$25 NLHE 6-max: TT BvB, Flop has two overs

[loafaBREAD]

Hey all,

I just want your thoughts on the flop. Turn and river is obvious, plays itself. (Though I'd appreciate your thoughts on turn bet sizing!)

Pre I chose a smaller bet sizing since V seemed tight with may 3-bets (22/18, 3B: 10). I had few hands on V at the time so we turned out not being as tight as I thought, so once I noticed that I went to 3x. That's typically how I play.

Fop I prefer betting over checking here- it offers protection, we do have a gutshot, and we block most of V's bluffs/draws he'd bluff with.

Is that what you're doing? If so, what are we doing on non-straight turn cards? If we hit our straight, do you prefer small or large sizing?

Yatahay Network - $0.25 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players

CO: 101 BB
BTN: 41.92 BB
Hero (SB): 100 BB
BB: 172.68 BB
UTG: 104.04 BB
MP: 269.64 BB

Hero posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has T:spade: T:heart:

fold, fold, fold, fold, Hero raises to 2.4 BB, BB calls 1.4 BB

Flop: (4.8 BB, 2 players) Q:club: J:diamond: 8:heart:
Hero bets 2.8 BB, BB calls 2.8 BB

Turn: (10.4 BB, 2 players) 9:diamond:
Hero bets 4 BB, BB calls 4 BB

River: (18.4 BB, 2 players) 3:spade:
Hero bets 13.8 BB, BB raises to 59.8 BB, Hero calls 46 BB

 

[Alucard]

If I'm having some checks on the flop I'd have TT in there

 

[gustav197poker]

I understand that opening at 2.4x widens the blind ranges here. If we believe that this villain is more tight in his 3-bet range, we should assume high fold equity (putting ourselves in the villain's mind), because if we then 4-bet we will be throwing him out of the pot very often, since with our opening size the villain will not be able to fully debug his 3-bet range. Because it will be very weighted at the excellent price we gave you to call. So if BB is really tight (as we think it is) he won't want to take a chance and will protect his postflop position by controlling the pot and giving up his neutralized hands. If we do not plan to semi bluff our TT hand with 4-bet preflop, we should standardize the size to 3x when entering a blind duel against this type of opponent.
The flop bet should be a bit bigger considering how our opening went. 70-85% of the pot can make that the low pockets like 22-66 fold more often. We are also at a rank disadvantage with respect to our hand, as villain is less likely to have JTs; QTs. And most likely are the Kxs in the V range, so we must compensate our disadvantage and put higher odds to the BB that has position over us.
The turn is a street that impacts too much on our range. If the V is a tight regular it should recognize your proportional change in the bet entered. We are with the best shape and decided on a smaller barrel. I'm not sure how tight villain's range is here, but it shouldn't continue without good enough hands to hit the river.
Finally the river is a super brick and we made a third barrel betting 75% of the pot. Villain has made a strong raise, equivalent to more than 4 times our river bet. The call is not discussed and possibly BB has the same hand as our, but if he could observe the whole sequence well it is not surprising that we find the absolute nuts here (KT). I am inclined to think that they split the pot, just because of the fact that the 2b was evident and confirmed the strength of your range. In this case the times we check in the turn we allow that the V can sometimes convert in bluff his dominated hands.
Greetings.

 

[loafaBREAD]

I understand that opening at 2.4x widens the blind ranges here. If we believe that this villain is more tight in his 3-bet range, we should assume high fold equity (putting ourselves in the villain's mind), because if we then 4-bet we will be throwing him out of the pot very often, since with our opening size the villain will not be able to fully debug his 3-bet range. Because it will be very weighted at the excellent price we gave you to call. So if BB is really tight (as we think it is) he won't want to take a chance and will protect his postflop position by controlling the pot and giving up his neutralized hands. If we do not plan to semi bluff our TT hand with 4-bet preflop, we should standardize the size to 3x when entering a blind duel against this type of opponent.
The flop bet should be a bit bigger considering how our opening went. 70-85% of the pot can make that the low pockets like 22-66 fold more often. We are also at a rank disadvantage with respect to our hand, as villain is less likely to have JTs; QTs. And most likely are the Kxs in the V range, so we must compensate our disadvantage and put higher odds to the BB that has position over us.
The turn is a street that impacts too much on our range. If the V is a tight regular it should recognize your proportional change in the bet entered. We are with the best shape and decided on a smaller barrel. I'm not sure how tight villain's range is here, but it shouldn't continue without good enough hands to hit the river.
Finally the river is a super brick and we made a third barrel betting 75% of the pot. Villain has made a strong raise, equivalent to more than 4 times our river bet. The call is not discussed and possibly BB has the same hand as our, but if he could observe the whole sequence well it is not surprising that we find the absolute nuts here (KT). I am inclined to think that they split the pot, just because of the fact that the 2b was evident and confirmed the strength of your range. In this case the times we check in the turn we allow that the V can sometimes convert in bluff his dominated hands.
Greetings.

Thank you for the feedback! Sometimes I do have trouble understanding your English, so let me see if I got this right...

1. Bet larger on the flop
2. Small turn bet is OK b/c v shouldn't be continuing too often.
3. River...??

I didn't discuss the river, you're right. I can't imagine folding here...maybe that's just me. It wasn't an all-in from V, and I didn't want to get it all in bc of KT. So I flatted.

As V, KT might consider some raises OTT, yea? Not that that should improve our situation all that much.

We did chop as V had T6s, proving that we should open 3x sizing BvB unless we have a significant sample to determine otherwise!

Also, 4. you talked about 4-betting TT pre... as I play now, I would never do that. I'm not sure I fully understand your point there (partly your English, but also that concept might be too advanced for me!).

I'm assuming smaller raise sizes increases how many 3-bets V can have, as 3-bet sizing is smaller as a result. Thus, our 4-bet range is wider... but even in that case TT would be too good to turn into a bluff, and against 'tight' Vs, not good enough to 4-bet for value. I can see 4-betting JJ and calling off BvB, but TT seems like a flat to me, even vs a smaller sizing.

Unless we have a 4-bet/fold range that is value? I mean, if V flatted the 4-bet I wouldn't feel too bad, though I couldn't call an all-in. Is that what you meant?:icon_bigs

 

[gustav197poker]

Thank you for the feedback! Sometimes I do have trouble understanding your English, so let me see if I got this right...

1. Bet larger on the flop
2. Small turn bet is OK b/c v shouldn't be continuing too often.
3. River...??

I didn't discuss the river, you're right. I can't imagine folding here...maybe that's just me. It wasn't an all-in from V, and I didn't want to get it all in bc of KT. So I flatted.

As V, KT might consider some raises OTT, yea? Not that that should improve our situation all that much.

We did chop as V had T6s, proving that we should open 3x sizing BvB unless we have a significant sample to determine otherwise!

Also, 4. you talked about 4-betting TT pre... as I play now, I would never do that. I'm not sure I fully understand your point there (partly your English, but also that concept might be too advanced for me!).

I'm assuming smaller raise sizes increases how many 3-bets V can have, as 3-bet sizing is smaller as a result. Thus, our 4-bet range is wider... but even in that case TT would be too good to turn into a bluff, and against 'tight' Vs, not good enough to 4-bet for value. I can see 4-betting JJ and calling off BvB, but TT seems like a flat to me, even vs a smaller sizing.

Unless we have a 4-bet/fold range that is value? I mean, if V flatted the 4-bet I wouldn't feel too bad, though I couldn't call an all-in. Is that what you meant?:icon_bigs

Sorry for my english. I will try to be clearer.
From the blinds the ranges are much wider. If you open in SB at 2.4x, the villain from BB needs 8.33% less equity to call compared to a standard size of 3x. Although it seems insignificant, this increases V's overall range and also affects his bluff range. Against that excess we are a bit unbalanced when the V 3-bet and we call. But if we 4-bet, we recover value when BB is tight and we force all dominated hands to fold. Because the villain will think that your range is actually very strong and your opening has been a plan to catch him. Naturally we will not have fold equity (actually yes, when V make 5bet preflop). But I don't think it's the best at 25NL to make a bluff 4-bet with TT. Therefore my suggestion is to open 3bb when you are BvB. (Your preflop sequence is optimal, when you think that villain has the widest range).
I like your flop bet size when you have a 3bb opening. And also when your villain has a wide range.
Your turn bet is proportionally smaller than that made on the flop. You are representing a not very strong value hand, when in reality your range is super strong. But an villain of 25NL will always bet you here when he thinks he has the Nuts.
On the river you bet 75% of the pot. It seems a bit big to me if we consider the turn bet. The proportions you chose were 58% 38% and 75% respectively. I think you'll get folds here, when the villains haven't gotten their flush of diamond and only they will calls with T.