$5 NLHE 6-max: check back TPTK vs suspected nuts? 3bet pot

[Haze of Spade]

888 Poker - $0.05 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 117.6 BB (VPIP: 24.19, PFR: 17.74, 3Bet Preflop: 5.17, hands: 324)
SB: 100 BB (VPIP: 21.67, PFR: 17.36, 3Bet Preflop: 3.54, Hands: 761)
BB: 116.8 BB (VPIP: 52.61, PFR: 2.54, 3Bet Preflop: 0.98, Hands: 654)
UTG: 120.8 BB (VPIP: 46.81, PFR: 27.66, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 49)
Hero (CO): 277 BB

SB posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has A♦ K♠

fold, Hero raises to 3 BB, fold, SB raises to 12 BB, BB calls 11 BB, Hero calls 9 BB

Flop: (36 BB, 3 players) K♦ 5♠ Q♣
SB bets 24 BB, fold, Hero calls 24 BB

Turn: (84 BB, 2 players) 6♦
SB checks, Hero?


SB 3bet's very tight and the flop hit's his range pretty hard.
I block KK+ and there there aren't many hands left he would take this line but QQ and AK, also KQ but i dont even think that's in his range like 55.
I feel he got me beaten on flop also it is suspicious that he bets so big but he cbets 80% of the flops so i call of course.
Should we check back this turn to such a suspicious check or is that just paranoid, what do you think?

 

[quant1986]

I think check turn is fine. He could check back AA,AK,AQs and may give up TT-JJ.

If he has KK/QQ, likely keep firing as he did on the flop to get three street values.

 

[triplstacker]

I agree with quant; check the turn and reevaluate. However, I like a 4bet and fold to shove if his 3bet frequency is so low. It's very possible he has 1010+ and willing to fold to a 4 bet

 

[John A]

You only have 760 hands, so you won't really know his 3-bet in the SB from a CO open. Regardless, check back turn is fine and pretty std. What worse hands are calling you at this point?

 

[cs_rlewis]

Yeah I agree with everyone given his 3bet stat is super low. Check back turn then call/bet river

 

[Haze of Spade]

ok i see, the pot was so big and i was desperately trying to convince myself that he gave up when checking.
so i shoved and he called with set queens haha

like John A said i dont have enough hands to put him on an exact range so i did asume it is very tight but i knew he could aswell have a bluff so i felt like i have to defend my hand against draws..
not the first time that happened.
now i know better, thank you for the replies!

 

[cs_rlewis]

A 3% 3bet probably has very little draws. AK would be the obvious one, which you are chopping with. Betting so big your only getting called when you are beat.
When you bet big villain wont call TT-JJ. Maybe AQ.
If you bet smaller you target his whole range.

 

[xRanieri]

He might have JTs or AK. I think AA would continue here. What a weird line lol. Especially with that turn brick. If he had QQ, KK, or KQ, he'd continue betting, or (very unlikely) wants to check/raise?

Damn, this makes no sense. You should check-back and then call the river bet if the river is a brick. A river of J, Q, or T would suck, and it would be harder to call a river bet.

EDIT: Btw, if you bet the turn after he checked and he raised, that's an ez fold.

 

[John A]

He might have JTs or AK. I think AA would continue here. What a weird line lol. Especially with that turn brick. If he had QQ, KK, or KQ, he'd continue betting, or (very unlikely) wants to check/raise?

Damn, this makes no sense. You should check-back and then call the river bet if the river is a brick. A river of J, Q, or T would suck, and it would be harder to call a river bet.

EDIT: Btw, if you bet the turn after he checked and he raised, that's an ez fold.

There's only one bet left, so there's no way to bet/fold the turn. And no, you likely shouldn't call the river after the turn check back. That's the point of the check. You're trying to get to showdown essentially. If anymore money goes in at this point, you should fold, unless your opponent is a drooler or if the river is a total brick (then you'll need to decide if you're calling for a split pot - which usually you should just fold, but it will be close).

Just a side note, for those who are using the 3% stat from SB w/ 760 hands, you need about 100k+ hands to even start to consider what someone's range would be in that spot. Consider that the % someone 3-bets is also going to differ based on the position of the original raise. How many CO vs. SB 3-bets do you think you're going to have in 760 hands?

What you do in a spot like this is look at someone's OVERALL 3-bet, and if it's exceptionally low or high, then you deduce this person might be tight or loose w/ his 3-bets. But you combine this with other stats to create a profile of who you are likely facing.

 

[playinggameswithu]

You only have 760 hands, so you won't really know his 3-bet in the SB from a CO open. Regardless, check back turn is fine and pretty std. What worse hands are calling you at this point?

My thoughts also. Thinking tiny range of hands we have beat and it would not make much sense for them to continue acting the way they have been. Realistically the best you are hoping for would be a split pot. I just glimpsed over the hand didnt really read the OP too lazy.

 

[braveslice]

re using the 3% stat from SB w/ 760 hands, you need about 100k+ hands to even start to consider what someone's range would be in that spot.

Even though we can't say for individual player, we can typically categorize villain's style of play using all stats we have about the villain and then compare to general pool tendencies.

This should not be too far from the accuracy from any stat given every player has different kind of days (especially in micros) and also that we don't need to know exactly, only what is the most likely solution.

 

[John A]

Even though we can't say for individual player, we can typically categorize villain's style of play using all stats we have about the villain and then compare to general pool tendencies.

This should not be too far from the accuracy from any stat given every player has different kind of days (especially in micros) and also that we don't need to know exactly, only what is the most likely solution.

Agreed. I think you missed my last paragraph where I essentially said the same thing.

I'm just trying to point out the sample size variance issues. I read people on CC all the time making decisions on stats that have really high variance. For example, VPIP after ~40 hands, if it's really high or low, you can start making some decisions. But 4-bet% after that many hands, you can't. Same with 3-bet by position stats. They take a long time to really normalize, and that's why you need to use many other lower variance stats in conjunction with each other to form opinions and weigh that against player pool tendencies.

 

[braveslice]

Agreed. I think you missed my last paragraph where I essentially said the same thing.

Yeah, you are right, I missed that.