$2.20 NL HE MTT: $2.20 6-max on PS - Bluffcatching weak top-pair

[DegenerateSheep]

Game

Hold'em

Game Format

No Limit

Table Format

MTT

Buy-in

2.20

Currency

$

Came across this interesting hand in the 2.20 6-max today, where we flop TP after defending vs a BTN open, but I had a few doubts:

- Are we ever Check-raising Top pairs here, and if so is it higher kickers, or lower kickers?
- The river seems good to bluff catch on, as there's an overcard to the top pair, and all the FD's brick. Is my reasoning here correct?

If there are other thought about the line I took, I'm always interested in hearing it!

pokerstars, $1.96 + $0.24 - Hold'em No Limit - 50/100 (12 ante) - 5 players
Replay this hand on CardsChat

UTG: 3,717 (37 bb)
CO: 8,585 (86 bb)
BU: 3,093 (31 bb)
SB: 4,662 (47 bb)
BB (Hero): 13,795 (138 bb)

Pre-Flop: (210) Hero is BB with 8♣ 9♣
2 players fold, BTN raises to 200, 1 fold, Hero calls 100

Flop: (510) 9♥ 3♥ 2♣ (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets 168, Hero calls 168

Turn: (846) 6♠ (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN checks

River: (846) Q♦ (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets 846, Hero calls 846

Spoiler: Showdown

*** SHOW DOWN ***
josepinheirom: shows [6c Qc] (two pair, Queens and Sixes)
danfre1588: mucks hand
josepinheirom collected 2538 from pot

 

[fundiver199]

Preflop
Standard defend.

Flop
If the opponent had opened from EP, this is definitely just a call, because then overpairs make up a larger percentage of his range. When he opened from BTN, its a closer spot. However one of the things, we should always think about before check-raising the flop, is if we are willing to stack off or not. If BTN was shallower like 20 BB, then I would be willing to stack off, but for 31 BB I think, its a bit to marginal. So I do think, the play here is to just check-call, even though it leaves him in control and allow him to potentially draw out on you or outplay you on the later streets.

Turn
54 came in, but overall this is a pretty big brick, which mean two things. The first is, that if you were ahead on the flop, you are almost certainly still ahead now. And the other effect of a brick is, that he is probably not going to bet at a super high frequency. So instead of check-raising the flop there could be an argument for check-calling, as you did, and then leading out on a card like this, which is very unlikely to have helped him.

Checking with intentions to call is also fine though, so I am only writing this to make you think a little more out of the box about alternative lines. Sometimes doing something unconventional like call flop, lead turn might catch the opponent off guard and could potentially create more mistakes than taking a line, they are more used to.

River
So now came one of the cards, you did not want to see. The first decision here is actually, if there is any argument in leading out to get called by worse. It would need to be some sort of block bet like 40% pot, but there are some hands in his range like 77-88, A6 or maybe even AK high, you could potentially get paid by. And the intention would then be to fold to a raise.

The Q is however a bad card for you, since he is far more likely to have it than you. So there is definitely also merit to checking and allow him to represent, that he hit that Q. However when he bets full pot, I actually think, he has some kind of strong hand far more often than a bluff. And of course you are also not getting the best price. So I can actually see a fold here, even though it sucks, and even though you are fairly high in your range.

Spoiler
Yeah he had it, and I am not surpriced about that at all. Only thing slightly surpricing is, that it was Q6 and not a hand like AQ or KQ.

 

[300HPGOD]

The above analysis is very good and spot on imo. I think flop is somewhat close between check raising and check calling but I like check calling better. Turn is close to a lead vs check calling. Id say im pretty indifferent about this spot since I dont think big pairs bet so small on this flop being that there were two hearts out there. Maybe if they had AA with the ace of hearts they could do this but to me its more AK-A10 and possibly even some heart draws that he is pricing thereself in while keeping the betting lead. When we do check the turn though, I believe it really makes them define their hand and when they check back to us all the big pairs are gone and we can be very confident we are ahead.

River is bad as as I think (same as above) that villain has AK through A10 a lot here and this helps them. Although every overcard here could help them and its not as bad as the ace falling. Given that I would believe part of their range is flush draws that now missed I would be checking this every time here with the intention to call almost all bets with pot size being one of the bets I would still call. If they are bluffing, they will probably be going big here so this fits that and they could be bluffing AK, AJ, A10 the same way. With that, its not exactly a snap call but I do believe this is a call.

 

[eetenor]

Came across this interesting hand in the 2.20 6-max today, where we flop TP after defending vs a BTN open, but I had a few doubts:

- Are we ever Check-raising Top pairs here, and if so is it higher kickers, or lower kickers?
- The river seems good to bluff catch on, as there's an overcard to the top pair, and all the FD's brick. Is my reasoning here correct?

If there are other thought about the line I took, I'm always interested in hearing it!

PokerStars, $1.96 + $0.24 - Hold'em No Limit - 50/100 (12 ante) - 5 players
Replay this hand on CardsChat

UTG: 3,717 (37 bb)
CO: 8,585 (86 bb)
BU: 3,093 (31 bb)
SB: 4,662 (47 bb)
BB (Hero): 13,795 (138 bb)

Pre-Flop: (210) Hero is BB with 8♣ 9♣
2 players fold, BTN raises to 200, 1 fold, Hero calls 100

Flop: (510) 9♥ 3♥ 2♣ (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets 168, Hero calls 168

Turn: (846) 6♠ (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN checks

River: (846) Q♦ (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets 846, Hero calls 846

Spoiler: Showdown

*** SHOW DOWN ***
josepinheirom: shows [6c Qc] (two pair, Queens and Sixes)
danfre1588: mucks hand
josepinheirom collected 2538 from pot

So I am running this hand in the free version of GTOWIZARD- you get 10 free hands every day---it is an awesome tool---free only allows 8 handed games not 6 but thought I would share it anyway as we do not need to be exact at this buy-in level

Preflop GTO this is a 3 bet hand 4x sizing preferred 98% of the time--- GTO has us shoving several hands at this stack depth

Flop ---using the 2% of times we call data
Villain bets 30% pot GTO has two small sizes 40% pot or 25% pot but we can assume V is using 1 sizing here most often-GTO is 77% of range small bet so V is close to GTO here something to make a note of for future play
GTO has us check raise 76.5% freq two sizes- 5bb 44% 7bb 33%-------Our V used simplified sizing so we can also simplify our sizing -to 4x V size
Why? Our assumptions in low buy-in games is our V are not playing GTO ranges even if they using near GTO sizing- Therefore we can simplify our actions
Our hand needs protection on flop but can still get value from draws - by betting larger flop we can end the hand on the turn when called if we so choose due to the much lower SPR
As our V are not using full GTO ranges we can also over fold to V Shoving on flop after we have shown that much "strength" -an exploit term still viable in lower buy-in games- GTO our raise has balance so is not just showing "strength"

Turn as played-GTO has us check now V is also supposed to check the hand they checked-so they did play GTO turn

As played ----GTOWizard wants us to lead river 98% of the time- if we check it wants us to call 100%

If we look at this hand in particular we can see how we want to deviate from GTO play- We can play more exploit on rivers and over fold- the reason is the range of hands that GTO expects the BTN to bluff when betting this sizing -many of which standard V are frequently not using-Also our V often check down so we do not have to lead marginal hands and our V check scare cards often on turns and the 6 could be a scare card to them etc etc

As others have stated with no concrete player data at this buy-in level-on this river I to would fold as this bet leans to value most often

I highly recommend the free version of GTO wizard by the way it is great for looking at ranges street by street and then diving deeper by estimating what our non GTO V are using as ranges on each street
As I stated here though this V seems to be playing with a basic frame work of GTO so if you run into them again you can note them as moderate skill until you gather further data
Which is another handy aspect of using GTOWIZARD

 

[eetenor]

So I am running this hand in the free version of GTOWIZARD- you get 10 free hands every day---it is an awesome tool---free only allows 8 handed games not 6 but thought I would share it anyway as we do not need to be exact at this buy-in level

Preflop GTO this is a 3 bet hand 4x sizing preferred 98% of the time--- GTO has us shoving several hands at this stack depth

Flop ---using the 2% of times we call data
Villain bets 30% pot GTO has two small sizes 40% pot or 25% pot but we can assume V is using 1 sizing here most often-GTO is 77% of range small bet so V is close to GTO here something to make a note of for future play
GTO has us check raise 76.5% freq two sizes- 5bb 44% 7bb 33%-------Our V used simplified sizing so we can also simplify our sizing -to 4x V size
Why? Our assumptions in low buy-in games is our V are not playing GTO ranges even if they using near GTO sizing- Therefore we can simplify our actions
Our hand needs protection on flop but can still get value from draws - by betting larger flop we can end the hand on the turn when called if we so choose due to the much lower SPR
As our V are not using full GTO ranges we can also over fold to V Shoving on flop after we have shown that much "strength" -an exploit term still viable in lower buy-in games- GTO our raise has balance so is not just showing "strength"

Turn as played-GTO has us check now V is also supposed to check the hand they checked-so they did play GTO turn

As played ----GTOWizard wants us to lead river 98% of the time- if we check it wants us to call 100%

If we look at this hand in particular we can see how we want to deviate from GTO play- We can play more exploit on rivers and over fold- the reason is the range of hands that GTO expects the BTN to bluff when betting this sizing -many of which standard V are frequently not using-Also our V often check down so we do not have to lead marginal hands and our V check scare cards often on turns and the 6 could be a scare card to them etc etc

As others have stated with no concrete player data at this buy-in level-on this river I to would fold as this bet leans to value most often

I highly recommend the free version of GTO wizard by the way it is great for looking at ranges street by street and then diving deeper by estimating what our non GTO V are using as ranges on each street
As I stated here though this V seems to be playing with a basic frame work of GTO so if you run into them again you can note them as moderate skill until you gather further data
Which is another handy aspect of using GTOWIZARD

Just to make it clear it is not ten distinct hands you get on GTOWIZ if you make adjustments to each hand each adjustment is considered a new hand so you could use all 10 adjustments on one spot

 

[fundiver199]

As played ----GTOWizard wants us to lead river 98% of the time

That is actually interesting, and it falls in line with something, I have recently been trying to incorporate more in my own game. Which is leading the river with in between hands like this, after the turn got checked through. The idea behind this is, that when the opponent checks back turn, usually their range consist mostly of medium strong hands with some showdown value or hands, that are simply giving up.

In this hand, its almost impossible to imagine, that Hero did not have the best hand on the turn, when it went check-check. Because if Villain had anything better, they would for sure have bet it for value and protection on a very dynamic but still pretty safe board. So unless Hero got rivered, as in fact he did, he has the best hand here.

So why not go for some thin value and let Villain make a tough decision with his bluff catcher? It also gives us the advantage, that we control the bet sizing. And in this case we would not have bet full pot, so we get away cheaper. This is the idea, which is sometimes referred to as a "block bet". And while I dont believe in the idea of leading only to bet less, than we think, the opponent might have bet, it is an added benefit of leading rather than check-calling.

As others have stated with no concrete player data at this buy-in level-on this river I to would fold as this bet leans to value most often

Yeah I really think a full pot sized bet on the river, especially after the turn got checked through, is a bit of a bet sizing tell in micro and low stakes online games. If the Villain had a strong but not nutted hand like even QJ or QT, he most likely would not choose this sizing. He would bet something smaller like half pot, because he is not that sure about his hand. And if he wanted to bluff, he would most likely pick another sizing as well. Either smaller or perhaps moving all-in. Hitting the "pot" button on the river, especially in a small pot, is something, recreational players love to do, when they are strong.

So in a sense this hand is a bit of an annoying cooler. The Villain hit a runner-runner two pair, which allowed him to bet so big on the river. If the board had run out 5-Q or 7-Q rather than 6-Q, Hero would still have lost the hand, but he would not have had to pay off a full pot sized bet on the river. And of course the way to exploit a bet sizing tell like this is to overfold. So Hero could have punished Villain by not paying him off.

 

[DegenerateSheep]

That is actually interesting, and it falls in line with something, I have recently been trying to incorporate more in my own game. Which is leading the river with in between hands like this, after the turn got checked through. The idea behind this is, that when the opponent checks back turn, usually their range consist mostly of medium strong hands with some showdown value or hands, that are simply giving up.

In this hand, its almost impossible to imagine, that Hero did not have the best hand on the turn, when it went check-check. Because if Villain had anything better, they would for sure have bet it for value and protection on a very dynamic but still pretty safe board. So unless Hero got rivered, as in fact he did, he has the best hand here.

So why not go for some thin value and let Villain make a tough decision with his bluff catcher? It also gives us the advantage, that we control the bet sizing. And in this case we would not have bet full pot, so we get away cheaper. This is the idea, which is sometimes referred to as a "block bet". And while I dont believe in the idea of leading only to bet less, than we think, the opponent might have bet, it is an added benefit of leading rather than check-calling.

Yeah I really think a full pot sized bet on the river, especially after the turn got checked through, is a bit of a bet sizing tell in micro and low stakes online games. If the Villain had a strong but not nutted hand like even QJ or QT, he most likely would not choose this sizing. He would bet something smaller like half pot, because he is not that sure about his hand. And if he wanted to bluff, he would most likely pick another sizing as well. Either smaller or perhaps moving all-in. Hitting the "pot" button on the river, especially in a small pot, is something, recreational players love to do, when they are strong.

So in a sense this hand is a bit of an annoying cooler. The Villain hit a runner-runner two pair, which allowed him to bet so big on the river. If the board had run out 5-Q or 7-Q rather than 6-Q, Hero would still have lost the hand, but he would not have had to pay off a full pot sized bet on the river. And of course the way to exploit a bet sizing tell like this is to overfold. So Hero could have punished Villain by not paying him off.

I think I'll be looking to incorporate this idea of leading rivers after x/x turn lines more into my gameplan as well. I would like that a fair bit since I like being the agressor, and going x/b/c 3 times in a row makes me uncomfortable. It also aligns with something I heard a pro say about people who underbluff:

- you can bet into them and expect honest river raises

This puts us in situations where small block bets are unlikely to be bluff-raised, which allows us to play perfectly while still getting value from hands we beat (in this example V might have called his Q6 for a 30-40% bet if the river was non-Q, but would just have checked back otherwise).

 

[eetenor]

I think I'll be looking to incorporate this idea of leading rivers after x/x turn lines more into my gameplan as well. I would like that a fair bit since I like being the agressor, and going x/b/c 3 times in a row makes me uncomfortable. It also aligns with something I heard a pro say about people who underbluff:

- you can bet into them and expect honest river raises

This puts us in situations where small block bets are unlikely to be bluff-raised, which allows us to play perfectly while still getting value from hands we beat (in this example V might have called his Q6 for a 30-40% bet if the river was non-Q, but would just have checked back otherwise).

- you can bet into them and expect honest river raises------
This is soo true sooo often at these stakes it is why we can lead and then fold on rivers--it is really a great way to increase our ROI at very little risk versus 80% of player pools