$5 NLHE Full Ring: TT from LP vs CO calling double barreling

TakMits

TakMits

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
Total posts
116
Awards
1
Chips
3
PokerStars - $0.05 NL ZOOM - Holdem - 9 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 3

BTN: $6.87
SB: $4.66
BB: $6.50
UTG: $9.44
UTG+1: $9.11
MP: $2.46
MP+1: $2.66
Hero (LP): $5.07
CO: $9.09


villain stats:15/10/2

SB posts SB $0.02, BB posts BB $0.05

Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero has T:spade: T:club:

fold, fold, fold, fold, Hero raises to $0.15, CO calls $0.15, fold, fold, fold

Flop: ($0.37, 2 players) 2:diamond: 3:diamond: 7:club:
Hero bets $0.20, CO calls $0.20

Turn: ($0.77, 2 players) 6:diamond:
Hero bets $0.25, CO calls $0.25

River: ($1.27, 2 players) 3:heart:
Hero bets $0.45, CO calls $0.45

what line would you follow? is my bet sizes right or should i bet more? what would you do specific on that turn and river?
 
RodneyC86

RodneyC86

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Total posts
592
Chips
0
Bigger everywhere IMO.

Flop bet is standard but bigger please. The board is not very wet in the traditional sense but not awful dry either. You can also get good value vs worse pocket pairs who thinks you missed and any lone 7. Floaters probably would float with two overs too though perhaps this board is not the best board for that. Flop is not the street to pansy bet in most cases IMO. You're only beat by the rare sets and JJ which is a small portion of his range even if you don't wanna include SCs in his range

I'm bet folding both turn and river.
If opponent is Argo fish, consider check calling river instead.
 
Abedin120

Abedin120

Rock Star
Platinum Level
Joined
Sep 3, 2012
Total posts
316
Chips
0
You should make bigger raises, maybe something like $0.25 on the flop, $0.40 on the turn and $0.80 on the river, even bigger raises than that, because there is big possibility to lose your money with that cards, so you have to protect. Taking money as you can from your opponent is very good move, but exposure to a risk is something that you never have to do that.
 
S

ScottishMatt

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Total posts
2,394
Chips
0
You should make bigger raises, maybe something like $0.25 on the flop, $0.40 on the turn and $0.80 on the river, even bigger raises than that, because there is big possibility to lose your money with that cards, so you have to protect. Taking money as you can from your opponent is very good move, but exposure to a risk is something that you never have to do that.

If you are betting to protect then you are doing it wrong . . . value or bluff. Nothing else.
 
RodneyC86

RodneyC86

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Total posts
592
Chips
0
If you are betting to protect then you are doing it wrong . . . value or bluff. Nothing else.

I might be going against the new graiN here, Protecting is actually IMO a valid excuse, but though yeah, it should come as a byproduct of a value bet with a made hand on a wet board. Basically, slowplaying certain boards like never.

Though yes, you gotta be clear whether you are valuing first and foremost rather than thinking about protecting. Protection comes in the form of bet sizing. Wet board? Bet bigger.
 
jordanbillie

jordanbillie

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Total posts
3,742
Awards
3
Chips
161
Rodney has the appropriate analysis on this hand. Bigger sizing and bet fold later streets.
 
S

ScottishMatt

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Total posts
2,394
Chips
0
I might be going against the new graiN here, Protecting is actually IMO a valid excuse, but though yeah, it should come as a byproduct of a value bet with a made hand on a wet board. Basically, slowplaying certain boards like never.

Though yes, you gotta be clear whether you are valuing first and foremost rather than thinking about protecting. Protection comes in the form of bet sizing. Wet board? Bet bigger.

Protection ranks below villain tendencies when it comes to bet sizing, so no. If you have a set on a wet board, you don't bet big in order to protect, you bet big because you want to extract the maximum. If extracting the maximum means going half pot then you should go half pot. Losing value because you are scared is a good way to lower winrate. Protection is a moot point.
 
RodneyC86

RodneyC86

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 15, 2012
Total posts
592
Chips
0
Protection ranks below villain tendencies when it comes to bet sizing, so no. If you have a set on a wet board, you don't bet big in order to protect, you bet big because you want to extract the maximum. If extracting the maximum means going half pot then you should go half pot. Losing value because you are scared is a good way to lower winrate. Protection is a moot point.

Yes but surely you won't bet half pot when the board is like screaming draws at you?

Agree with villain tendencies and such, and table dynamics and ranging, and who shot(pf raised) first. Though I think this should be reserved for 5nl plus.

Why? 2nlers are just mad about the draw, bet large to protect and give them as improper odds to draw as possible.

Edit: nvm i got your point, forget my first sentence. Still you see? By product of value betting ;)
 
Last edited:
S

ScottishMatt

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Total posts
2,394
Chips
0
Yes but surely you won't bet half pot when the board is like screaming draws at you?

Agree with villain tendencies and such, and table dynamics and ranging, and who shot(pf raised) first. Though I think this should be reserved for 5nl plus.

Why? 2nlers are just mad about the draw, bet large to protect and give them as improper odds to draw as possible.

If I was somehow privy to the information that my opponent was never calling more than half pot with a weaker hand then yes I would. Don't get me wrong, we do bet larger on wet boards. We just don't do it for protection. The fact that the board is wet means we can get called by a wider range, which includes made hands and draws and we want to charge these draws as much as possible. The larger the margin between the odds they need and the odds we give them the more -EV it is for them to call. The larger the mistakes our opponent makes the greater our EV is. So we bet large to maximize value and not to protect.

It's for the same reason that we bet bigger against weak players and balance our sizing against good players. The argument for protection would imply that because our opponent is good we need to protect more. Which is in complete contrast to a valuebetting POV. Have you never thought about your sizing vs a good reg and decided it was best to size down because that widens his potential calling range considerably?

Edit: yeah you get me - by valuebetting we add this strange concept of "protection", whenever we act we should prioritize the factor which is most critical and use that to dictate our action and in every case valuebetting outranks protection. We still get that protection but it should never be a factor in our decision matrix.
 
Last edited:
Top