55, GSSD vs predictable opponent

pokerstars Game #20595428209: Hold'em No Limit ($0.10/$0.25) - 2008/09/21 22:47:05 ET
Table 'Orma' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: kempchee ($26.65 in chips)
Seat 2: Eliminator6 ($25.85 in chips)
Seat 4: DrPepper500 ($10.05 in chips)
Seat 5: Degu77 ($24.75 in chips)
Seat 6: mpipo ($6 in chips)
Seat 7: Vigor Mortis ($46.15 in chips)
Seat 8: Tygran37 ($59.40 in chips)
Eliminator6: posts small blind $0.10
DrPepper500: posts big blind $0.25
mpipo: posts big blind $0.25
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to Tygran37 [5h 5d]
Degu77: folds
nicole 1275 has returned
mpipo: checks
Vigor Mortis: folds
Tygran37: calls $0.25
kempchee: raises $1.25 to $1.50
Eliminator6: folds
DrPepper500: folds
mpipo: calls $1.25
Tygran37: calls $1.25
*** FLOP *** [4d 7c 3h]
mpipo: checks
Tygran37: checks
kempchee: bets $4.25
mpipo: folds
Tygran37: ????



Here's the setup and my question... kempchee is a tight/very aggressive player I have a good number of hands on (several hundred). He cbets up around 80% when he raises. I'm not 100% sure of this but he also seems to have a tendancy to cbet a bit closer to pot when he misses and a little less when he hits. So given all that I think this action looks an awful lot like AQ/AK from him.

Is this a reasonable spot for a semi-bluff shove? We should have 6 outs if called I would think and I also don't think he calls this with Ax or with medium overpairs. thoughts?

edit: I'm also not sure he calls it with QQ+ but he might, I've been TAG and have had the goods every time at showdown...a couple big pots

well, what are his stats? If this guy is raising 7% of hands or 20% matters here. 80% cbet doesnt really mean much if he is a nit as he usually has a hand going on.

This isnt a terrible spot I suppose if you are pretty confident on your bet sizing read as there are a lot of players that do this, and as you said you have some equity on higher pairs here. I completely disagree about you folding out higher pairs however,

Firstly, this should be a raise pf. I don't think it's terrible to limp considering the blind poster's stack size, but I think he's *just* deep enough that we can get away without commitment if he gets active and can still take the pot down enough of the time to make a raise work.

Second, if you're putting him on overcards then this is your standard wa/wb situation. The problem is you're oop which means you'll get run over by good players more often, but in general micro stakes FR tags don't double barrel well and you'll be able to get to showdown cheaply (or improve your hand and go for value). There's very little value in raising - I doubt he folds very many overpairs.

Just call and get to showdown cheap.

ChuckTs said:

Firstly, this should be a raise pf. I don't think it's terrible to limp considering the blind poster's stack size, but I think he's *just* deep enough that we can get away without commitment if he gets active and can still take the pot down enough of the time to make a raise work.

Second, if you're putting him on overcards then this is your standard wa/wb situation. The problem is you're oop which means you'll get run over by good players more often, but in general micro stakes FR tags don't double barrel well and you'll be able to get to showdown cheaply (or improve your hand and go for value). There's very little value in raising - I doubt he folds very many overpairs.

Just call and get to showdown cheap.

Click to expand...

First of all, just to get it out of the way, I didn't actually take this line. I just thought about it and thought it might make an interesting discussion.

I'm basing this largely on a read and not just on his cbet percentage, also his other stats.. I think the chance he has better than a pair are almost zero and I have seen this particular player lay down QQ before as an overpair so he can do it. I do completely agree that against your typical 25NL player this is not a good line.

I guess, how much can or should a read like that take precedence at this level in the decision making?

Also, regarding preflop... I did not raise it specifically because of the blind posters stack..and the fact the blind poster usually doesn't fold if he's put any money in (played with him before too), but is fairly easy to extract money from if you can make a hand. Would you still raise it? Against a full buy in blind poster I would have raised.

If you ask me for my first reaction to that line, I'd say it's way too aggressive on way too small of a read. You just don't need to make plays like this in FR as people generally have solid hand ranges and you usually have much less FE than you think. A few hundred hands really doesn't give us anything but a general tip to how he plays. I find it really hard to believe that you're almost %100 sure he doesn't have >one pair here.

I'm sorry to say that I suck with maths and EV calcs, but I think this would be a perfect hand for one. I still think your assumptions are much too rigid, but if they were true we could punch your guesstimated hand range in, our equity when called, and basically figure out whether or not shoving is profitable. I think even if it is profitable, the ch-c line is even more so though.

The preflop debate isn't all that big of a deal. Limping behind is fine when effective stacks are short. You could also debate that raising someone who's really loose is going to be for value though, so w/e. I don't think it makes much difference. Like you said though, full stacked we should almost always be raising there.

ChuckTs said:

if you're putting him on overcards then this is your standard wa/wb situation.

Click to expand...

Um, what? How is this a wa/wb situation? if he has 2 overcards there are 6 outs(plus any other card that comes he could have and we are OOP and wont know(you touched on this though, imo even more reason to raise and take it down if we are confident about our "read"), same if he has an overpair(6 outs). 6 outs is not wa/wb and I think a lot of people play a wa/wb game even when it isnt one. Just because he cant have a SFD or something along those lines doesnt mean it is wa/wb.

Now I agree with check calling here mostly since he wont double barrel with overs very often, but if OP has some strong reads(kinda seems like he is talking himself into them though) then I like a raise here and take it down, as 2 overs isnt that far behind.

Well it plays the exact same way, I don't see the difference. I guess you could peg it as somewhere between wa/wb and ba/wb, but I really don't think it matters much. We play it for pot control and try to get to showdown cheap, otherwise we let it go.