$2 NLHE Full Ring: Would this have worked in higher levels?

nameless1537 · Aug 18, 2019

Villian Stats (VPIP/PFR/AF): 29.76/18.75/4

I played this hand last night. Just a little background. I was pretty much card dead for most of the session and there were a couple of hands that I just played (were barely playable), just to show that I had a pulse but really didn't take it further if I was called down. My table stats for the session was VPIP/PFR/AF of 9/7/4 (while villain had stats of 30/17/4). I played mostly for value, so if I didn't hit the flop in the hands that I was involved with, I generally folded. I think I threw out an occasional cbet, but didn't pursue further if called down.

So in other words... I think I was playing like a nit. Not by choice, but the cards were honestly bad for most of the session. This was seriously the first time I had an A + face card in playable position in the whole game (I may have had AT in the button and folded when there was one raise and multiple callers before it got to me).

My impression of the villain was that he was playing LAG, but not maniacal. Managed his stack pretty well, and noted that he hovered at around his level once he got there. I think he had shown some capacity to fold in sticky situations, but I can't be certain... it was just an impression that I got in the 60 some odd hands that I had on him.

Anyway, that's the background. And this is what transpired.

pokerstars - $0.02 NL - Holdem - 9 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4: http://www.pokertracker.com

UTG+1: 100 BB (VPIP: 9.76, PFR: 4.88, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 41)
Hero (MP): 97 BB
MP+1: 111.5 BB (VPIP: 23.98, PFR: 6.10, 3Bet Preflop: 1.02, Hands: 251)
MP+2: 72 BB (VPIP: 21.43, PFR: 4.41, 3Bet Preflop: 10.00, Hands: 70)
CO: 299.5 BB (VPIP: 12.68, PFR: 8.45, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 142)
BTN: 282.5 BB (VPIP: 29.69, PFR: 18.75, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 64)
SB: 87.5 BB (VPIP: 25.00, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 48)
BB: 100 BB
UTG: 100 BB (VPIP: 21.21, PFR: 18.75, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 33)

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Jd Ah
fold, fold, Hero raises to 3 BB, fold, MP+2 calls 3 BB, fold, BTN calls 3 BB, fold, fold

Flop : (10.5 BB, 3 players) 4c Kh Qd
Hero checks, MP+2 checks, BTN bets 4 BB, Hero raises to 10 BB, fold, BTN calls 6 BB

Turn : (30.5 BB, 2 players) 6h
Hero checks, BTN checks

River : (30.5 BB, 2 players) Jh
Hero checks, BTN bets 26 BB, Hero raises to 84 BB and is all-in, fold

Hero wins 79.5 BB

The plays that I pulled here were kinda me just experimenting. I check-raised on the flop (just to throw a bit of a wrench into the works for the player on the button because up until this point, I was playing a very straight-forward brand of poker) with the hope that I could see the turn and river on the cheap, and was hoping to get checked on the turn if I checked. I also figured I kinda had 8 outs, so it was worth trying, while also exercising a bit of fold equity on the raises. It could have also indicated strength in the form of a set or 2 pair.

Either way, my check-raise shove on the river managed to get the button to fold. My question is... what is the likelihood of me pulling something like this off in higher levels. If you were in the villain's shoes... what range of cards would you have put me on based on the action and my table image? Was I just lucky that the button folded or was this well-played (ignoring the results)?

Matt Vaughan · Aug 18, 2019

Preflop is obviously fine.

I actually don't hate check raising the flop for the following reasons:

1. The first preflop caller is basically a non-factor once he checks after us checking as the PFR.

2. Once we've checked and the MP player has checked, the BTN basically has the green light to bet his whole range, most of which will be pocket pairs, weak draws, and random air.

However, I'd prefer a larger sizing. We want to encourage straight draws and second or third pair to fold, not give them an immediate 4 to 1 with a plan to check turns.

The river line is... interesting. The thing is that while we have a great combo to do this with in THEORY, we just don't really rep much of anything in practice, and that's a problem when we are really only targeting thin value bets that we want a LAG-ish villain to bet/fold. (He's NOT folding two pair imo.) Villain can also easily have a decent amount of Qx backdoor flush draws due to our flop sizing, which now come in. I would even say T9s and AT are possible again due to the flop sizing.

Lastly, the extent of our appearing "nitty" is limited to how much our opponents are paying attention to or tracking us. I just don't think this is particularly relevant at 2nl, and even if some players ARE paying attention to us, there's no guarantee that they are processing the information the way that we want them to, etc.

So while I like the spirit of this, as well as some elements of the execution, I just don't know that the full reasoning is on point, and I think we got a bit lucky with where the villain was precisely in their range this time.

fundiver199 · Aug 18, 2019

Pretty much agree with Scourrge. I also dont hate the flop check-raise, but you need to go bigger. He is calling 6 to win a pot of 30, so you price him in to float with almost anything in position.

And what does your turn and river line really represent? On the river you are kind of saying, that you backdoored into a flush. But typically when people bluff the flop and pick up additional equity, then they will barrel again on the turn. This is actually pretty mandatory.

So if you credibly want to represent a monster hand, then check-raise, bet, jam will get a lot more respect from solid regulars than this particular line. They will often get curious and want to see your hand, because your line is so unusual.

nameless1537 · Aug 18, 2019

This is great feedback from both of you. @fundiver199, I never thought about barrelling on the turn too as I was focused mostly on the straight draw at the time. Barrelling again on picking up equity on the turn is something I'll have to consider when deciding what to do on the turn when I come across this in the future.

Now, both of you said that my check-raise on the river needs to be higher, which in hindsight I agree with. What is the amount that I should do? 3x-4x the villain's bet-size in this instance? or should this be done in relation to the pot size? Basically, how would you go about scaling the size of the check-raise on the flop to make it credible enough to make the villain think twice about calling?

What it sounds like is that I got quite lucky that the villain folded. Which I'll take now, but still need to learn how to make my bluffs more credible.

fundiver199 · Aug 18, 2019

You should size a raise relative to the size of the pot, after you called Villains bet. In this case the pot was 10 (to make it simple), and he bet 4, so after you called, the pot was 10 + 4 + 4 = 18. A reasonable bet size is at least half pot, so 18/2 = 9. This mean, you should raise to at least 4 + 9 = 13, and I would prefer to go a little larger like maybe 15. Then he need to call 11 rather than just 6, and this give him a significantly worse price.

PokerStars have bet slicer buttons, which you can set for 50% pot, 65% pot etc. If you start using one of these, it become a bit easier to size raises correctly, rather than trying to do the math in your head in real time. If you for example click "half pot", you can always manually adjust the number up a bit.

nameless1537 · Aug 18, 2019

This is such good information. Thanks @fundiver199.

Now followup question: In this case, I would imagine that if my equity goes up after the turn, I would follow up with a 1/2 pot+ bet on the turn to represent value assuming he calls?

If the turn card did not increase my equity though (likely scenario), how would you handle the turn? If it didn't help me, and it doesn't look like it would help villain, would you still bet on the turn? if so, how much? Or would you check on the turn?

In this case, as you can see... I was playing with a pretty spontaneous half-assed approach (and admittedly not very well thought out) that I was lucky to have pulled off. But in future, I think I need to have a good idea of how to handle these kinds of situations optimally if I decide to take a line like this again.

fundiver199 · Aug 18, 2019

In this case you did not actually pick up equity on the turn. You picked up, what I call bluff outs, that is cards, you can represent on the river, if you miss. Of course you could represent the backdoor flush with any two cards, but you want to do it with hands, that block your opponent from having the flush.

So Ah is a nice card to continue bluffing with. This just mean, that if you are going to pick some hands to give up with, then give up with Ad and Ac instead. Holding Ah also makes it less likely, he have a flushdraw, which is good, because then he is less likely to continue.

But of course it would be better to have AhJh here, so that you could actually make a flush on the river and not just represent it. Also if you bluff with all your gutshots on the flop, you are probably bluffing to much, so maybe next time pick only those, that also have a backdoor flushdraw and not offsuit combos like this.

But I dont mind being a little bit out of line here with to many bluffs. The reason is, a lot of players bet the flop to much when checked to, and you decidedly have the range advantage here. You can have KK, QQ, AA and AK, but he can not, and this makes it difficult for him to defend against this assault.

eetenor · Aug 18, 2019

Villain Read.

nameless1537 said:
Villian Stats (VPIP/PFR/AF): 29.76/18.75/4

I played this hand last night. Just a little background. I was pretty much card dead for most of the session and there were a couple of hands that I just played (were barely playable), just to show that I had a pulse but really didn't take it further if I was called down. My table stats for the session was VPIP/PFR/AF of 9/7/4 (while villain had stats of 30/17/4). I played mostly for value, so if I didn't hit the flop in the hands that I was involved with, I generally folded. I think I threw out an occasional cbet, but didn't pursue further if called down.

So in other words... I think I was playing like a nit. Not by choice, but the cards were honestly bad for most of the session. This was seriously the first time I had an A + face card in playable position in the whole game (I may have had AT in the button and folded when there was one raise and multiple callers before it got to me).

My impression of the villain was that he was playing LAG, but not maniacal. Managed his stack pretty well, and noted that he hovered at around his level once he got there. I think he had shown some capacity to fold in sticky situations, but I can't be certain... it was just an impression that I got in the 60 some odd hands that I had on him.

Anyway, that's the background. And this is what transpired.

PokerStars - $0.02 NL - Holdem - 9 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4: http://www.pokertracker.com

UTG+1: 100 BB (VPIP: 9.76, PFR: 4.88, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 41)
Hero (MP): 97 BB
MP+1: 111.5 BB (VPIP: 23.98, PFR: 6.10, 3Bet Preflop: 1.02, Hands: 251)
MP+2: 72 BB (VPIP: 21.43, PFR: 4.41, 3Bet Preflop: 10.00, Hands: 70)
CO: 299.5 BB (VPIP: 12.68, PFR: 8.45, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 142)
BTN: 282.5 BB (VPIP: 29.69, PFR: 18.75, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 64)
SB: 87.5 BB (VPIP: 25.00, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 48)
BB: 100 BB
UTG: 100 BB (VPIP: 21.21, PFR: 18.75, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 33)

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has Jd Ah
fold, fold, Hero raises to 3 BB, fold, MP+2 calls 3 BB, fold, BTN calls 3 BB, fold, fold

Flop : (10.5 BB, 3 players) 4c Kh Qd
Hero checks, MP+2 checks, BTN bets 4 BB, Hero raises to 10 BB, fold, BTN calls 6 BB

Turn : (30.5 BB, 2 players) 6h
Hero checks, BTN checks

River : (30.5 BB, 2 players) Jh
Hero checks, BTN bets 26 BB, Hero raises to 84 BB and is all-in, fold

Hero wins 79.5 BB

The plays that I pulled here were kinda me just experimenting. I check-raised on the flop (just to throw a bit of a wrench into the works for the player on the button because up until this point, I was playing a very straight-forward brand of poker) with the hope that I could see the turn and river on the cheap, and was hoping to get checked on the turn if I checked. I also figured I kinda had 8 outs, so it was worth trying, while also exercising a bit of fold equity on the raises. It could have also indicated strength in the form of a set or 2 pair.

Either way, my check-raise shove on the river managed to get the button to fold. My question is... what is the likelihood of me pulling something like this off in higher levels. If you were in the villain's shoes... what range of cards would you have put me on based on the action and my table image? Was I just lucky that the button folded or was this well-played (ignoring the results)?

Thank U 4 Posting.

I assume what you are asking is: would you make a good player fold a better hand with this line? In a session where you had been playing like a nit.

My thoughts are no: your betting story does not mesh with you having a monster hand here in the mind of a good player, who has been watching your playing style so far.

You have to put all three streets of action together and your actions together make no sense vs a good player.

Your flop check raise sizing suggests you are pot building on the flop but then you check a blank on the turn and check river again.

A good player plays preflop as played with several strong K's vs a nit open yes.
A good player plays flop bet as played vs nit open with strong K's: AK KQ KJ K10s
A good player does not call nit check raise of only 6 BB's into 18BB pot with strong K's and then check turn but also bet 3/4 pot river and then fold to a weird jam.
A G P expects nits to bet AA on the turn and only check trap KK QQ.
A G P with a Kx or Qx hates the J river as hands a nit might over play in this spot include KJ or JJ
Why would A G P expect value on the river from a 3/4 pot bet when the nit check raises to get a free card or trap on the flop, as we know because the nit checked turn? How many nits do you know that use the old double check trick or triple check trick?

So your play does not make sense vs a good player. If you can only get 2 streets vs a good player why are you check raising small for value on the flop? What bluffs does a good player expect you to have when you check raise that flop?
J10? Check raise 6 BB with J10 A10? Then check turn with J10-A10? Then check A10 hoping that villain will bet most of villains range? When as played villain would only bet KJ or QJ and villain expects to get a call from a folding nit who did not bet AK or AA on turn or river due to fear of KQ or QQ.

Just some thoughts.
Not all players play the same.

Hope this helps

nameless1537 · Aug 18, 2019

This is all such great feedback and I am so grateful to these contributing members of the site. This whole thing has been very instructive for me as I consider what kinds of ingredients I would need to have to sell a bluff. What I'm recognizing is that you can't really "fall" into a bluff, and the different elements of the story that needs to be in place for the bluff to hold.

Now, one of the scenarios not seriously considered is me having AT (suited or otherwise) as hole cards, and playing it out. Would it be much different than the way I played it? If I ended up doing a check-raise on the flop with the proper sizing (and assuming villain calls), would the story still line up?

I think one quick thought that crossed my mind when I threw out the all-in bet is that I could have also been holding AT and probably still played the same way, and doing so without the belief that the villain was betting on the backdoor flush draw.

The only thing I would have really messed up is the river bet in this scenario. At the time that I checked, I was only playing the fact that I only paired the J on the river, but it was only after he threw out the pot sized bet, the thought occurred to me whether I could represent the backdoor flush draw and/or the gutshot straight draw. It's not something I would really want in my repetoire and not something I would probably attempt again, but I'm really trying to figure out how it is that this bluff worked, and what elements are repeatable and what can be improved.

Thanks again for the feedback. I'm really enjoying the cash game right now -- to my surprise.

fundiver199 · Aug 19, 2019

The issue here is, that your line is not balanced. The hole point of check-raising the flop for value is, that you want to play for stacks. And if the Villain is sitting here with KJ, he is not betting the turn when checked to. He will just check back and be happy to be one step closer to showdown without having to pay another bet.

So if you have a value hand, you always want to bet the turn. And since you have no strong hands, that want to check the turn, you cant check your draws without becoming totally unbalanced and easy to exploit. If the Villain know, you are doing this, he can just bet all his draws on the turn and try to take it away, when you check.

This mean, that if your value range is KK, QQ, 44, KQ, and your bluffs are AJs, ATs, JTs, then all those hands should bet again on the turn. And then of course when ATs gets there on the river, you should jam for value.

On this particular runout, some of your original value hands might not still want to bet. So maybe you can construct your river range something like this:

* Value jam: flushes, straights, KK and QQ
* Bluff jam: AJs, JTs
* Check-fold: KQ without a heart
* Check-call: KQ with a heart (flush blocker), 44

This is not perfectly balanced, but its just to illustrate the whole principle of GTO lines. Whenever you bet, you need to have both bluffs and value, and whenever you check, you need to have both hands, that are check-calling and hands, that are check-folding.

Now is all this GTO stuff nessesary in the lower end of the micros, not really. But your question was, would your play be good against better opponents. And the answer is no, because your line was unbalanced.

teh_colonel_saigon · Aug 19, 2019

As so many have said, you're line overall doesn't make sense because you are telling two different stories. The flop is one (a strong king) the river is another (backdoor flush).

Let's just look at the flop.

A Flop check raise might work- depending on your opponent he'll fold his Queens (Q9s+) and some of his kings (K5s+, maybe up to K8). I took out the Ace hands here for simplicity, though on the flop these probably were still in his range.

Q9s, QTs and QJo are 15 card combinations. Let's say he'll fold these.

K5s - K7s, K8o together are 21 combinations. He might call with these, but let's assume he'll fold all of them.

K4s, K9o+ not including AK and KK is 44 combinations.

36 combinations he folds, 44 he calls.

With this estimate you are slightly +EV
You were risking 10 to win 14.5, so you need to be good 40% of the time. If he folds those hands above, you are good 45% of the time.

So you could play around with check raise sizes a bit to see if he'd fold more in that spot. On the turn after he calls, maybe a bet would get some weak + suspicious hands to fold, but there don't seem to be too many of those.

nameless1537 · Aug 19, 2019

@fundiver199 and @teh_colonel_saigon Thanks again for your feedback. One of the philosophies that I'm really trying to adopt as I transition into the cash game is to emphasize process over results... which is why I created this post. Just because it worked here, it doesn't mean that it would work in higher levels... so I'm learning more about what the thought process is for a good player in higher levels and to build towards it.

The truth is, I don't think I need to understand this stuff to be profitable at 2NL... and probably not even at 5NL. But I do want to have the process down pat before I move up levels.

It's become evident to me that I should learn more about GTO play. That said, there is something to be said about playing more exploitatively at the micros. @fundiver199, you have recommended blackrain99's books and videos in past posts for microlimits, which I have been watching... and I think he leans more exploitative type of play.

Do you (or anyone else reading this) have recommended resources for GTO play? I read in another thread that a good approach is to have the GTO plays down and then lean exploitative when you see opportunities to strike. Is this what you do?

fundiver199 · Aug 19, 2019

Upswing Poker Lab is probably the best training site today for GTO style poker. But its not cheap, so for 2NL and 5NL, it might be a bit of an overinvestment. I play 10-20NL and have not made the investment yet. I think, even in the upper end of micros, you still get far with an exploitative approach, but as regs become better, you want to be at least somewhat balanced against them specifically.

What I actually do is use the program PokerSnowie. This is also not cheap, but it is an AI program, that will give answers, that are supposedly at least close to GTO lines. I use it to review hands, I played, and to plug in scenarios or even play against the computer.

The point, I was trying to hammer home in this hand, was not, how exactly you should build your range. It was more, that you should be carefull to not bluff with lines, you would never take for value. Better opponents will pick up on that and look to pick you off.

This is where, to be honest, many players at 2NL are just a little dumb. They see 3 cards of the same suit on the board, face a big bet, and think "oh he must have a flush". Whereas at higher limits, more players will look at your whole story, and if it makes no sense, their answer is "yeah right, show it to me".

Search

$2 NLHE Full Ring: Would this have worked in higher levels?

nameless1537

Rock Star

Matt Vaughan

King of Moody Rants

fundiver199

Legend

nameless1537

Rock Star

fundiver199

Legend

nameless1537

Rock Star

fundiver199

Legend

eetenor

Legend

nameless1537

Rock Star

fundiver199

Legend

teh_colonel_saigon

Rock Star

nameless1537

Rock Star

fundiver199

Legend

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us

Language