$50 NLHE Full Ring: 5-10 bet with any cards, is this normal?

S

Sidetracked

Legend
Joined
Jun 30, 2016
Total posts
1,294
Awards
2
At a full ring table, I'd say that was unusual and bad. Out of position etc etc.

Stick around and get all his money. It would only be a matter of time.
 
G

gustav197poker

Legend
Joined
May 2, 2019
Total posts
1,110
Awards
1
From MP the aperture range feels quite strong on a long table. Against that perception the SB has very few hands that want to play passively. In fact, it is best to combine a 3-bet range with possessions that wish to avoid post-flop play. Among these holdings are those hands that could have some connectivity. And certainly a combo suit and double gap is not the best candidate to attempt the robbery, but it does not seem totally crazy to me either. The reason is in the hands that your opponent is blocking. A combo: T7s is blocking combinations that have a low impact on your range. For example: A7s; K7s; Q7s; J7s; T7s; 76s. Such hands are more infrequent to open from middle positions at a long table. I'm not saying we can't open with those hands, but it's less likely. Instead it is more likely to open from MP with hands like: ATs; KTs; QTs. That is, the villain blocks a greater number of hands than hero does not open from MP. Therefore, his hand is a candidate to bluff a% of time to balance his range with the times that hero is more wide in aperture.
On the flop V checks on the wet texture. When he does this SB could have in his range:
1) A number of hands that have some defensible value, but are relatively vulnerable for this board.
2) Also V could have very strong hands that are inducing to bet the hero.
3) Finally the V could have a number of weak hands that are giving up. Although if V is competent, he could sometime bluff with a hand from this group.
So when hero bets on the flop, he is getting value mainly from group 1 hands. The other combinations do not provide additional EV.
That is why we are looking for a small size with our flop bet. The standard is 1/3 pot. Half pot is too much for texture and if villain is an average 50NL player he will quickly fold all dominated hands. And he will only continue with the top of his range.
An important line is completed on the turn. It is not unreasonable to include in range V at least 4 combos: KT that now formed a straight.
The river doesn't change anything and now the V has led with a bet of 2/3 pot. I suppose you've been unlucky, but V's bet doesn't seem blocking but a bit polarized expecting you to call with the weak hands that you wanted to protect on the flop. Most likely, V wants to get value from the stronger Axs that hero opened from a starting position. And if SB called your big flop bet, you should think that the most likely bluffs of V be oriented the Kxs and maybe the K of spade, that didn't complete his flush draw. The rest should beat you in this texture.
Greetings.
 
Vallet

Vallet

Legend
Joined
Jun 5, 2019
Total posts
1,785
Awards
12
At a full ring table, I'd say that was unusual and bad. Out of position etc etc.

Stick around and get all his money. It would only be a matter of time.
If such opponents get into the flop, they suck out your stack at a high speed. They raise high, because they do not mind the money and can afford it. I lost 70% of my bankroll to such people. Their hands were T7, J3, and so on. I have a hard job to get up from my knees.
 
Figaroo2

Figaroo2

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Total posts
7,356
Awards
16
Don't worry about this hand.
If the villain was any good he would have checkraised the flop and stacked you on the turn.
T7s 3bet from blinds is rubbish. He just got super lucky, he only hits a flush here 1 in 122 hands, so in effect with top 2 pair you are nearly always going to win this hand. In future against these villains just 4bet pre for value.
 
liuouhgkres

liuouhgkres

Visionary
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Total posts
798
Awards
2
Don't worry about this hand.
If the villain was any good he would have checkraised the flop and stacked you on the turn.
T7s 3bet from blinds is rubbish. He just got super lucky, he only hits a flush here 1 in 122 hands, so in effect with top 2 pair you are nearly always going to win this hand. In future against these villains just 4bet pre for value.
I think AQs is a very bad hand to 4bet, because you are dominated by AA-QQ and AK and even weak players don't often call with trash hands.
 
Figaroo2

Figaroo2

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Total posts
7,356
Awards
16
I think AQs is a very bad hand to 4bet, because you are dominated by AA-QQ and AK and even weak players don't often call with trash hands.
Generally I agree with your comment about AQ. Im talking specifically about playing v maniacs. I had a hand recently were I was cold 4 bet by a villian similar to the one described in this hand and found he had T2s.
If you know this villain is capable of 3betting T7s then I'm 4betting most strong hands.
 
TheBigFinn

TheBigFinn

Visionary
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Total posts
586
Awards
2
4-bet AQs vs. manic.

I think AQs is a very bad hand to 4bet, because you are dominated by AA-QQ and AK and even weak players don't often call with trash hands.

My first thought when watching this hand play was to 4-bet. True manics are 3-betting a wide range so the logic doesn't apply. I plugged an 18% range into my simulator and hero came out 60/0. When I lowered it to 12% Hero is a 55/45 favorite. But 4-1/2% 3-bet consisting of 99+, AJs+, AKo and hero is a 40/60 dog.

If Hero is sure Villain is a manic, he should 3-bet. If not just check and see the flop.

As played against the tight range, Hero is a 70/30 favorite and even more of a favorite against the wide range. TPTK meats the 3 suited board it appears. The J turn has little impact and I am getting stack my th elow flush same as Hero.
 
Top