$2 NLHE 6-max: Should I triple barrel this hand?

888Poker Snap, Hold'em No Limit - $0.01/$0.02 - 6 players
Hand delivered by Upswing Poker

UTG: $0.40 (20 bb)
MP: $1.08 (54 bb)
CO: $2.93 (147 bb)
BU (Hero): $3.29 (165 bb)
SB: $1.65 (83 bb)
BB: $1.05 (53 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.03) Hero is BTN with 5♥ 7♥
3 players fold, Hero raises to $0.06, 1 fold, BB calls $0.04

Flop: ($0.13) 6♣ 9♥ Q♣ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.06, BB calls $0.06

Turn: ($0.25) 4♦ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.17, BB calls $0.17

River: ($0.59) K♠ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.41, BB raises to $0.76 (all-in), BU (Hero) folds

default 888 6max NL2 buyin is 50bb
Villain is an unknown.

I seldom go for triple barrel as NL2 players call too much with weak holdings
But this hand is bottom of my range, and no SDV. May play 66,99,44,KQ,TJ the same way

Would you triple barrel ? What do you think about the sizing?

I would probably not triple when the K hits, though they could just have a busted flush draw. I liked the sizing. These types of sophisticated long bluffs and bluffs besides c bets should be avoided at the micros IMO.

Would check turn (why would he fold now and not on the flop) and maybe bet the river to represent the K.

When playing smaller stakes, I find it a lot harder to triple barrel online. If they have any sort of holding, (including ace high) they will call.

You answered your own question. At these stakes triple barrel bluffs work so rarely that you will lose money over time even with the times you hit the draw you are semi-bluffing.

Bet for value at NL2 and if you feel like bluffing keep your sizing on the smaller side just know if they call the flop they are likely calling turn. Only bluffs that work are shoves at this level in my experience.

quant1986 said:

888Poker Snap, Hold'em No Limit - $0.01/$0.02 - 6 players
Hand delivered by Upswing Poker

UTG: $0.40 (20 bb)
MP: $1.08 (54 bb)
CO: $2.93 (147 bb)
BU (Hero): $3.29 (165 bb)
SB: $1.65 (83 bb)
BB: $1.05 (53 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.03) Hero is BTN with 5♥ 7♥
3 players fold, Hero raises to $0.06, 1 fold, BB calls $0.04

Flop: ($0.13) 6♣ 9♥ Q♣ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.06, BB calls $0.06

Turn: ($0.25) 4♦ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.17, BB calls $0.17

River: ($0.59) K♠ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.41, BB raises to $0.76 (all-in), BU (Hero) folds

default 888 6max NL2 buyin is 50bb
Villain is an unknown.

I seldom go for triple barrel as NL2 players call too much with weak holdings
But this hand is bottom of my range, and no SDV. May play 66,99,44,KQ,TJ the same way

Would you triple barrel ? What do you think about the sizing?

Click to expand...

At these stakes you don't make money triple barrel bluffing. On this flop I would be betting a very polarized range. This hand fits into that as a bluff with your straight draw and the back door flush draw so I would bet bigger, around $0.10. The turn is a good barrel card, so I would bet $0.20 into the now $0.33 pot. However if this bet is called, I doubt you are getting a fold on the river. Hope to make your hand. I think the best triple barrels on this run out would contain a Jack or Ten to block the nuts and his QJ, Q10.

Hujiko said:

Would check turn (why would he fold now and not on the flop) and maybe bet the river to represent the K.

Click to expand...

I disagree, you should be betting the turn to fold out his 9x, 77, 88 straight draws and flush draws that might peel once.

With this particular hand on that board runout I would triple barrel. You have an open ended straight draw that didn't come in on the river. As long as you are choosing good hands to triple barrel, then i don't see a problem with this play.
Sometimes your bluffs don't work but if you balance them with enough value hands you should be fine in the long run.
Obviously in low stakes a bluff like this might not work as much as you would like.
Against his range most people would fold out a 6 or 9 here. Obviously if he's sitting there with the nuts he ain't folding no matter how good your bluff is.

cs_rlewis said:

With this particular hand on that board runout I would triple barrel.

Click to expand...

+1

I would most likely raise him AI though and this would not be my main line.

I don't like the triple barrel bluff at these stakes in general, unless you've got an even more ideal situation. As played I think your flop bet is weak, I would just bet pot and maaaaybe bet pot again on the turn, but I think it's quite likely that if he calls a pot sized bet on the flop he's just not going anywhere in this hand and you can give up. Hell, being open ended on the turn could incentivize you to just check behind, considering your opponent has already called a flop bet. You might even get him to barrel at you when you've made your straight this way.

Nathan Smith said:

I disagree, you should be betting the turn to fold out his 9x, 77, 88 straight draws and flush draws that might peel once.

Click to expand...

Well in my opinion at these stakes flush and straight draws will often peel twice and even A9 might peel another time. Yes 77 and 88 (which might fold against the flop bet) and worse 9x then A9 might fold but there are way more combos that peel twice then once so in my opinion there is not enough fold equity.

I think you played this fine. Against better players at higher stakes I would check this turn some of the time to avoid getting blown off my equity, but as you have so little showdown value I dont mind a double barrel with the intention of firing the 3rd if you whiff the river.
Checking the turn and bluffing the river on the scare card king also tells the story that you have AK and is fine.
The mathmatics of poker highlights you should bluff when you have little showdown value. You should also realise at the start of the hand that if you play 7 high you will have to bluff more often than usual.
Unfortunately on this occasion you ran into a hand but dont let that stop you in the same spot in future.
Sets, QK and JT, everything is unblocked.

Hujiko said:

Well in my opinion at these stakes flush and straight draws will often peel twice and even A9 might peel another time. Yes 77 and 88 (which might fold against the flop bet) and worse 9x then A9 might fold but there are way more combos that peel twice then once so in my opinion there is not enough fold equity.

Click to expand...

You make a good case for triple barreling.

no one of you even consider that this board hits villain pretty well. He hits there million of combos. Of course our range hits this board too but on higher stakes probably I would go with check that combo. We don't need to cbets, barrel every draw we have. And this combo is pretty bad. Mostly because villain hits the board, villains has many 8x there so he takes our outs, we don't draw to nuts and we have many better hands to cbet there. Of course on microstakes cbet maybe wouldn't be so bad but Im never barreling there. 4s on turn doesn't change much in villain's calling range + nl2 games on 888 aren't 100bb games.

To the last poster... If you arent willing to fire at least two barrels on the majority of boards then dont play the hand in the first place.
Of course there are a lot of draws and because of that hes going to call a lot, as the hand plays out the only draw that gets there is JT. Most of his draws will whiff leaving him weak holdings the majority of the time. If you are going to play 57 then you need to fire the river to get him to lay those down when we only have 7 high and no showdown value. And even at 2nl if you are caught bluffing all 3 streets its great for your image and helps you get paid off later when you have a hand.

sorry but there are many other board structures we can cbet, barrel this hand and still makes profit by opening it. If you think that we have to cbet every board where we have some equity and barrel every turn which gives us extra equity then you are wrong. You just can't go blindly with betting everything because you have an equity. There are many factors we have to consider. One of them is "calling stations" pool on nl2. I agree that runout is kinda cool for us to barrel it including river from "poker theory" but.. I disagree it's a spot we have to do it. Especially on 53bb effective stacks.

I wouldn't mind either in this spot. both triple or letting go.
turn gives us an open ender & with the draws present I like barreling on the bigger side.
Also in these kind of spots it's better to put maximum pressure on people so I'd just overbet jam river.

But the issue remains 2NL is full of stations. And this guy is half stacked. I'm really careful when barreling into these type of guys. because they don't like to fold.
Also no history or reads which is another - for me.

vs a decent player this would be a good triple imo.

IPlay said:

You make a good case for triple barreling.

Click to expand...

Why would you say that?

I just think that after the flop call his hand is most of the time stronger then 77 or 88 or 89 etc. and thus he will continue more on the turn and river so two-three barreling is not that good in my opinion.

Hujiko said:

Why would you say that?

I just think that after the flop call his hand is most of the time stronger then 77 or 88 or 89 etc. and thus he will continue more on the turn and river so two-three barreling is not that good in my opinion.

Click to expand...

because you say villain has a lot of weak holdings that will peel twice but not the river such as draws and 9x.

I would have checked the flop, called or bet the turn, and got away on the river.... save yourself some chips.

IPlay said:

because you say villain has a lot of weak holdings that will peel twice but not the river such as draws and 9x.

Click to expand...

Read back I also said that I expect then to fold weak holding on the flop already so they wont have alot of weak holdings on the turn. So no triple barreling advice from me.

There are a lot of strong holdings the villain could have.