$200 NL HE 6-max: Would you bluff-catch this river with a set of Kings?

[Mr_Kk13]

Game

Hold'em

Game Format

No Limit

Stakes

$1/$2

Table Format

6-max (6 seats)

Currency

$

The concept that can be taken from this hand and could be used in microstakes is where your hand falls in your range when you are bluff-catching, and if you are beating some of your opponent's value, you should bluff-catch, even if villain is underbluffing.

 

[Aballinamion]

The concept that can be taken from this hand and could be used in microstakes is where your hand falls in your range when you are bluff-catching, and if you are beating some of your opponent's value, you should bluff-catch, even if villain is underbluffing.

FIRST of all, let’s consider this is a deep stack pot, players involved have more than 100 blinds effective stack:
I don’t like the way this hand was played preflop: both players used polarization, IP 3-bets 3.6x and OP 4-bets to 3.1x. (Not saying that it was wrong, just don’t like to do it).
Considering this is a GTO game, a 3-bet of 3x will suffice and a 4-bet of 2.2x the same.
The postflop game was well played by both players, the chosen sizings for flop/turn/river were fine.
IP couldn’t simply raise OTF, although OOP bets a very small 1/6 of the pot, which is hard to me to understand why: we are usually betting 1/4 or 1/3 pot in situations like this but 1/6 seems... whatever, IP cannot simply raise OTF because OOP had made a 4-bet and it has all the AA combos in its range, although half of AK combos aren’t possible cause IP is blocking 50% of them (it remains only 8 possible combos for AK and all the combos for AA).
However, IP cannot simply fold a set in a situation like this. As I said, the postflop was well played for both players. Hard to find a fold in a spot like this, whether IP had the bluff catching of the second nut flush or hadn’t it.
I don’t think we can be opening such combos from UTG at the micro-stakes. Feel free to disagree, I’m opened mind.
The bluff catching will be more effective (at the micros) if IP was holding the ace of hearts, not the king of hearts.
For these particular hand OOP had some idea about IP player to be putting up a 4-bet having... 65s from UTG!!!
IMO either UTG/MP is a recreational player or some delusional one who believes being playing NLHE 1000 or higher. This is not a high stakes poker where Patrick Antonius if playing versus Phil Hellmuth and everything is possible in terms of ranges.
The hand was well played postflop by both players but the opening range and the chosen sizing for preflop bets are weak.

 

[Station_Master]

FIRST of all, let’s consider this is a deep stack pot, players involved have more than 100 blinds effective stack:
I don’t like the way this hand was played preflop: both players used polarization, IP 3-bets 3.6x and OP 4-bets to 3.1x. (Not saying that it was wrong, just don’t like to do it).
Considering this is a GTO game, a 3-bet of 3x will suffice and a 4-bet of 2.2x the same.
The postflop game was well played by both players, the chosen sizings for flop/turn/river were fine.
IP couldn’t simply raise OTF, although OOP bets a very small 1/6 of the pot, which is hard to me to understand why: we are usually betting 1/4 or 1/3 pot in situations like this but 1/6 seems... whatever, IP cannot simply raise OTF because OOP had made a 4-bet and it has all the AA combos in its range, although half of AK combos aren’t possible cause IP is blocking 50% of them (it remains only 8 possible combos for AK and all the combos for AA).
However, IP cannot simply fold a set in a situation like this. As I said, the postflop was well played for both players. Hard to find a fold in a spot like this, whether IP had the bluff catching of the second nut flush or hadn’t it.
I don’t think we can be opening such combos from UTG at the micro-stakes. Feel free to disagree, I’m opened mind.
The bluff catching will be more effective (at the micros) if IP was holding the ace of hearts, not the king of hearts.
For these particular hand OOP had some idea about IP player to be putting up a 4-bet having... 65s from UTG!!!
IMO either UTG/MP is a recreational player or some delusional one who believes being playing NLHE 1000 or higher. This is not a high stakes poker where Patrick Antonius if playing versus Phil Hellmuth and everything is possible in terms of ranges.
The hand was well played postflop by both players but the opening range and the chosen sizing for preflop bets are weak.

I think preflop is fine. The 3bets and 4bets look big but they are meant to be sizing up when deeper stacked. 4betting 65s looks loose but is probably solver approved and mixed with fold or call. I dont think this was an exploit at all, Welshgaz is in almost every 200z video I see and is definitely a reg. You could argue 65s shouldn't open in the first place, but I'm sure this is fine as a partial from HJ.

Postflop seems fine. The flop bet very small but the 4better should be range betting this board and note how the caller seems to have no raising range IP to protect his range. The bluff catch on the river looks very standard with a set and relevant blocker.

 

[rastapapolos]

IMO either UTG/MP is a recreational player or some delusional one who believes being playing NLHE 1000 or higher. This is not a high stakes poker where Patrick Antonius if playing versus Phil Hellmuth and everything is possible in terms of ranges.
The hand was well played postflop by both players but the opening range and the chosen sizing for preflop bets are weak.

UTG is a GTO balanced player cause he 4bet with a bluff "65s".
The opening ranges aren't weak, First when UTG opens with his range he needs to be balanced (value+bluff) and if he know that the BU is a GTO player too, the 3bet range is also balanced (value+bluff) so he throw a 4bet using his position's advantage "utg range".
He also risks 48.36$ to win 18.12$ which means that BU should fold 72.7 % of the time (48.36/66.48) to make it a break even play.
Now let's enumerate the BU 3bet range:
AA -KK-QQ-JJ = 24
TT-99-88-77 = 24
AK-AQ-AJ-KQ = 64
ATs-KJs-KTs-QJs = 16
78s-89s-9Ts-TJs= 16
A5s-A4s = 8
There is a total of 152 combinations, and if BU fold everything except "AA,KK,QQ,JJ,AK" 152-40 = 112 / 152 = 73.6 % which is enough fold equity and it is a neutral EV play.

OTR the T of heart is very scary especially if we know that UTG is a GTO player cause his range will have some QJ, Ax of heart. But I would call here 100% of the time with the Kh.

 

[Aballinamion]

UTG is a GTO balanced player cause he 4bet with a bluff "65s".
The opening ranges aren't weak, First when UTG opens with his range he needs to be balanced (value+bluff) and if he know that the BU is a GTO player too, the 3bet range is also balanced (value+bluff) so he throw a 4bet using his position's advantage "utg range".
He also risks 48.36$ to win 18.12$ which means that BU should fold 72.7 % of the time (48.36/66.48) to make it a break even play.
Now let's enumerate the BU 3bet range:
AA -KK-QQ-JJ = 24
TT-99-88-77 = 24
AK-AQ-AJ-KQ = 64
ATs-KJs-KTs-QJs = 16
78s-89s-9Ts-TJs= 16
A5s-A4s = 8
There is a total of 152 combinations, and if BU fold everything except "AA,KK,QQ,JJ,AK" 152-40 = 112 / 152 = 73.6 % which is enough fold equity and it is a neutral EV play.

OTR the T of heart is very scary especially if we know that UTG is a GTO player cause his range will have some QJ, Ax of heart. But I would call here 100% of the time with the Kh.

Thanks a lot for your great insight and analysis. I will take it under consideration, it was very good to read it.
Nonetheless, I have a little thing to say about this: I have said clearly that this tactics aren’t well applied at the micro stakes, forgive me if I made some mess, my English skills can be poor sometimes.
@Station_Master is right, there’s one less player at the table, so OOP would be opening from MP (or Hijack for Full-Ring tables).
I totally agree to you that OOP is playing GTO if he elects to 4-bet such combos in given scenarios such as CO x BTN, SB x BTN or even BB x BTN or SB x BB.
Because if he’s 4-betting 65s from MP what is the size of his 4-bet range?
Villain isn’t actually opening from UTG, and I made a little blunder about it, but considering a hypothetical player ahead, 65s should never be in his opening range to begin with.
I agree to you that for this case scenario, it is possible that CO is 4-betting BTN using a large range approach:
Could you please tell me what is CO’s 4-betting range vs BTN, once it has 65s as its... bottom range?
Thank you very much for your deep analysis!

 

[Aballinamion]

The postflop game was well played by both players, the chosen sizings for flop/turn/river were fine.

I remember I have written this

I don’t think we can be opening such combos from UTG at the micro-stakes.

I have made a blunder, for this specific hand isn’t UTG, but CO, for one player is sitting out and the other player is null, out of the table.
However, considering there are all 6 players at the table, I still continue to defend that we cannot open such combos from UTG, because our equity won’t realize postflop quite often (once again, for the micro stakes point of view).

Thank you all for posting and forgive my blunder/mistake.

 

[BOXING71]

the more I read reviews of different situations at the gaming table, the more I understand that I am a weak player. I'm currently playing NL5, how many players play like this at this limit? I don't think I'm good at poker. I can only play in tournaments in the hope of good luck.

 

[BOXING71]

I remember I have written this

I have made a blunder, for this specific hand isn’t UTG, but CO, for one player is sitting out and the other player is null, out of the table.
However, considering there are all 6 players at the table, I still continue to defend that we cannot open such combos from UTG, because our equity won’t realize postflop quite often (once again, for the micro stakes point of view).

Thank you all for posting and forgive my blunder/mistake.

thanks for your comments. I love reading them. I always take something useful for myself. But for me it is still too difficult. I am learning. I hope ...

 

[Aballinamion]

the more I read reviews of different situations at the gaming table, the more I understand that I am a weak player. I'm currently playing NL5, how many players play like this at this limit?

I missed your posts mate, how do you do? Good to see you around again!
Well, I’m weak player as well, so let’s hold our hands?
At 5 NLHE there are some regulars, I cannot precise how much but most of them are a bit best than NLHE 2 players.
Play what makes you more comfortable mate, I can say to you that tournament is much harder than cash games, but if you like it, I second you any day.

thanks for your comments. I love reading them. I always take something useful for myself. But for me it is still too difficult. I am learning.

I love the way you write, it’s very sweet of you to say it
Things that are worthy in life tends to be difficult to the extreme level mate: this difficulty will prove how much you love (or not at all) poker.
We must study and play poker as we are in love, no matter how we suffer or have to endure ultimate challenges, we keep moving forward for we cannot step back.
You are much better than you evaluate yourself, have faith and love yourself! I guarantee you’ll get there sooner than later.
Thanks a lot for your attention and for your kindness!
Best regards;

 

[Station_Master]

Thanks a lot for your great insight and analysis. I will take it under consideration, it was very good to read it.
Nonetheless, I have a little thing to say about this: I have said clearly that this tactics aren’t well applied at the micro stakes, forgive me if I made some mess, my English skills can be poor sometimes.
@Station_Master is right, there’s one less player at the table, so OOP would be opening from MP (or Hijack for Full-Ring tables).
I totally agree to you that OOP is playing GTO if he elects to 4-bet such combos in given scenarios such as CO x BTN, SB x BTN or even BB x BTN or SB x BB.
Because if he’s 4-betting 65s from MP what is the size of his 4-bet range?
Villain isn’t actually opening from UTG, and I made a little blunder about it, but considering a hypothetical player ahead, 65s should never be in his opening range to begin with.
I agree to you that for this case scenario, it is possible that CO is 4-betting BTN using a large range approach:
Could you please tell me what is CO’s 4-betting range vs BTN, once it has 65s as its... bottom range?
Thank you very much for your deep analysis!

I imagine the 65s is not 4bet 100% of the time, the player probably uses a random number generator and 4bets it 10% of the time (estimating) and that's 10% of the times they actually open 65s as it should be a partial.

 

[Gallarado777]

why do you call the flop and not rearrange your opponent and turn also call when you can put all-in you just played badly if you decide to go all the way you need to do it before you let your opponent open 2 cards here

 

[Station_Master]

why do you call the flop and not rearrange your opponent and turn also call when you can put all-in you just played badly if you decide to go all the way you need to do it before you let your opponent open 2 cards here

It's really for balance to protect his checking range and potentially win more than by getting folds, welshgaz would have to expect his opponent to be drawing thin as flush draws would be small proportion of range, lots of AA and AK, someother Ax

Notice how if a heart hadn't come theproxa would probably have made the same shove but as a bluff, allowing welshgaz to make more money than if he had raised flop or turn.

That's just my interpretation, but generally speaking what a 200z reg does is probably a pretty good play, as they are no doubt a better player than me and most others on the forum!

 

[Mr_Kk13]

I sincerely thank you all for the replies. This is very valuable information. I play 5nl myself at pokerstars, zoom tables. When I record these hands after I finish my session, I have a hard time understanding fully why these players are doing what they are doing. But I am willing to learn, I want to improve and move up the stakes. Keep grinding and good luck at the tables!

 

[BOXING71]

I missed your posts mate, how do you do? Good to see you around again!
Well, I’m weak player as well, so let’s hold our hands?
At 5 NLHE there are some regulars, I cannot precise how much but most of them are a bit best than NLHE 2 players.
Play what makes you more comfortable mate, I can say to you that tournament is much harder than cash games, but if you like it, I second you any day.


I love the way you write, it’s very sweet of you to say it
Things that are worthy in life tends to be difficult to the extreme level mate: this difficulty will prove how much you love (or not at all) poker.
We must study and play poker as we are in love, no matter how we suffer or have to endure ultimate challenges, we keep moving forward for we cannot step back.
You are much better than you evaluate yourself, have faith and love yourself! I guarantee you’ll get there sooner than later.
Thanks a lot for your attention and for your kindness!
Best regards;

thank you, your words give me confidence in myself....I guess everything will be like this, I have to study.I really like to read about poker when understanding players write.I would be glad to see how you play.But my level of play will not give this opportunity .Good game and have a nice evening!!!

 

[gustav197poker]

In fact this hand could have ended on the flop. I have no idea what BTN was thinking, but it's very likely that he had the wide image of opener. And he wanted to keep it in the boat.
From my point of view this should not be a problem to try to put more money on the flop by raising the small cbet, since here BTN has a range that is perceived to be wider by definition. So opener is almost forced to see the turn with hands like JJ or QQ, vs a raise OTF. If so and the BDFD of spades is not completed, BU could continue to shoot denying fairness with possible OTT overbet.
Greetings.

 

[Aballinamion]

he wanted to keep it in the boat.

Say what? You meant that the intention of BTN was to keep CO/UTG betting with its entire range, i.e, bluffs and values?

From my point of view this should not be a problem to try to put more money on the flop by raising the small cbet, since here BTN has a range that is perceived to be wider by definition.

Isn’t a problem at all to raise OTF! But let’s consider for a moment this is polarized 4-bet pot. And let’s consider this is a 100% GTO game: BTN will call a couple of times and raise OTF a couple of times, this particular moment BTN had felt it was not the moment to put up a raise.
And this is a 4-bet pot, CO/UTG has all the AA combos and BTN has none of them, or just a few combos, the point is that CO/UTG has much more AA combos than BTN.
BTN’s range is not so wide because it had made a 3-bet preflop and called a 4-bet IP (both polarized sizings) so we do expect that BTN is holding better hands, cause the weak hands wouldn’t have made a 3-bet or would’ve folded to a 4-bet.
BTN’s range is wider when it raises first into the pot, and less wider when it 3-bets versus CO or at maximum MP.

 

[gustav197poker]

Say what? You meant that the intention of BTN was to keep CO/UTG betting with its entire range, i.e, bluffs and values?

Isn’t a problem at all to raise OTF! But let’s consider for a moment this is polarized 4-bet pot. And let’s consider this is a 100% GTO game: BTN will call a couple of times and raise OTF a couple of times, this particular moment BTN had felt it was not the moment to put up a raise.
And this is a 4-bet pot, CO/UTG has all the AA combos and BTN has none of them, or just a few combos, the point is that CO/UTG has much more AA combos than BTN.
BTN’s range is not so wide because it had made a 3-bet preflop and called a 4-bet IP (both polarized sizings) so we do expect that BTN is holding better hands, cause the weak hands wouldn’t have made a 3-bet or would’ve folded to a 4-bet.
BTN’s range is wider when it raises first into the pot, and less wider when it 3-bets versus CO or at maximum MP.

And what does that mean exactly? That you just call with your full range on the flop? Let's be objective. I respect your opinion, but for me, this is a totally avoidable situation for a 200nl player, whether he is located in BTN or from CO.
If you're unbelievably lucky enough to flop second best set, with this board setup and being one range less strong than the opener or MP, "in my opinion" there are additional merits with more aggressive lines in weird places like these. Don't you find this super small OTF cbet strange? Do you think I am very wrong in my way of thinking? Feel free to express what you want.

 

[Aballinamion]

Don't you find this super small OTF cbet strange?

Thank you for your reply. Yes, I think it’s a weird c-bet sizing, but I have full access to the hole cards of both players.
But without this information it looks like that CO/UTG puts a small c-bet for the times that BTN raises OTF.
But this is also strange because if the intention of the OOP was to put a 4-bet bluff using a very weak range, why it elected to use polarized sizing preflop?
This is almost a heads-up game this is the explanation for the 65s 4-betting out of position.
But isn’t clear to me the entire 4-bet range of OOP (65+, 22+??, A9o+???) for if we are 4-betting 65s we can easily 4-bet using 22, QJs, KQs, A9o... and these last hands are all better in terms of equity than 65s...
Confuse, other player had said that the OOP is a solid regular at NLHE 200, which makes me wanna play against it as soon as possible!

 

[gustav197poker]

But without this information it looks like that CO/UTG puts a small c-bet for the times that BTN raises OTF.
But this is also strange because if the intention of the OOP was to put a 4-bet bluff using a very weak range, why it elected to use polarized sizing preflop?
This is almost a heads-up game this is the explanation for the 65s 4-betting out of position.

It is probable that there is a previous story between the two players here, a fact that is no less important, for to incorporate in this sequence.

 

[gustav197poker]

But isn’t clear to me the entire 4-bet range of OOP (65+, 22+??, A9o+???) for if we are 4-betting 65s we can easily 4-bet using 22, QJs, KQs, A9o... and these last hands are all better in terms of equity than 65s...

You said it. To that you have to add some random factor of hand selection, every certain volume played. Could be 79s; TJs, just to name a few.

 

[gustav197poker]

Confuse, other player had said that the OOP is a solid regular at NLHE 200, which makes me wanna play against it as soon as possible!

For me it is impossible to classify someone as a weak or strong player, with only one hand played. It's even possible that opener erred and actually wanted to pick a more standard cbet flop size, like 1/4 pot. We will never know.

 

[Station_Master]

In fact this hand could have ended on the flop. I have no idea what BTN was thinking, but it's very likely that he had the wide image of opener. And he wanted to keep it in the boat.
From my point of view this should not be a problem to try to put more money on the flop by raising the small cbet, since here BTN has a range that is perceived to be wider by definition. So opener is almost forced to see the turn with hands like JJ or QQ, vs a raise OTF. If so and the BDFD of spades is not completed, BU could continue to shoot denying fairness with possible OTT overbet.
Greetings.

Why would BTN want to end the hand on the flop. He almost certainly has the best hand and his opponent will be drawing super thin. Hiw much equity did the opponent have 4%? So far better to keep him in the pot and get more value.

AKx board is so favourable for the 4better he can bet range for small size and IP has no raises. Of he raises KK then surely OOP can barrel him off all his x-calls.

I think this is played just fine by IP. OOP played fine too assuming 65s is only opened and 4bet a small portion of the time.

 

[gustav197poker]

Why would BTN want to end the hand on the flop. He almost certainly has the best hand and his opponent will be drawing super thin. Hiw much equity did the opponent have 4%? So far better to keep him in the pot and get more value.

AKx board is so favourable for the 4better he can bet range for small size and IP has no raises. Of he raises KK then surely OOP can barrel him off all his x-calls.

I think this is played just fine by IP. OOP played fine too assuming 65s is only opened and 4bet a small portion of the time.

On the other hand, for me, BU did not take advantage of his opportunity to bet on the flop. He was lucky to hit set otf, that happens about 12% of the time. So if I am lucky enough to randomly fall into that small 12% percentage (and without having made 5 bets preflop with KK!) I am raising 100% of the time here on this board.
BU could represent semi bluffs of spades, he could even try this line with pure bluffs trying to take down opener's small continuation bet.
I'm surprised to be the only one who thinks that BU has played in a controversial way.

 

[fundiver199]

On the other hand, for me, BU did not take advantage of his opportunity to bet on the flop. He was lucky to hit set otf, that happens about 12% of the time. So if I am lucky enough to randomly fall into that small 12% percentage (and without having made 5 bets preflop with KK!) I am raising 100% of the time here on this board.

Especially when the C-bet is only like 15% pot. There has to be a point, where the C-bet gets so small, that we dont always allow the preflop aggressor to essentially see a 4-card flop before committing any money. In this case we are never getting any action later in the hand from 65 of hearts, unless the opponent picks up a draw on the turn. So why not just make it 60$ to go on the flop and either end the hand right there or force the opponent to put in money drawing very thin to a runner-runner.

I can maybe understand the passive line from KK (including non 5-bet preflop) in a high stakes games, where players are bluffing a lot, and where you have to worry about being balanced and protecting your range. But in the micros I will strongly advice people to just bet or raise, when they have a good hand. This is going to work much better in the long run than all this fancy slowplaying. Its also going to be less tilting, because calling down here and getting shown the runner-runner is just not a good feeling.

 

[blueskies]

All in preflop. Premium pairs are just too vulnerable in deep stacked games. And when you make the best hand you can reasonably expect to make, play that sith aggressively!

As played checking both flop and turn is awful. Slowplaying is just awful I don't care GTO or whatever. If you wanna balance raise more when in position more so that you can make raises and still get action in these valuetown scenarios.

As played you dunno where you are. I guess you just gotta call and smack yourself (well deserved).