6 MAX STT JJ

[KingCurtis]

What's your move on the flop?

pokerstars Game #20681505156: Tournament #110299648, $23+$2 Hold'em No Limit - Level I (10/20) - 2008/09/25 10:48:37 ET
Table '110299648 1' 6-max Seat #2 is the button
Seat 1: lunar111 (1360 in chips)
Seat 2: Got AMG? (1360 in chips)
Seat 3: stewpid1975 (1780 in chips)
Seat 4: mattsim23 (1500 in chips)
Seat 5: Owen Timothy (1500 in chips)
Seat 6: KingCurtis67 (1500 in chips)
stewpid1975: posts small blind 10
mattsim23: posts big blind 20
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to KingCurtis67 [Jd Jc]
Owen Timothy: folds
KingCurtis67: raises 60 to 80
lunar111: folds
Got AMG?: folds
stewpid1975: calls 70
mattsim23: folds
*** FLOP *** [3c 2s Qs]
stewpid1975: checks
KingCurtis67: ????

 

[c9h13no3]

WA/WB check back.

 

[Makwa]

Bet 1/2 pot, as a continuation bet, also a probe (if he comes back over top u r in trubble). I put him on AK or AJ, maybe a small pr up to 10s (wish I knew more about this plyr). If I'm right, he may fold there and then.

 

[Inscore77]

3/4 pot, leave enough behind to get away from the hand

 

[switch0723]

WA/WB check back.

^^^^ Any normal person should do this.

Since everything you do turns to gold, i just open shove here imo

 

[KingCurtis]

I c-bet about 1/2 the pot and he folded....I just wanted to know some other angles if any thanks guys

 

[NevRcall]

As it was the very beginning of the tournament, i assume you got no news about your opponents. Check was wiser but it might have been hard to get some more value from this board later (maybe a J/T...). A cooler card could have come on the turn (spades + overcard).

So nice choice to bet, and be pleased to see you were ahead with that little pot.

 

[c9h13no3]

Congrats, you kept him from drawing to 0-3 outs.

 

[S93]

Congrats, you kept him from drawing to 0-3 outs.

Why always the high and mighty aditute?

 

[KingCurtis]

Congrats, you kept him from drawing to 0-3 outs.

TY I ended up winning that.......so maybe winning things proves more than being a complete douche bag

 

[KingCurtis]

I c-bet about 1/2 the pot and he folded....I just wanted to know if someone could try and make me look like an idiot thanks guys

FMP

 

[switch0723]

c9 has a point here btw about how we should be checking this. It's standard wa/ab, if we bet we will only be called by a queen or a flush draw with likely an overcard giving them awsome equity against our hand. therefore we should check here and call the turn to allow bets from lower pp's and complete bluffs.

Although in a stt i don't mind betting here and then give up if called, since it avoids any tricky turn and river decisions if we are double barreled

 

[ChuckTs]

Bet 1/2 pot, as a continuation bet, also a probe (if he comes back over top u r in trubble). I put him on AK or AJ, maybe a small pr up to 10s (wish I knew more about this plyr). If I'm right, he may fold there and then.

Why do you want TT and worse to fold?

 

[BelgoSuisse]

WA/WB check back.

Somewhat true. But there are two overcards possible and a flush draw, so villain could actually not be so far behind here. Which also means there's a number of hands we can extract value from by betting.

Also, WA/WB applies not as much in tournaments as it does in cash games because with ICM, the chips we gain are worth less than the chips we loose, and therefore we should go for the least variance play when the EV difference is not too dramatic.

I think I would check behind most of the time, but i don't think a cbet is really a mistake here, tbh.

 

[kmixer]

I would have bet at least 1/2 the pot. I play a PL 6 handed tourney each day so if it were an actual PL game I would have bet the pot here.

 

[c9h13no3]

Somewhat true. But there are two overcards possible and a flush draw, so villain could actually not be so far behind here. Which also means there's a number of hands we can extract value from by betting.

Also, WA/WB applies not as much in tournaments as it does in cash games because with ICM, the chips we gain are worth less than the chips we loose, and therefore we should go for the least variance play when the EV difference is not too dramatic.

I think I would check behind most of the time, but i don't think a cbet is really a mistake here, tbh.

Isn't protecting our stack by not betting more important than protecting our hand? We're going to get sucked out less than the cost of betting, and if we just fold to any overcard/flushcard that's gotta be way less variance than paying ~50% of the pot to keep him from drawing to his 20-30% in equity.

And if you're that scared of variance, why not just give up, and not invest another dime in the pot?

 

[Inscore77]

Isn't protecting our stack by not betting more important than protecting our hand? We're going to get sucked out less than the cost of betting, and if we just fold to any overcard/flushcard that's gotta be way less variance than paying ~50% of the pot to keep him from drawing to his 20-30% in equity.

And if you're that scared of variance, why not just give up, and not invest another dime in the pot?

So instead of playing to win, play not to lose? That wont get you very far, but idk, maybe I'm missing something

 

[tenbob]

Very standard check here. I still don't get why on earth just because there is 2 of a suit on a flop ppl seem to count opponents having a flush draw. Sure its possible but should'nt be something that we factor into things very often, unless we see something different from betting patterns.

 

[c9h13no3]

So instead of playing to win, play not to lose? That wont get you very far, but idk, maybe I'm missing something

When you're early in a tournament holding a marginal holding, wouldn't playing to avoid losses & protect our stack be a good thing? Also, "play to win" is just a silly cliche and means pretty much nothing when it comes to hand analysis.

 

[Inscore77]

When you're early in a tournament holding a marginal holding, wouldn't playing to avoid losses & protect our stack be a good thing? Also, "play to win" is just a silly cliche and means pretty much nothing when it comes to hand analysis.

All I'm trying to say is why not make a smallish bet, maybe half the pot, to see where we truly stand. Him being in the small blind, he could have hit the 2 or the 3, and maybe we can get some more chips out of him. If I'm wrong, by all means correct me, I dont want to go around the HA section giving bad advice(by this I do not mean you) It's just what I would do, and what KC obv would do as well, however it could happen to be wrong

 

[c9h13no3]

1) If this guy has a pair smaller than J's, its better to check the flop to increase the likelyhood that we get value out of his hand. Is he more likely to call a flop bet, or a bet after we check two streets? Additionally, we're only getting 1 street of value from a hand like TT, so why does it have to be the flop?

2) We can easily get check-raised off our hand by someone on the draw, which is a disaster for us equity wise, since we still hold ~60% equity in the pot.

3) Protecting our hand doesn't have much value. If villain actually has AK, he has at most 30% equity. So if we check behind, he'll draw out on us 30% of the time by the river, costing us the 80 chips that we put into the original pot. If we bet, we're paying 90 chips to protect that 80 chips that we put in, from something that's not even 50% likely.

4) Our hand can't improve. We have 2 outs. So when we put money in bad, we're putting it in really bad, and we're not even building the pot to maximize what we win when we suck out.

5) Betting the flop makes the pot larger, and puts us in funny situations, like this one:

Flop: 3c 2s Qs
Villain checks.
Hero bets 90 into 180.
Villain calls 90.

Turn: 7d
Villain checks.
Hero checks.

River: 2c

Villain bets 225 into 360
Hero?

In situations like that, we could easily be getting bluffed off the hand by a flush draw, or value-towned by a Q. We still don't know "where we stand", and what's worse is we're making a decision for a decent chunk of our stack early in the tournament.

Basically you're arguing that we bet for information (that might be faulty), but we'll get that information through out the hand without betting. Lets sacrifice that info to keep the pot small, protect our stack, and increase the likelyhood that weaker hands will pay us that 1 street of value that we're looking for.

Btw, you've read the WA/WB thread right? There's not a phrase I hate more in poker than "bet to see where we stand". That's a TERRIBLE reason to bet. You're basically arguing that you pay money so that you don't lose money. It's totally counter-intuitive.

My plan for this hand is to check behind the flop & turn, v-betting the river. I'll call 1 street of betting as well, as long as its not too large. I'm also not putting a dime in if a K, A, or spade rolls off the deck.

 

[switch0723]

All I'm trying to say is why not make a smallish bet, maybe half the pot, to see where we truly stand. Him being in the small blind, he could have hit the 2 or the 3, and maybe we can get some more chips out of him. If I'm wrong, by all means correct me, I dont want to go around the HA section giving bad advice(by this I do not mean you) It's just what I would do, and what KC obv would do as well, however it could happen to be wrong

I havn't read most posts after my last one in this thread. But i just have to say there is no such thing as betting to see where we stand, that should never be a reason to bet. When we ever bet, it should be because its the most +ev decision or a bluff. In this scenario, betting is not the most +ev thing to do, checking back is

No you can go back to discussing whatever you were with c9

 

[mparker876]

1) If this guy has a pair smaller than J's, its better to check the flop to increase the likelyhood that we get value out of his hand. Is he more likely to call a flop bet, or a bet after we check two streets? Additionally, we're only getting 1 street of value from a hand like TT, so why does it have to be the flop?

2) We can easily get check-raised off our hand by someone on the draw, which is a disaster for us equity wise, since we still hold ~60% equity in the pot.

3) Protecting our hand doesn't have much value. If villain actually has AK, he has at most 30% equity. So if we check behind, he'll draw out on us 30% of the time by the river, costing us the 80 chips that we put into the original pot. If we bet, we're paying 90 chips to protect that 80 chips that we put in, from something that's not even 50% likely.

4) Our hand can't improve. We have 2 outs. So when we put money in bad, we're putting it in really bad, and we're not even building the pot to maximize what we win when we suck out.

5) Betting the flop makes the pot larger, and puts us in funny situations, like this one:

Flop: 3c 2s Qs
Villain checks.
Hero bets 90 into 180.
Villain calls 90.

Turn: 7d
Villain checks.
Hero checks.

River: 2c

Villain bets 225 into 360
Hero?

In situations like that, we could easily be getting bluffed off the hand by a flush draw, or value-towned by a Q. We still don't know "where we stand", and what's worse is we're making a decision for a decent chunk of our stack early in the tournament.

Basically you're arguing that we bet for information (that might be faulty), but we'll get that information through out the hand without betting. Lets sacrifice that info to keep the pot small, protect our stack, and increase the likelyhood that weaker hands will pay us that 1 street of value that we're looking for.

Btw, you've read the WA/WB thread right? There's not a phrase I hate more in poker than "bet to see where we stand". That's a TERRIBLE reason to bet. You're basically arguing that you pay money so that you don't lose money. It's totally counter-intuitive.

My plan for this hand is to check behind the flop & turn, v-betting the river. I'll call 1 street of betting as well, as long as its not too large. I'm also not putting a dime in if a K, A, or spade rolls off the deck.

My standard move in this situation would have been a c-bet generally resulting in a fold from the villain. After reading this post though, the check does make a lot more sense. I know that keeping pots small with mediocre holdings is the best strategy and definately a hole in my game. I'll have to keep this in mind next time the situation arises, thanks man.