200NL - AA slows down on turn

Playing a decent reg, with some distinguishing features: Over 1.4k hands, he's only 4-bet 0.3% of the time, and he folds to 3-bets 75% of the time.

I'm on the button with AA, reg opens UTG. I 3-bet to $25, he tanks for a few seconds, then calls. I'm not superpicky with timing tells, but perhaps it's noteworthy. His range in this spot - calling a 3-bet OOP - is obviously tight.

The flop comes K-9-4, two diamonds, the king is one of them. Neither of my aces are of diamonds.

He checks to me, I bet. Again, he tanks for a little bit, and then calls. This time, I trust the timing tell a bit more. Preflop, he might have been occupied with another table, but people tend to watch 3-bet pots more closely and it seems a little unlikely that he was terribly busy elsewhere. Not impossible, just takes the probability down a notch.

The turn is an offsuit 6, which is about as blank as they come. And here is my decision point: Do I bet again?

I didn't, and here's why:

He's not likely to have a set, mostly because even though he very rarely 4-bets, KK still has to be discounted somewhat, and 44 isn't in his range all that often (he's definitely the type to fold small PPs to 3bets OOP), but 99 is 100% in there.

He's also very unlikely to have a flushdraw. It would have been more likely if the king had been offsuit, but since it isn't, it takes away about half of the flushdraw combos he could have (AKs, AQs, KQs, QJs and MAYBE JTs).

He could be calling bullshit on me with a hand like TT-QQ. And AK and KQs are likely in his range.

So I give him (adjusted somewhat for likelyhood) 4 combos of sets, let's say half of TT-QQ makes 9 combos of that, two combos of flushdraws (that I'm not sure he'd play passively), 6 combos of AK and 3 combos of KQs.

He had a high turn AF. He also had a high (39%) bet-river%, indicating that he's capable either of bluffing the river, or value betting thin, or both. Someone who's a nit on the river is someone with <20%.

I really don't want to be checkraised by AK on the turn, and I fear that's exactly what he'd do with about half his range, most of which I beat. So I consider how bad a free card is. The answer is "not very" since he won't have many outs on average; queens could be outs if he has KQ, and he only has a flushdraw (9 outs) less than 10% of the time. His underpairs are two-outers. Furthermore, he will often fold his underpairs, but may bet them for value on the river. QQ/JJ must look pretty safe to bet if I check back the turn on a K-high board.

So I check, intending to call the river (obviously raising if it's an ace), or bet if checked to. I'm not intending to play for stacks, but will grudgingly call if he checkraises the river thanks to pot odds.

The river is a jack, I feel a sharp pain in my poker soul because I'm "obviously" outdrawn by JJ, he bets $69 into a $112 pot, and I snapcall.

Look OK?

What HH convertor is that? It's awesome

I don't think either the 4bet % or bet river % should be considered here with that sample size. I'm not sure they converge enough to be accurate. We can probably make some general assumptions about his range with respect to his fold to 3bet % though. Fold to turn bet would help.

I think his range is weighted towards strong underpairs (lol oxymoron) and Kx. Sets are really unlikely as are flush draws (really only AQd in his range).

If you've been 3betting the hell out of this guy, which I hope you have been with those stats, I think I just keep barreling since he's probably fed up at this point and will be much more likely to call down with QQ-TT, especially with the flush draw out there being a decent part of our range.

Overall I think it's close. Would depend a lot on how we are perceived and how often we expect him to call with those underpairs.

Irexes said:

What HH convertor is that? It's awesome

Click to expand...

Eh, I dunno. Sometimes I use a converter, sometimes I just write the hand down. There are pros and cons with both ways; this is for when I feel "writey."

ChuckTs said:

I don't think either the 4bet % or bet river % should be considered here with that sample size. I'm not sure they converge enough to be accurate. We can probably make some general assumptions about his range with respect to his fold to 3bet % though. Fold to turn bet would help.

Click to expand...

You bring up an interesting point in regards to sample size. I'm not sure how many hands would be considered enough to trust br%. And what's a decent sample size for 4bet% to converge? I have an hour with Alan tonight; I'll be sure to ask for his opinion.

I think his range is weighted towards strong underpairs (lol oxymoron) and Kx. Sets are really unlikely as are flush draws (really only AQd in his range).

If you've been 3betting the hell out of this guy, which I hope you have been with those stats, I think I just keep barreling since he's probably fed up at this point and will be much more likely to call down with QQ-TT, especially with the flush draw out there being a decent part of our range.

Overall I think it's close. Would depend a lot on how we are perceived and how often we expect him to call with those underpairs.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I forgot to mention that, and realized it after I had turned off the computer: I was 3-betting him relentlessly. And given that, I think he may well have been on a call-down mission, and I miss a bunch of value by not playing for stacks. I find these spots tricky, because even though I have 1.4k hands on him, I don't actually know how many he has on me. So it's possible that he didn't notice that I had been 3-betting a lot at that table (my stats were something silly like 35/25 with 20% 3-bet at that table).

In considering checking turn, I toyed with the idea of raising any river if he bet, but I decided it wasn't optimal.

Anyway, if we think this hand's close, then I won't sweat it. For what it's worth, I also considered checking back the flop and play for stacks on the turn and river. But I didn't, because I think AK and KQs is a decent chunk of his range, and I don't think he'll fold the flop with TT-QQ, and also because he's a reg and for meta-game purposes I want to be able to c-bet K-high flops as bluffs almost always.

Alan and I talked about convergence sample sizes yesterday quite a bit, and for most postflop stats, he likes "a couple of thousand hands" before he thinks they're in the right zone. That said, he also agreed that even though a value from a smaller sample probably hasn't converged yet, it's still the case that it's better than no information at all. Bayesian statistics kindly point this out: A guy who has bet 50% of his rivers even over a small sample is more likely to be aggressive on the river than a nit. So we can still use the information to make guesses; we just need to treat it a bit more carefully.

I cant really think of anything other than calling this. folding looks pretty weak considering he hasn't really shown any aggression up to this point. The only line that bets for value that is in his range is jj really. I dont think he's ever flatting KK oop.

So 1 hand of his range beats us? snapcall fistpump to me.

but im a lowly micro player and see him showing up with a naked king and complete air enough of the time to easily make this profitable.

edit: this is 6max right?

No, definitely have to call the river. The question is between checking or betting the turn. As played, the river is a snapcall.

6max, yes.

oh ok, well in that case I agree with checking behind. perfect place for him to play back at you, especially if you have history right?

btw very well thought out and expressed thoughts in this hand. this is real poker to me.

My question is what do you do if you had bet, and get c/raised in this spot? that seems like alot sicker spot to me. And as theres basically 0 of this going on at 10nl i have to use your threads to learn

It was in part from fear of being checkraised that I decided NOT to bet. If I had, I would have been committed, because he would have put me all-in with that raise, and AK is (probably) in his range. So: I have to call a checkraise, but I don't have to like it. I'm not going to be ahead the majority of the time when it happens, but pot odds dictate a call.

Mr. Paulsson, if you anylize hands like that, my poker game to yours is like a Piper Cub to an F-22. (and I'm talking a wind up toy ..... not a real Cub).

I read all that and realize I will never attain the poker mind that some of you have.

Think I stay in the micros .........

I agree with your philosophy here by betting the turn you are increasing the cost of showdown and then potentially having to fold so yeh this totally makes sense to me. Sure I would probably bet it against a weaker player but against a tighter more structured player like you have described here best to get out cheap and hope your AA holds up.

jammerthon said:

I agree with your philosophy here by betting the turn you are increasing the cost of showdown and then potentially having to fold so yeh this totally makes sense to me. Sure I would probably bet it against a weaker player but against a tighter more structured player like you have described here best to get out cheap and hope your AA holds up.

Click to expand...

but thats not what hes saying. he already clarified for me that if he bets turn and gets check/raised he's committed and is playing for stacks. checking the turn keeps him from having to play for stacks here.

Deltafrost said:

but thats not what hes saying. he already clarified for me that if he bets turn and gets check/raised he's committed and is playing for stacks. checking the turn keeps him from having to play for stacks here.

Click to expand...

Right so what you're saying is the difference is in that he is stack committed if the pot wasn't so large in relation to his stack he should bet out on the turn? Please enlighten me to the difference in value if he had a deeper stack to play with.

jammerthon said:

Right so what you're saying is the difference is in that he is stack committed if the pot wasn't so large in relation to his stack he should bet out on the turn? Please enlighten me to the difference in value if he had a deeper stack to play with.

Click to expand...

If we had been playing 200 deep, I'd have bet the turn every time. The difference is in the fact that with twice the stack size, I would have had an easy time folding to a turn check/raise versus this particular opponent (because playing deep, the "risk" of him check/raising me with AK on the turn is much smaller).

Thanks for that, yes makes even more sense I would also consider checking in a deep stack situation but obviously I can see why that would be a bad move now nice one.

hmm I'm not sure I understand; you havent mentioned stack sizes, or if you did I missed it, but for 100BB stacks I thought the standard play with AA in 3bet pots was to shove the turn and this seems like a perfect place.

GilgUK said:

hmm I'm not sure I understand; you havent mentioned stack sizes, or if you did I missed it, but for 100BB stacks I thought the standard play with AA in 3bet pots was to shove the turn and this seems like a perfect place.

Click to expand...

Yeah, stack size is 100BB - sorry for not mentioning it, although my laziness is due to them being the standard size.

I'd be interested in your reasoning behind this being the perfect place for it. More specifically, I think this is the worst kind of opponent versus whom to use that play.

Well you have a hand good enough to play for stacks with. If he has a set here, and you're only really worried about KK and 99 then I think you are stacking off anyway, Shoving the turn looks a little bluffy so he might call with any combinations of Kx he has and you're in good shape against the flush draw so why not get the money in now when you are probably ahead?

If he was liberally calling 3-bets, then yeah, I think shoving would be best. The defining factor here is how tight he is versus 3-bets. Unless he is tilting from me 3-betting him, there aren't that many kings in his range. There are only 6 combos of AK, and 3 combos of KQs (unless he's steaming, he's not calling KQo OOP). And I don't even know that he'd call a shove with all of those. Contrast that with 3+3 combos of 99 and KK and a shove is starting to look a little iffy.

The part that's really iffy about shoving is that it usually gets him to fold two-outers that might look up another bet on the river: TT, JJ and QQ. If I check back the turn, he might be inclined to check/call the river with those hands.

It's dangerous to think in terms of "I'm stacking off vs. 99 and KK anyway, so I might as well just shove" by the way. His range for calling a turn shove is much, much stronger than his range for calling a river shove (if I decide to just shove the river if he checks to me). I can think of it as a cooler that he "happens" to show up with 99 if I shove turn and get called, but I'm still missing value from weaker hands.

Will he call a turn shove with JJ? TT? Is there any way for me to get more value out of those hands? I think that's what he'll have most of the time. My job here isn't to maximize value vs. KK, because I can't. I have to maximize value versus the part of his range that I can affect, and that means AK, and TT-QQ (and protection versus flush draws come into play as well, although as I stated earlier, I think there are precious few of those in his range).

I see your point, I guess it all depends on your image as to whether he would call the turn shove. I'm only a beginner playing 50nl so I'm just trying to understand situations like these.

I guess the whole point of my post was based on some training videos I saw recently that suggested bet check bet in 3bet pots looks stronger than bet, shove so you might be missing out on value. Especially if you had already established a bit of a wild image with a lot of 3 betting.

I also had learnt that if you call a 3bet and hit top pair then you are getting your stack in, otherwise why call the 3bet? So in my mind he would be willing to stack off with KQ here, although obviously you were at the table and know how tight he is.

I guess by betting the flop you represented a K or better so he might not call a turn shove so but by checking the turn he could be persuaded to call a bet on the river. What is your opinion then on checking the flop back representing a weaker hand than a king then trying to get your stack in on the turn and river?

GilgUK said:

I guess by betting the flop you represented a K or better so he might not call a turn shove so but by checking the turn he could be persuaded to call a bet on the river. What is your opinion then on checking the flop back representing a weaker hand than a king then trying to get your stack in on the turn and river?

Click to expand...

Excellent question!

I think checking the flop is a mistake, for three reasons:

* I think he often peels the flop with most of the hands I want to get value from (AK, KQs and TT-QQ).
* Meta-game, while often overdone and unnecessary, does come into play here, because he's a reg, and since I'll c-bet this flop 100% of the time with my light 3-bets, I certainly want to do it when I actually have something as well.
* I'm pretty content playing for stacks on the flop. He could certainly c/r me with a weaker hand (AK, mostly, or maybe a hand like AsQs). When he just calls, however, his remaining lines throughout the hand are:

1. check/call turn, check/call river. This would probably be mostly KQs and maybe AK trying to let me hang myself.
2. check/raise turn. Sets and (rarely) AK.
3. check/fold turn. Probably TT-QQ, but it's debatable. He's calling the flop in the hopes of getting a cheap showdown (basically hoping I'll give up and not bet the turn).
4. check/call turn, check/fold river. AsQs, maybe. I don't know what else would play this way.

He's good enough to call the flop with a plan (or I'd think so). He probably knows what he's going to do on most turns, even if the ace of spades might get him confused. Looking at the four lines, I'm missing value from not betting the turn if he's on line 1. I'm saving myself some money versus line 2. I'm gaining money versus line 3, because if he calls the flop and I check back the turn, it would be borderline criminal of him not to call a bet on most rivers. Line 4 is really just one hand, and even then it seems unlikely that he wouldn't just try to get it in on the flop.

I wouldn't emulate my line at 50NL versus most opponents there. Even the best regs at 50NL probably call 3bets way too light out of position, and you should be really happy playing for stacks on a K high flop with AA. They might even be "trapping with KJ" in a spot like this. I still wouldn't necessarily shove (it depends a little bit on the exact stack sizes and how big the preflop 3-bet was and the flop bet) but you're definitely looking to get it in.

By the way, welcome to the forums. If this is the sort of discussion that we can come to expect from you, I'm very excited about having you here.

I see, that all makes perfect sense. Thanks! This has been very useful for me.

F Paulsson said:

In considering checking turn, I toyed with the idea of raising any river if he bet, but I decided it wasn't optimal.

Click to expand...

I know this is a bit off the main topic here but I dont really like a raise on the river here. Considering he hasnt really adjusted to facing 3bets in general I doubt this person is calling a raised river light since that is rarely a bluff in general and we are obviously never folding out better. If you wanted to do that i think barrelling the turn here would be better as he is more likely peel it off with worse hands(or possible draw). Now if we did have air here I wouldnt mind a raise on the river since I dont think he is calling very wide here. This would depend a lot on his river stats though obviously so who knows.

widowmaker89 said:

I know this is a bit off the main topic here but I dont really like a raise on the river here. Considering he hasnt really adjusted to facing 3bets in general I doubt this person is calling a raised river light since that is rarely a bluff in general and we are obviously never folding out better. If you wanted to do that i think barrelling the turn here would be better as he is more likely peel it off with worse hands(or possible draw). Now if we did have air here I wouldnt mind a raise on the river since I dont think he is calling very wide here. This would depend a lot on his river stats though obviously so who knows.

Click to expand...

No, I agree with you. Checking back the turn is in order to get extra bets out of weak hands that can't call raises, and avoiding stacking off to sets. Still, I included that in the reasoning, because it's important to consider as many lines as possible. For instance, I also considered flatting preflop.