Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Poker Education & Beginners Questions / Old Hand Analysis Section /

25NL - Flopped Quads Against TAG, Should I C-Bet?

 
Old
Default
25NL - Flopped Quads Against TAG, Should I C-Bet? - Tue Apr 12, 2011, 02:29 AM
(#1)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Here's the situation: The villain in this hand had only played about twenty hands at this table, so my observations of them were limited. My HUD was showing something like 11/7 over those twentyish hands, though. So, they seemed pretty TAG, but I wasn't totally sure. I was running something like 23/17 at the table.

So, I got dealt AK in second position and opened for 3x. The button 3xed my open, and when action was folded back to me, I stopped to think. I didn't want to run into a dominating high pair, and from what I had seen, the button was pretty tight. I put him on a high pair or AK, and considered folding. I ended up deciding that folding would be way too nitty, so I 4bet with the intention of folding to a 5bet. I was a bit surprised when the button called.

The flop came KKK, giving me quads, which narrowed my perception of my opponent's range to a high pair, since AK was now an impossible holding. Also, since I had flopped the unbeatable nuts, my mind went straight to value mode. I assumed at this point that my opponent had flopped a boat, and I figured that Zeebo's Theorem applied. I decided that if I checked, it might be suspicious (not really suspicious, but it might make me look like I had AA or QQ, if not the K), and I also decided that if I bet, my opponent was almost guaranteed to come along. So I made a standard 75% c-bet, assuming that JJ+ would never fold. What do you guys think?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (6 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

BB ($29.55)
UTG ($25)
Panicky (MP) ($45.39)
CO ($27.70)
Button ($25)
SB ($23.96)

Preflop: Panicky is MP with K, A
1 fold, Panicky bets $0.75, 1 fold, Button raises to $2.25, 2 folds, Panicky raises to $5.25, Button calls $3

Flop: ($10.85) K, K, K (2 players)
Panicky bets $7.73

Last edited by PanickyPoker; Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 02:31 AM..
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 02:36 AM
(#2)
o0o0AcEo0o0's Avatar
Since: Jan 2011
Posts: 218
BronzeStar
I think they got all in and you stacked him off haha
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 02:52 AM
(#3)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
For those who do not know, Zeebo's Theorem States: No one EVER folds a full house (my words, not exact quote).

This means that if you hold a hand which is better than a FH, or hold a "best" FH that cannot be beaten by quads, your best option is a lead out.

To me, the BEST option here is the one most likely to get you at least 1 CALL, and preferably a couple.

You are spot on in thinking a check now, after you 4 bet, may look very "fishy"...he may wake up to the fact you hold AK/AA, and fold after 1 small bet at the flop, or just check behind. Afterall, if he bets AT ALL, and you check/call, you plant the possiblity you do have AK in his mind, right?

I'd play this flop exactly like I held JJ, and PRAY he holds AA/QQ, or "reads" me for having TT if he has JJ. If you CHECK, about the only way you get paid more is if you check/call, and a Q/J hits the turn...

So I think about the best you can do is make your "normal" C-Bet, and pray he holds a hand strong enough to call. If he does, you are likely stacking him, and if not, you probably weren't getting paid without a LUCKY turn card anyway.

Last edited by JDean; Tue Apr 12, 2011 at 02:54 AM..
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 03:40 AM
(#4)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Thanks, JDean. I forgot to mention that part of the intention of the c-bet was to look suspicious in its own way. I figured this: If I checked, what would that mean? Almost nothing hit this board, but if my range is JJ+ or AK, I have a bet-worthy hand (at the very least, I should have a full house) and should be at least trying to capitalize on fold equity. Checking makes me look very strong, i.e. like I don't need to bet, i.e. like I'm at the top of my range (AA, AK).

On the other hand, c-betting could be a bluff, since it is such a standard bluff to make. Therefore, c-betting actually makes my range look bigger than if I just checked, because I'd do it with every hand I would 4bet preflop. (JJ+ and AK, and preflop 4bet bluffs as well). If my opponent figured this out, then their correct move should have been to rejam if they thought I was bluffing.

The only hitch in this logic is that it seems to me that even if they narrow my range to JJ+ and AK, they actually don't have the equity to call with any weaker than AA (or maybe QQ; I haven't calculated it mathematically). I just wanted to make my range look bigger in order to get them to rejam, but I'm starting to think that I was actually theoretically folding out the bottom of their range. What do you think, JDean? I'm starting to question my play now. I thought it was excellent before I started this follow-up post.
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 07:49 AM
(#5)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
dude...

You are WAY over thinking this one!

The fact is, the only thing you can do is PRAY for a call.

If you check the flop, and he checks behind, then you kida gotta check the turn as well to HOPE he then bluffs. If he flatted your 4 bet with AQ, then you are ONLY getting a call if he spikes. I'll be honest, even JJ/TT is not going to be betting into your checks very often on this flop after your 4 bet...ya know?

If he DOES hold QQ+, then it is quite possible he will "read" your normal C-Bet as a "bluff", and put YOU on JJ/TT. If he DOESN'T hold QQ+, then he is going to check this down, and you aren;t getting any value anyway, or at MOST you are getting 1 street.

When you flop a "monster", the TYPICAL thinking is "check 'til he catches", but unless he holds AA, there isn;t any way for him to "catch up" on this board if YOU already hold a strong pocket pair...see?

So you are relying on him making a "mistake" here to get paid, OR relying on him having AA or QQ to get paid. Either way, betitng EARLY gives the best chance of him making that "mistake", or calling on a good, but 2nd best, hand.
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 01:13 PM
(#6)
RockerguyAA's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,089
BronzeStar
He's not calling your 4-bet with less than a medium pocket pair. The last thing you want to happen is slowplay the flop and see an A hit the turn, killing the action. It is extremely rare that anyone can come to the conclusion that their opponent has quads so try and get max value from TT+.

On a side note, I was watching a late night poker show a few weeks ago and someone actually laid down a best full house to quads. The way the hand played out to the river, he came to the conclusion that the villains hand was polarized sharply to either quads or a huge bluff. They were heads up at the end of the single table tournament so I'm sure he had a very good feel for the villains style. My point I'm trying to make though, he had all night to feel out the villain and had all 5 streets to come to this conclusion. So in your situation, the villain hasn't had a lot of time to really get to know you, and he has to make a commitment decision on the flop with much less information. There is no way he is ever going to put you on quads and fold. His only real consideration is if you have AA if he has a smaller pocket pair.
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 03:01 PM
(#7)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,479
(Head Trainer)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanickyPoker View Post
I put him on a high pair or AK, and considered folding. I ended up deciding that folding would be way too nitty, so I 4bet with the intention of folding to a 5bet.
4b/folding AK caught my attention. Assignment for Panicky: Verify if this is good or not by evaluating the math of the situation, and the meta game considerations.

I agree with c-betting the flop, for the reasons you said, it looks much less suspicious as the preflop 4-bettor. Pray he's got AA and slowplayed it pre (failing to 5B). I'd be really surprised if he stacks off with QQ. Of course if he's bad he will, so I guess what I mean is I hope he's bad. lol

Dave
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 04:29 PM
(#8)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLangolier View Post
4b/folding AK caught my attention. Assignment for Panicky: Verify if this is good or not by evaluating the math of the situation, and the meta game considerations.
If my pot odds/equity calculations are correct (removing rake from the calculation), after my 4bet, if I was 5bet/jammed overtop of, I would need 38.5% equity in order to proceed. I would be ranging the guy on JJ+ or AK. Of course, like you know, my ranging is not all that sharp, but if I assessed his range correctly, I'd have about 39.5% equity. So I believe that 4bet/folding would be close, but perhaps an incorrect play.

Do you agree with that, Dave? I didn't think it would be this close, but when I 4bet, I sized it with the intention of making a fold mathematically correct. Apparently I didn't size it quite small enough.
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 04:47 PM
(#9)
RockerguyAA's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,089
BronzeStar
I don't really see the point of 4-betting with AK if your not willing to get it all-in preflop. If the guy is willing to 3-bet with JJ or QQ he is probably willing to 5-bet with them too.
 
Old
Default
Tue Apr 12, 2011, 04:58 PM
(#10)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
The idea is that he might 3bet with weaker than that. 5betting narrows his range in my mind to only the best possible hands. I've seen people 3bet AJ from that guy's spot, but they'd have to be an idiot to 5bet them. If he 5bets me, I assume that I am not ahead of his range anymore, and I am behind enough to fold. And with the rake consideration, it actually might have been a good fold.
 
Old
Default
Wed Apr 13, 2011, 03:26 AM
(#11)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
Bump.
 
Old
Default
Wed Apr 13, 2011, 10:48 AM
(#12)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,479
(Head Trainer)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanickyPoker View Post
If my pot odds/equity calculations are correct (removing rake from the calculation), after my 4bet, if I was 5bet/jammed overtop of, I would need 38.5% equity in order to proceed. I would be ranging the guy on JJ+ or AK. Of course, like you know, my ranging is not all that sharp, but if I assessed his range correctly, I'd have about 39.5% equity. So I believe that 4bet/folding would be close, but perhaps an incorrect play.

Do you agree with that, Dave? I didn't think it would be this close, but when I 4bet, I sized it with the intention of making a fold mathematically correct. Apparently I didn't size it quite small enough.
I show you'd be calling 19.75 to win a pot of 50.35, so your break even point is 39.2%. Hand equity I show as:

JJ+, AK = 39.8% (I used stove)
QQ+, AK = 38.8%
KK+, AK = 37%
JJ+, AK, JTs (adding a bluff hand in) = 42.3%

So yeah, it's very close mathematically. When the math is this close, it means it doesn't matter much if you call or fold, long term you will still end up with about the same pile of chips you started with after thousands of trials.

So, given that it's very close mathematically, what about meta-game considerations?
 
Old
Default
Wed Apr 13, 2011, 12:48 PM
(#13)
RockerguyAA's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,089
BronzeStar
I think my biggest worry is 4-betting the guy, then folding AK to a 5-bet when he holds QQ. I think that would be a really bad fold. If I don't know anything about my opponent I might call his 3-bet rather than 4-bet with AK and see how the flop goes. That way I can avoid having to consider folding 25% of my stack while I have 50% equity vs QQ or 39.8% equity vs JJ+ and AK (Thanks Langolier).

It really helps to have some history with the villain in these kind of situations. Obviously if he is ultra tight preflop it would be crazy to get all the money in with AK. I'd be less likely to 4-bet with AK if villain raised UTG. I'd be MUCH more likely to 4-bet with AK if I raised late position and the villain 3-bet from the blinds and is a known aggressive blind defender. If I raised early position with AK and the villain then 3-bets from the blinds, I'd probably treat it the same as if the villain raised UTG himself. If he is a thinking player he will give your early position raise more respect, so therefore you should give his out of position 3-bet more respect as well.

Last edited by RockerguyAA; Wed Apr 13, 2011 at 12:51 PM..
 
Old
Default
Wed Apr 13, 2011, 01:42 PM
(#14)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
I think that folding AK to QQ is a fine fold if QQ is the bottom of the guy's range (or if AK is the only hand that's worse). The reason is, where he'd play QQ, he'd also play KK and AA. So you can sort of treat QQ, KK, and AA as one hand, and measure my equity against it. I may be fine against QQ by itself, but I do awful against QQ+. I think treating them as one hand helps understand why the fold is good, because you will never range a guy on QQ exactly preflop. KK and AA will just about always be a consideration, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLangolier View Post
So, given that it's very close mathematically, what about meta-game considerations?
I'm not totally sure what you're getting at, but if I understand correctly, here's what I think the considerations would be:

1) If I fold to a 5bet, I don't get to see what my opponent had. If I called and they turned over AQ, that'd be welcome information for my future hands with them, because it would mean that they're probably not as good as I've given them credit for.

2) If I fold, it means that I'm willing to 4bet/fold. If anyone at the table is paying attention, then they might take that as a green light to bluff me off of my better hands.

3) But since I'd never played against these opponents from what I remember, they may all be casual players who aren't paying attention, and who I might not see again. I don't believe that the impressions I leave, or receive, would carry much weight in the long run.

Therefore, in this particular case, it still seems like a close decision. Meta-game considerations seem to argue for the 4bet/call line, though. I'm curious if anyone thinks I should have sized my 4bet bigger in order to make a 4bet/call correct mathematically. If I did that, then I'd see my opponent's cards, and I wouldn't leave the impression that I'm easy to get off a hand.
 
Old
Default
Wed Apr 13, 2011, 02:19 PM
(#15)
RockerguyAA's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,089
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanickyPoker View Post
The reason is, where he'd play QQ, he'd also play KK and AA. So you can sort of treat QQ, KK, and AA as one hand, and measure my equity against it.
That is true. Treating the three as one hand and measuring the equity vs it is a good idea. It seems like a good place to start with the decision making. Then adjust accordingly to any reads/stats you have, position, and blind battle considerations.
 
Old
Default
Thu Apr 14, 2011, 02:49 AM
(#16)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,479
(Head Trainer)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanickyPoker View Post
I'm not totally sure what you're getting at, but if I understand correctly, here's what I think the considerations would be:

1) If I fold to a 5bet, I don't get to see what my opponent had. If I called and they turned over AQ, that'd be welcome information for my future hands with them, because it would mean that they're probably not as good as I've given them credit for.

2) If I fold, it means that I'm willing to 4bet/fold. If anyone at the table is paying attention, then they might take that as a green light to bluff me off of my better hands.

3) But since I'd never played against these opponents from what I remember, they may all be casual players who aren't paying attention, and who I might not see again. I don't believe that the impressions I leave, or receive, would carry much weight in the long run.

Therefore, in this particular case, it still seems like a close decision. Meta-game considerations seem to argue for the 4bet/call line, though. I'm curious if anyone thinks I should have sized my 4bet bigger in order to make a 4bet/call correct mathematically. If I did that, then I'd see my opponent's cards, and I wouldn't leave the impression that I'm easy to get off a hand.
Good.

The point of the meta-game question was to get you thinking about the consequences of 4b/folding. Maybe good or bad, or just something to be aware of. If you 4b/get it in and turn up AK that's probably not much of a revelation as a lot of guys stack off AK pre 100 bb's deep these days. When you 4b fold it says something though. What it might says to those paying attention:

- You are possibly capable of folding a really good hand if you think you're beat
- You are capable of 4b bluffing

The 2nd point is important, if they think you have some bluffs in your 4b range you will get more action on your big pairs in the future 4 betting them. I know it's your first session with this player, but this is the kind of thing someone might note on you. In either case, if they think they can move you off big hands, they will be more likely to play back at you in the 3b/4b/5b game. If they think you have bluffs in your 4b range, they will be more likely to play back at you in the 3b/4b/5b game. In the future you will absolutely want to 4b your AA and KK because of this metagame, you'll get it in vs. QQ/JJ and AK much more often where as a TAG might not stack off JJ so quickly pre vs other players.

Just some food for thought.
 
Old
Default
Thu Apr 14, 2011, 03:35 AM
(#17)
PanickyPoker's Avatar
Since: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,168
I hadn't thought of it that way. I did end up thinking more about the question after I posted my answer above, and I did consider that I might get more action and be able to use that to my benefit if I end up getting 5bet bluffed more. But I didn't consider that my 4bets might be seen as bluffs if I folded, and I might end up getting some villains to open up their ranges against me. That is interesting.

 
Old
Default
Thu Apr 14, 2011, 10:17 AM
(#18)
RockerguyAA's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,089
BronzeStar
If they see you get it all-in pre with AK they will be more willing to stack off with JJ and QQ to you in the future as well.
 
Old
Default
Thu Apr 14, 2011, 01:45 PM
(#19)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,479
(Head Trainer)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockerguyAA View Post
If they see you get it all-in pre with AK they will be more willing to stack off with JJ and QQ to you in the future as well.
Sort of. The thing is it's become somewhat standard and expected these days for players to 4b/stack off with AK pre. When they see it, this does confirm AK is in your 4b/get it in range though. But if you 4b fold, the thinking player will now assume there is worse hands than AK in your 4b range, i.e. you have some bluff range (many players don't have a 4b bluff range). If they note you have a 4b bluff range they are even more likely to stack off JJ to you.
 
Old
Default
Sat Apr 16, 2011, 11:06 AM
(#20)
RockerguyAA's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,089
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLangolier View Post
Sort of. The thing is it's become somewhat standard and expected these days for players to 4b/stack off with AK pre. When they see it, this does confirm AK is in your 4b/get it in range though. But if you 4b fold, the thinking player will now assume there is worse hands than AK in your 4b range, i.e. you have some bluff range (many players don't have a 4b bluff range). If they note you have a 4b bluff range they are even more likely to stack off JJ to you.
Good stuff Langolier I neen to think about this for a while.

And great thread Panicky!
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com