$50 NL HE 6-max: what is your opinion on this hand both preflop and postflop?

[gustav197poker]

Game

Hold'em

Game Format

No Limit

Stakes

$.25/$.50

Table Format

6-max (6 seats)

Currency

$

Additional data:

They refer to a previous hand played by 2 other players, one of which is the V I'm up against.

In said hand V from BB calls an UTG opening (2.2x)
Flop: 2h-Kd-Ts
V called a cbet: 1/2 pot.
Turn: 4s
V calls second barrel UTG: bet size: 2/3 pot.
River: Qd
x/x and V shows: AdQh and wins the hand.


Now we go to the hand that concerns us, where I am interested in knowing your opinion about the following sequence. Here I am playing from BB and the V is the CO:

pokerstars, Hold'em No Limit - $0.25/$0.50 - 6 players
Replay this hand on CardsChat - https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/125dENNlS

UTG: $46.68 (93 bb)
MP: $151.31 (303 bb)
CO: $58.45 (117 bb)
BU: $50.00 (100 bb)
SB: $61.38 (123 bb)
BB (Hero): $68.94 (138 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.75) Hero is BB with 7♣ T♣
2 players fold, CO raises to $1.10, 2 players fold, Hero 3-bets to $3.55, CO calls $2.45

Flop: ($7.35) 5♣ 7♠ K♠ (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $3.49, Hero calls $3.49

Turn: ($14.33) K♣ (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $7.25, Hero raises to $16.25, CO calls $9

River: ($46.83) Q♣ (2 players)
Hero bets $45.65 (all-in), CO folds

Total pot: $46.83 (Rake: $2)
BB (Hero) wins $44.83

 

[Station_Master]

Villain looked to be quite sticky in the first hand. While it's only one hand if this is his player profile then it's not the type of player I would make a light 3bet against, because you really just want a fold pre. I would assume T7s should normally be a call against CO and only very rarely 3bet.

Postflop
Seems fine to check flop oop especially with middle pair, though K high boards are often cbet frequently in theory and you do invite aggression by checking. On the other hand if you cbet and get called, it will make turns and rivers tricky.

On the turn, villain can have a lot of bluffs still as well Kx. I think hands like TT are more likely to check back. So I think continuing is the beat play, I would typically call here given we could have the best hand, though I dont mind the raise (once you get called it looks like villain has a K or flush draw).

River - you get there and easy shove, shame villain folded, though he could have been on a spade draw. What would you have done on a blank? - this is the only issue with the turn play as I think if you shove, a K never folds (though spade draws will fold, whereas without raising they might have bluffed you off the best hand on river).

 

[Aballinamion]

Additional data:

They refer to a previous hand played by 2 other players, one of which is the V I'm up against.

In said hand V from BB calls an UTG opening (2.2x)
Flop: 2h-Kd-Ts
V called a cbet: 1/2 pot.
Turn: 4s
V calls second barrel UTG: bet size: 2/3 pot.
River: Qd
x/x and V shows: AdQh and wins the hand.


Now we go to the hand that concerns us, where I am interested in knowing your opinion about the following sequence. Here I am playing from BB and the V is the CO:

PokerStars, Hold'em No Limit - $0.25/$0.50 - 6 players
Replay this hand on CardsChat - https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/125dENNlS

UTG: $46.68 (93 bb)
MP: $151.31 (303 bb)
CO: $58.45 (117 bb)
BU: $50.00 (100 bb)
SB: $61.38 (123 bb)
BB (Hero): $68.94 (138 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.75) Hero is BB with 7♣ T♣
2 players fold, CO raises to $1.10, 2 players fold, Hero 3-bets to $3.55, CO calls $2.45

Flop: ($7.35) 5♣ 7♠ K♠ (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $3.49, Hero calls $3.49

Turn: ($14.33) K♣ (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $7.25, Hero raises to $16.25, CO calls $9

River: ($46.83) Q♣ (2 players)
Hero bets $45.65 (all-in), CO folds

Total pot: $46.83 (Rake: $2)
BB (Hero) wins $44.83

Thanks for posting this hand to the forum mate. As Jack, the ripper, let’s go through pieces and parts:

Villain:

Villain calls AQo from the blinds versus EP, which could mean it is a balanced player: I don’t know why, but most players are 3-betting AQ+ 90% of times from this position, thus becoming unbalanced. Some players are 3-betting QQ+ in the same spot 95% of times or more, which is even harder to understand.
When we call with those hands, villain would hardly assume we have it, thus bluffing more than they would if we have made a 3-bet preflop.
All in all, villain seems a coherent opponent, given this line you provided.

Now the hand in question:

Suited connectors are good to 3-bet and flat, given villain’s fair sizing. If we are calling too much we are wrong, if we are 3-betting too much we are wrong and the same goes for folding.
T7s is a hand that has equity and playability postflop, plus we can make villain fold right off the bat, collecting dead blinds. Villain calls and we see a flop.
Villain is calling here with a lot of hands, maybe it would fold some J9o, Q8o, Q6s, or a baby pocket pair, but we must assume villain still has a wide range to play IP (being a decent player we assume villain knows that BB would 3-bet light or for stealing, thus it widens its range).
This flop is good to us because we have some equity and we are checking more than betting versus LP. Our 3-bet range is not so strong from this position and we elect to go for pot control.
We have some hands that could bet, such as AK, KQ, KJ, KK, AA, but not that much, so if we are checking more than betting versus decent opponents we are going fine.
Villain goes closely of 1/2 and we cannot fold, for we own BDF and a 2PMK (two pair medium kicker). If we had the combos of spades we could be raising, but calling seems fine.
Villain is betting its kings and flush draws of spades (values and bluffs).
OTT we raise 1/2 pot because now our range is getting weaker, and we would do the same if we had AK and KQ.
On the river we elect to jam. Well, not a great fan of this line but I see the point in doing it. When we jam river we assume villain lost its draws of spades and if it has a king it will have a hard time calling.
But we have a hand with decent showdown value, and we could check to realize our equity.
The problem of jamming this river is that we are turning showdown value into bluff and on top of that villain could simply fold all of its losing hands and call us only with hands that have us beat, such as KQ, huge maybe K5s and QQ and BDFs of clubs that have us owned.
If we want to extract value of a decent player here on the river, we should be checking more or betting thin to try to get action of Kx.
But for this line it seems villain had just the draws of spades, so it missed and folded to a jam: one more point, when we do check here we allow villain to try to bluff its missed draws, assuming we raised turn with some Kx and now we would check awaiting villain to check behind and realize our equity.
Nonetheless, this hand was well played for both players. Nice hand and keep on moving!

Best regards;

 

[sumdumguy]

Dude, did you put up with the pressure, two K's on the table and in the end it gave you the color? Did you already analyze the opponent? I imagine that you already had time watching how he played, he could also have the K and realize that in the end I was going to lose with the color or that it was me! Maybe I'm drawing too many profound conclusions.