes without saying, but my range of hand that I'm calling out of the BB doesn't get any smaller if there are more callers... As long as I'm closing the action.

Thanks for the lesson, FP. You almost make me want to switch to limit, just so I can apply what you have to offer more directly.

The concepts and general theory still apply of course, and I find the thought process fascinating.