Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Texas Hold'Em Cash Games /

10NL 6-max Zoom: K6s call in bb to a +1/hj 3x open, nice flop playing oop

Old
Default
10NL 6-max Zoom: K6s call in bb to a +1/hj 3x open, nice flop playing oop - Wed Mar 06, 2013, 01:38 AM
(#1)
ForrestFive's Avatar
Since: May 2011
Posts: 2,036
Hi,

Thanks guys for your HA reviews of my hands. I do read them and hope to take much more thinking to my game.

And then this happens. Is this a speculative call in the bb?

Yes Kd6d is possibly to a 3x open mp +1/hj 6-max.

Flop KcQd5d nice I hope my x/r was the correct line?

Mow I think I made a big mistake keeping the lead and betting a blank 2h on the turn.

Did I over play my own draw >>folding out worse<<?

No reads apart from a red label = cash raise no limp and I only play 6-max micros.

Thanks again HA peeps.

Last edited by ForrestFive; Wed Mar 06, 2013 at 02:08 AM.. Reason: keeping initiative
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 09:07 AM
(#2)
GarethC23's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,273
Hey Forrest

I dislike your preflop call here. I think KTs is probably the worst hand you could profitable call here for reference, with K6-K8s being considerably worse.

On the flop I actually disagree with the flop check-raise as well. We have such a big hand its going to be hard to go wrong with the flop check-raise, but consider that better kings don't fold to this. However, if we check-call we can get our opponent to bet with a lot of hands we have crushed. We don't need to worry much about protection having top pair and a diamond draw, only cards like offsuit nines, offsuit aces, really hurt us.

We can see some of the problem with the flop check-raise. You bet the turn. Is this for value? For protection? We certainly shouldn't be bluffing here right?

So I think check-raising the flop creates some problems. We are narrowing his range, and we do ok against a narrow range, but we really crush a wide range.

How does this all sound?
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 10:44 AM
(#3)
DivorcedDuck's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarethC23 View Post
Hey Forrest

I dislike your preflop call here. I think KTs is probably the worst hand you could profitable call here for reference, with K6-K8s being considerably worse.

On the flop I actually disagree with the flop check-raise as well. We have such a big hand its going to be hard to go wrong with the flop check-raise, but consider that better kings don't fold to this. However, if we check-call we can get our opponent to bet with a lot of hands we have crushed. We don't need to worry much about protection having top pair and a diamond draw, only cards like offsuit nines, offsuit aces, really hurt us.

We can see some of the problem with the flop check-raise. You bet the turn. Is this for value? For protection? We certainly shouldn't be bluffing here right?

So I think check-raising the flop creates some problems. We are narrowing his range, and we do ok against a narrow range, but we really crush a wide range.

How does this all sound?
tbh. i don´t like your analyzis for one reason, it´s based on nothing mostly. don´t get me wrong on this one. your suggestions are fine and they make a lot of sense agaisnt some specific villains but we know exactly nothing about this villain beside the point he...

a) sits at the table with a 100bb stacks
b) c-bets only half pot on a wet flop which he can represent very well
c) he makes a weak call to the C/R followed by a fold to a turn barrel on a blank

i fully agree to your statement preflop. K6s is a nice hand for passive blind defend but against MP it´s super loose and would need a read for justification.

postflop there are three possible lines in my eyes.

a) C/C
b) B/R
c) C/R

which one is the best? you gave an answer and you voted for something without knowing about villains postflop play. let´s say villain is semi loose aggressive with a tendency to be less aggressive on later streets. C/C would against this villain the worst possible option, because it gives him the possibility to check behind his huge load of gut shots combined with second or third pair on turn and we want to get value out of them, and so it would be close between B/R and C/R. answering that would depend on villains range, is he betting polarized or unpolarized and how wide is his range opening, is he preferring sc´s over pockets and how aggressive is he playing postflop. we have no clue...

the only thing i like in this hand is the turn barrel as the call to heros C/R on flop is mostlikely weak. villain should be either on a strong made hand or a weak underpair with a gutshot may be. a hand like AT, AJ, AQ, JJ or TT would be very likely for villain here, at leat i see way more combos like that than i see for AK, QQ+ and against unknown those hands reraise/shove the flop to a C/R most of the time.

your analyzis makes sense for some specific villains but for most it doesn´t and from the things we know normally the analyzis should end preflop as hero never ever should be in this hand. beyond that point it´s pure speculation and that´s what is most important to point out! - the hand was a highly speculative move without any reads when being out of position against a mostlikely reggish villain. hero got a lucky flop, overall i doubt that the hand can be played +ev without some reads.

Last edited by DivorcedDuck; Wed Mar 06, 2013 at 10:49 AM..
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 11:04 AM
(#4)
GarethC23's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,273
Flop check-call with this hand should be your standard play against most players readless or otherwise in this situation. The idea of standard plays is you don't know the opponent well enough to deviate.
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 12:01 PM
(#5)
DivorcedDuck's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarethC23 View Post
Flop check-call with this hand should be your standard play against most players readless or otherwise in this situation. The idea of standard plays is you don't know the opponent well enough to deviate.
you know this is a really huge leak you have?

against a standard reg C/C is the worst possible line here, even a donk bet would have more value as you get a raise from time to time to which you can shove. try it out and evaluate it with stox-ev. you will see there´s a huge difference!

without any read villain is a standard reg for that stakes to me, means he´s assuming to get called by either a draw or a trap and to this he will play one and done most of the time, all other assumptions would neeed some statistical or empirical proof we don´t have.

Hero has on flop against villains standard range, I assume villain c-bets this flop 100% of the time, an equity of 75%. the problme is that most of the hands, we´re talking a bout something around 130 combos are close to be dead. the interesting point on this flop is that around half(!) of villains combos have a gut shot combined with backdoor draw possibilites and those are the hands which pay you. we´re talking of 60+ combos out of ~130. Tbh. I have to assume you don´t have even thought about this so far.

Those hands don´t pay you by playing C/C!

So why don´t raise him and avoid to give him a free card to which he either improves hard or fold anyway!? it should be obv. that you want worse hands to pay and not to improve for free. There´s a huge load of hands in villains range against which you have only thin value and you need to realize that in order to play the hand profit.

another point is that C/C has a tendency to be the standard line especially when hero doesn´t know what to do but doesn´t want to give up the hand. that´s simply a huge leak and your advise is a manifestation of that leak.

i tried to show this to you but obv. i failed on that task. i´m done here.

good luck at the felts

edit: may be a picture helps...


Last edited by DivorcedDuck; Wed Mar 06, 2013 at 01:28 PM..
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 02:40 PM
(#6)
GarethC23's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,273
Thanks for opening my eyes.
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 04:11 PM
(#7)
DivorcedDuck's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 165
wow... you´re my new hero. when running out of logic you become polemic. nice hand, sir.
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 04:46 PM
(#8)
GarethC23's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,273
I never run out of logic . Unless a woman is involved!
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 05:36 PM
(#9)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
^^^
DD should like that - he's so aggro with the guys ... but yet such a pussy cat with the ladies! Thanks duck for those lovely compliments you left me in the Time Vault thread

I've been slacking on all the Time Vault stuff, but I've still been checking in with your thread every once in a while, and have been reading about your quest to find training materials from people you feel you can trust. Which can sometimes be a hard thing, because like ... to adopt the advice of somebody else is basically to trust their judgement over one's own. And sometimes, like, you just want to be sure you'll be better off and stuff ...

You know what I wonder about with this hand though, is if maybe there's just not enough material with it to be making conclusions about the discussion, you know what I mean? Like you said, where everybody seems to agree, is that there's no info on the villain. And also, this hand didn't go to showdown, so there's also no info on his range.

Like maybe the big learning'll come from more complicated hands (with trickier spots), with bigger pots? And if you make conclusions based on a hand that's not one of those better spots, you might wind up missing out on the hands that are worth paying more attention to?

Like here's one such spot - it's from a vid, but here's the hand info:

Hero (sb):
Villain: a one-tabler who min-raised pre-flop from middle position.

Board (on the turn):
Pot (on the turn): $4.30

Action: Hero bets $2.39 ... villain reraises to $7.22

Call, fold, or reraise?


And supposing Hero calls and the river comes:

Board (on the river):
Pot (on the river): $18.09

Action: Hero checks ... villain bets $15.50

Call, fold, or reraise?


Hope you find this spot as interesting as i did DivorcedDuck - I feel like it opened my eyes to some new ideas, so I thought maybe you'd find the same?
 
Old
Default
Wed Mar 06, 2013, 07:55 PM
(#10)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DivorcedDuck View Post
postflop there are three possible lines in my eyes.

a) C/C
b) B/R
c) C/R

which one is the best? you gave an answer and you voted for something without knowing about villains postflop play. let´s say villain is semi loose aggressive with a tendency to be less aggressive on later streets. C/C would against this villain the worst possible option, because it gives him the possibility to check behind his huge load of gut shots combined with second or third pair on turn and we want to get value out of them, and so it would be close between B/R and C/R. answering that would depend on villains range, is he betting polarized or unpolarized and how wide is his range opening, is he preferring sc´s over pockets and how aggressive is he playing postflop. we have no clue...

Oh, shucks - not sure why I didn't think of this before, but probably the flop would be super interesting to include because it's slightly similar ...


Pot (on the flop): $2.39

Action: Hero checks ... villain bets $1

Call, fold, or reraise?


Something that's different with this hand though, is that the villain started off with less than a full stack. So it was a one-tabler, who made a min-raise from middle position, with less than a full stack. And Hero completed in the sb, and so did the bb, who check-folded on the flop.


Hopefully you see this DD, because I think you might find it an interesting hand to contrast with Forrest's?
 
Old
Default
Thu Mar 07, 2013, 12:47 AM
(#11)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,517
(Head Trainer)
Definition of POLEMIC

1
a : an aggressive attack on or refutation of the opinions or principles of another
b : the art or practice of disputation or controversy —usually used in plural but singular or plural in construction

2
: an aggressive controversialist

If anything Gareth's reply was anti-polemic, and Duck's posts were quite polemic.

I think a part of the problem is the disconnect in the read. Everyone agrees we are readless, but Duck you then go on to give an extensive (polemic) lashing of Gareth's opinion based on a specific read which you assume:

Quote:
without any read villain is a standard reg for that stakes to me, means he´s assuming to get called by either a draw or a trap and to this he will play one and done most of the time
It's 10NL not 1000NL, IF the villain was a standard reg he's playing in us someone who is (to him) a 10NL random, no reg would assume he is getting check-called only by draws or traps from a random, he would also include mid strength hands like top pair/weak kicker (no draw), middle pair, a gut shot peeling, etc. Fishy play is the norm not the exception at 10NL. I would not assume a 10NL unknown is even thinking on this level tbh, not sure how you define reg but I usually think of a higher volume break even+ player and that's a read that is the exception not the norm, especially at microstakes.

If the villain only gives up worse hands on the turn and takes free cards and never bets more unless he improves, then getting into the argument you want makes sense, but I disagree with that "read" because we don't have it and I don't make that my default read for microstake randoms. Just my opinion.


Head Live Trainer
Check out my Videos

4 Time Bracelet Winner



 
Old
Default
Thu Mar 07, 2013, 08:41 PM
(#12)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
I picked that other scenario for a reason - and Dave already beat me to listing one of the points from it

Based on what DivorcedDuck was saying about wanting to charge loose passives for chasing draws, I'd have to assume he'd have check-raised the flop.

Whereas, in the actual hand from Live Training, Gareth check-called, bet-called, check-called: 'River Decisions' (Dec. 27, 2012)

And here, the villain had

So, the villain was bluffing with complete air, and would have likely folded to a check-raise on the flop. But responded to the check-call, bet-call, check by attempting a bluff on the river.

Hence, a check-raise on the flop would have likely netted $2 from the villain.

Whereas the check-call, bet-call, check-call line netted $24.72.


Now how can that be, some might wonder, if aggression is supposed to be good, and check-calling is supposed to be bad?

I think Gareth's line employs deception, and so to look at his strategy and merely see passivity, is to miss the fact that he was laying out a trap with a very strong hand, and using the passivity as camouflage.

Like he's not ceding control, he's letting the villain do the betting with the worst hand? And by doing that, he's getting to actually act last, and keep his cards close to the vest by not giving out info via bet sizing and timing tells?


And so another part of this strategy was what Dave brought up - that he's targeting a different villain. Whereas DivorcedDuck I guess is looking for money from loose passives who chase draws, Gareth's looking for lags who make bad bluffs.

Which is better to target? Maybe it depends on the player pool at the moment - and some of that might be a correlate of one's stake level, which is something else Dave mentioned?


But just going back to the fact that Forrest flopped very strong, like there was this other hand from Live Training, where Gareth check-raised the flop: 'The Biggest Blind' (Oct. 17, 2012, @18:00)

And so like, if we're betting and hoping the bet will be met with a fold from the villain, is it maybe a 'waste' to use up our good hands on that, when we could instead be using our junk cards? lol?

Is that the larger idea maybe?


DivorcedDuck, I hope you find these concepts as interesting as I did!

Last edited by TrustySam; Thu Mar 07, 2013 at 08:53 PM..
 

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