$200 NLHE 6-max: Summer review: AJ turns trips OOP

[F Paulsson]

You get paid off a lot when villain has QQ or TT-77 and when he puts you on air on that river bet. You can say it doesn't happen, but I can assure you it does. The piece of information we need to definitively determine the liklihood of this is what are the *hero's* stats. How does our villain perceive us here?

In June, my style was roughly 19/16, my opening range for MP (although it's doubtful he'd know this to this great a detail) is 22+, KJs+, JTs+, ATo+. At the time I c-bet 80%+, went to showdown 29%, double barreled 40% of the time. I have no idea how often I fold to turn raises (and I therefore expect that he didn't either).

And I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but here's four things that have to be true for it to happen:

1. He has to not 3-bet preflop with QQ.
2. He has to not raise the flop with 77-TT and QQ.
3. He has to raise the turn with said hands.
4. He has to call a river shove with those hands.

Since probabilities get multiplied, and all of these have, in my opinion, at the very least less than an average of 50% probability each, it seems like he'd play one of these hands this way only 6-12% of the time.

Compare that to a set. Arguably, it's perhaps a bit odd for him to slowplay a set on this flop, but even if he does that only 30% of the time with a set, that STILL makes a set more than twice as probable as 77-TT,QQ.

And, to top it off, in order for this to be better than just bet/shoving the turn, it would also have to be true that he'd rather call a river openshove than a turn 3-bet. It's probably true that there are players that would rather call a river openshove (hoping to pick off a busted flushdraw, I guess) than a turn 3-betshove, but then you have to weigh that probability versus the probability that he himself has a flushdraw (small but probably bigger than the combined probability that he'll both fold to a turn shove BUT call a river shove).

And I note you edited the part where I said c/c the river is reasonable, so I'll reiterate that here. I think we get paid enough that donking the river is more profitable at this level.

I didn't edit it in order to misrepresent what you were saying, I hope you didn't take it that way. I tend to quote the parts that I'm interested in discussing and since I don't disagree with c/c river being reasonable there was no particular reason for me to quote it.

Being out of position, I have no problem with bet/raise. It's probably the better play than bet/call here in general, but depending on his perception of you, they're both very close.

I disagree with bet/calling being close to bet/shoving.

Villain's range, roughly (ignoring the weighting and combinatorical size of each):

1. Unimproved PPs.
2. Flushdraws.
3. Sets.
4. J-X.
5. Pure floats, e.g. AhTx, or similar hands.

Bet/calling, shove river and bet/shoving the turn has the same value versus sets (we stack off) and pure floats (he folds either way).

Bet/calling probably wins a little extra versus PPs that raise the turn. I think this is a small part of his range.

Bet/shoving wins a lot of value versus flushdraws that raise the turn. I think this is a small part of his range as well.

Bet/calling loses at least a little value vs J-x when the river is a third heart. Since we're not openshoving a heart river, we will only win the same vs. J-X the times the river is a heart if he shoves when checked to. If he bets anything less than his entire stack (or checks behind) we miss out.

Villain is aggressive he isnt checking back the turn with flushdraw or stuff like 88.

"Isn't" is a strong word. Some non-zero percentage of the time, he will. But the percentage of the time he'll call a bet with those hands is 100%. So c/r:ing versus those hands is only better if he'll either shovebluff over our raise or call our checkraise, and while that will ALSO happen some non-zero percentage of the time, I think it's (much) more likely for him to try to snap off a bluff with mid PPs by calling two more streets rather than bet/calling the turn with 88 and then calling a river shove.

He also probably has some random overs/backdoor draws that decited the float us on the flop all of witch we should probably get most value from with a c/r.

If we think that this is a significant portion of his range, then it's better to take the line I took (c/c two streets) rather than c/r the turn, bet river, because this range is folding to a turn c/r anyway. I mean, some portion of the time he's going to spazz out and try to 3-bet bluffshove the turn with air, but then we're back to multiplying small probabilities, namely

1. he peels the flop with a weak hand,
2. he bets the turn when checked to, and
3. he spazzes out and shoves when he gets checkraised.

1. and 2. are pretty likely, but even if he peels the flop with 80% of his "air" (random overs etc, like you said), and bets it when checked on the turn 80% of the time, and spazzes out and 3-bet bluffs as often as 10% of the time when he gets checkraised, then we're still only dealing with a ~6% chance of him doing this with his air. This can still be a decent chunk of combos if he can have a lot of air but I'm not so sure he can. How much air does a 17/12 show up with?

 

[Sysvr4]

And I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but here's four things that have to be true for it to happen:

....

Since probabilities get multiplied, and all of these have, in my opinion, at the very least less than an average of 50% probability each, it seems like he'd play one of these hands this way only 6-12% of the time.

Good analysis, I don't disagree with any of it, well done.

Compare that to a set. Arguably, it's perhaps a bit odd for him to slowplay a set on this flop, but even if he does that only 30% of the time with a set, that STILL makes a set more than twice as probable as 77-TT,QQ.

I think this is immaterial to the discussion. Bet/shove the turn and you're stacking off to a set only 4% of the time less than you do with bet/call + shove on the river. That 4% is probably not enough to offset the money you lose when he calls your turn shove and subsequently sucks out (clearly you play the river a lot more carefully if a K, T, 9?, or any non-FH heart hits) or the money you gain by inducing a call from a wider range of hands on the river.

It's probably true that there are players that would rather call a river openshove (hoping to pick off a busted flushdraw, I guess) than a turn 3-betshove, but then you have to weigh that probability versus the probability that he himself has a flushdraw (small but probably bigger than the combined probability that he'll both fold to a turn shove BUT call a river shove).

Once again, the important distinction is what your villain thinks YOU have, so I could easily make the opposite argument. If you shove the turn, it's undeniable to even the most brain-dead opponent that you have a J or better, and he's probably folding everything but a worse jack. If you call and shove the river, your perceived range is substantially wider. You may well get called by AK trying to pick off a bluff. I still see vastly more opportunity to save money on a bad river and induce a call from a wider range of hands with bet/call + shove*.

I didn't edit it in order to misrepresent what you were saying, I hope you didn't take it that way. I tend to quote the parts that I'm interested in discussing and since I don't disagree with c/c river being reasonable there was no particular reason for me to quote it.

Fair enough

I disagree with bet/calling being close to bet/shoving.

I disagree with your disagreement We can do an EV calculation on the two, but I've found that doing so requires so many assumptions on how often villain plays (for example) a flush draw this way or how much you save or make that it's pure guesswork and we will probably disagree on the numbers substantively enough that it won't change our original positions.

Bet/calling, shove river and bet/shoving the turn has the same value versus sets (we stack off) and pure floats (he folds either way).

It actually has slightly less value against sets and more value against floats. I think the latter offsets the former if you remove the word "pure" from floats.

Bet/calling probably wins a little extra versus PPs that raise the turn. I think this is a small part of his range.

It wins dramatically more. And I think the range is slightly wider than just PPs. AK, a suited ace that paired, and others fall in this category, though admittedly some are more likely to solicit a call than others.

Bet/shoving wins a lot of value versus flushdraws that raise the turn. I think this is a small part of his range as well.

It wins more when he folds. It wins more when he calls and doesn't suck out. It wins less when he calls and sucks out. We're getting into that EV calc I didn't want to make.

Bet/calling loses at least a little value vs J-x when the river is a third heart. Since we're not openshoving a heart river, we will only win the same vs. J-X the times the river is a heart if he shoves when checked to. If he bets anything less than his entire stack (or checks behind) we miss out.

Agreed.

So again, so that there's no misunderstanding, the crux of my argument is not that one is materially better than another, but rather that that bet/call and bet/shove are close. Though I do think bet/call will reduce your variance. I'll let you have the last word on this, I rest my case

Btw, I read some of your blog last night, I commend you on its well-written content and subject matter. Kudos.

 

[doops]

I hate that check-call on the turn. It's interesting, though. On one hand, it tells him you have something, or are maybe on a draw. The problem is that because you are out of position, to follow up, you have to check to him again on the river, and then, if he bets and there is no scare card (which there was), you raise. Why might you have done this? What story are you trying to tell? I find it useful to keep my story at the front of my thoughts.

As to his play. Let me be him a sec. Well, in his shoes with, say a TT+, overcards, a flush draw, I might have played it about the same as him. A call to your bet on the flop. I'd think: he's got a J? He's c-betting? Semi-bluffing? I have some hope here, so let's see what the turn brings. Interesting -- another J on the turn and he checks to me. I'm gonna bet out here, although I still have only my pair and the board pair --or nothing but overs. Lets see if he still likes his hand. If he raises my bet, I'm in trouble unless I get help on the river. It answers the question that my bet represents. I'm getting out now. If he calls, I'm putting him on a draw over Jx. Although AJ, KJ, QJ, JT are certainly possible, why would he check to me on that turn? Well, aside from the fact that he knows I'll bet at it. Hmmm -- how tricky is he?

Looking at this from the other guy's possible perspective, the check/call could have been a brilliant move.

Thinking about

 

[Deco]

Check-raise or bet/shove the turn. I'm not sure which is better, probably check/raising since it gets the money in a little easier.

To me, since villain didn't 3-bet, his range consists of Jx, middle pairs, draws, and sets. You beat everything except a set, and sets raise the flop a lot. So I'm looking to cram the money in on the turn.

+1
I do fear the check raise is a little thin but I just can't see hands that beat us all that often.
Reckon KJ will stack off here?

I think I prefer bet/jam, or heck lets try something controversial. Bet/call then a check raise on the river?

 

[slycbnew]

I think I prefer bet/jam, or heck lets try something controversial. Bet/call then a check raise on the river?

We're not deep enough to bet/call, ch/r are we?

 

[Deco]

We're not deep enough to bet/call, ch/r are we?

I think we are.
Lets say they bet $45 on the river a shove should be rather comfortable.

The real issues are whether they will call a checkraise with worse and if they'll bet all their range we beat.

 

[F Paulsson]

As per above, I agree with everything you said down to about this point, where I feel I want to clarify a few things:

It wins dramatically more. And I think the range is slightly wider than just PPs. AK, a suited ace that paired, and others fall in this category, though admittedly some are more likely to solicit a call than others.

The only way it can win dramatically more is if he's dramatically more likely to call a river openshove unimproved than he is to call a turn 3-bet. If you include AK in his range (and ignoring how likely or unlikely it is for him to have that) then versus specifically AK, yeah - we can win dramatically more. He's never calling a turn shove, but he's going to call a river open-shove when a K or an A hits the board some reasonable percentage of the time. If you mean that bet/call, shove river is a better play because it allows him a chance to pair his overcard bluffs, then I see your point - but I have serious doubts that such hands exist in his range virtually at all. Still, I'll leave it at that.

It wins more when he folds. It wins more when he calls and doesn't suck out. It wins less when he calls and sucks out. We're getting into that EV calc I didn't want to make.

But... It only wins less when he calls and sucks out assuming that if a third flush hits the river, we somehow find a fold when we check to him. If we lead turn with $25, and he raises to $60, the pot is going to be $155 on the river, with $125 left and we're checking a scare card river versus a villain that we must assume has the balls to bluff (otherwise we can't put him on a flushdraw to begin with). I think that's a really tough fold to make. Especially if he can play his most likely hand - J-X - the same way.

So from where I'm standing, I'm stacking off versus a flushdraw when it hits regardless of whether or not I'm getting the money in on the turn or the river. The only difference between shoving the turn and calling off on the river is that on the turn, I at least get a chance to get the rest of HIS money when he doesn't hit (or make him give up 18% equity in the pot, which is at least better than letting him forfeit 0% equity on the river).

Btw, I read some of your blog last night, I commend you on its well-written content and subject matter. Kudos.

Why, thank you! I've been getting a lot of grief lately for not updating it. I'll try to be better about that in the future.

 

[eNTy]

didnt read every comment in here but i do have a question
if we c/r turn does this not turn our hand face up and kill a lot of action ?

 

[vanquish]

i barrel the turn for something like 3/5-2/3 pot

 

[F Paulsson]

i barrel the turn for something like 3/5-2/3 pot

Any RDT (Really Deep Thoughts) about the sizing, or just because it looks sexy?

 

[vanquish]

Any RDT (Really Deep Thoughts) about the sizing, or just because it looks sexy?

it's a spot where a lot of people will incorrectly barrel as a bluff, and i believe that's the most convincing sizing to make our monster look like we're trying a cheap(ish) bluff (and thereby get looked up super wide, at least on the turn)

 

[F Paulsson]

it's a spot where a lot of people will incorrectly barrel as a bluff, and i believe that's the most convincing sizing to make our monster look like we're trying a cheap(ish) bluff (and thereby get looked up super wide, at least on the turn)

Okie, that works. I was mostly fishing for bet-sizing in relation to remaining stacks but, probably like you, I think the vast majority of the value on the turn comes from being looked up by weaker hands and therefore we should encourage callers.