$200 NLHE 6-max: Middle pair top kicker; drawish board

[S93]

I question our ability to extract more value than we give with A9s post-flop, and it is very profitable to 3bet.

Why is it profitable to 3bet A9s vs a BTN open?
Is it because we get value from worse or is it because we get alot of folds in wich case our hand doesnt matter and we could just as well be 3betting less strong hands that arnt as dominated?

 

[NineLions]

If we have no fold equity on flop and turn isnt c/c turn allowing villain to bluff his huge range better then double barraling?
What do u expect to call flop and turn?
Also if villain has a huge range isnt he likly to bluff raise a barrel some X of the time in wich case how do u respond to a turn raise?

Just wondering since im curiouse wich line could be considered better.

I'm obv behind in the discussion here and don't have a lot of opportunities today to look at this much.

I see that c/c the turn is probably better than firing a second barrel just because all we fold are hands like 98/T9/small pairs and air which we're ahead of anyway.

But if we decide that a flop c-bet has little fold equity, then why not ch/cl the flop too?

 

[thepokerkid123]

Why is it profitable to 3bet A9s vs a BTN open?
Is it because we get value from worse or is it because we get alot of folds in wich case our hand doesnt matter and we could just as well be 3betting less strong hands that arnt as dominated?

The latter. I think I defend a lot less often than you do.
A9s is good to 3bet because anything is good to 3bet as long as our frequency is low, plus the A has card removal (more fold equity) and both cards allow us to continue very often should villain call.
I use it in my 3bet range because the only alternative I see is folding.

After the discussions so far in this thread, I'm going to do some experimenting with hands like this in blind defence.

But if we decide that a flop c-bet has little fold equity, then why not ch/cl the flop too?

Because it's for value.

 

[S93]

Some good descusion so far imo.
Lets try to keep it going .

The latter. I think I defend a lot less often than you do.
A9s is good to 3bet because anything is good to 3bet as long as our frequency is low, plus the A has card removal (more fold equity) and both cards allow us to continue very often should villain call.
I use it in my 3bet range because the only alternative I see is folding.

After the discussions so far in this thread, I'm going to do some experimenting with hands like this in blind defence.

You mind running a PT3/HEM filter where u 3bet A9s vs BTN/CO open in the SB/BB?
If sample is to small try throwing in A6s-A9s and maybe A9o(if your 3betting thouse vs BTN/co open)

Because it's for value.

I agree since if he is calling with wide range we might as well start value betting middle pair(this obvs asuming we seperate villains with high and low fold to cbet IP and only do it against thouse with a low fold).
The turn descion im still on the fence on but still think allowing him to bluff(wich is probably his plan if he is floating a wide range)>Double barraling.

But im really interested in hearing more from FP on the c/c flop.

 

[NineLions]

But if we decide that a flop c-bet has little fold equity, then why not ch/cl the flop too?

Because it's for value.

Hmm, I think this needs a little clarification, unless we're the only ones actually reading this thread. Which may or may not be the case. In other words, everyone that's posted probably has similar ideas what you mean by that, but maybe not any lurkers.


For value, meaning that we expect a good opponent to see think that we could be betting here with air and thereby often call us with their own air looking to take it away on the turn, or, with even with a weak draw or small pair again thinking that they might be able to take it away or may even have the best hand themselves. So we can build the pot here even against an opponent who may have a worse hand than we hold.

 

[S93]

Hmm, I think this needs a little clarification, unless we're the only ones actually reading this thread. Which may or may not be the case. In other words, everyone that's posted probably has similar ideas what you mean by that, but maybe not any lurkers.


For value, meaning that we expect a good opponent to see think that we could be betting here with air and thereby often call us with their own air looking to take it away on the turn, or, with even with a weak draw or small pair again thinking that they might be able to take it away or may even have the best hand themselves. So we can build the pot here even against an opponent who may have a worse hand than we hold.

Exactly imo. The reason I check back hand 2 and bet 3 is I dont expect good villains to ch/ca OOP very often, and when they do I expect to beat or them to atleast have great equity vs us.
But in hand 3, since I have a wide cbet range in that spot I expect decent villains to pick up on that and call with a much wider range then in example 2.

No clue if its "correct" thinking but do u understand what im trying to say?

 

[F Paulsson]

Because it's for value.

Is it, though? Looking again at his calling range that I gave above, even including all the gutshots, his range still beats ours. I don't know exactly where the line goes for us starting to show a profit from betting, but it has to be a really really wide range. If he starts to peel with underpairs to the 9 and A-x hands, I could see it.

Then again, his range will be different when he's flatting on the button. Some of the weaker queens probably won't be in there, then again, some of the weaker 9s won't either, so I'm not convinced that this works to our advantage. I'm again back at the "wrong" computer so I can't do any stoving on it.

 

[S93]

*Sneak bumb in hopes of revival*
Any one else have thoughts on this?