Mid Stakes Shorthanded NL Poker Forums

I think my image might be a bit weak at the table. I have passed on a lot of button steals.

I am not running a HUD due to mass tabling for 65 billion. Assuming the villains are all good regs so I'm not really getting out of line.

Villain has no two pair combos so it's pretty much a set that called OOP or nothing? I'm not sure whether I'm supposed to call down or just fold because he can't really be bluffing...

Later I check HUD and he is 30/24 with 14.3% 3b, 17% AF over 33 hands.

Poker Stars $2/$4 No Limit Hold'em - 5 players -
DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

SB: $429.80
BB: $415.40
UTG: $429.20
Hero (CO): $396.00
BTN: $414.70

Pre Flop: ($6.00) Hero is CO with Q K
1 fold, Hero raises to $10, 1 fold, SB calls $8, 1 fold

Flop: ($24.00) K 9 2 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $15, SB calls $15

Turn: ($54.00) 6 (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $36, SB raises to $100, Hero?

I would call i thinkys.

shudn`t he be aware of not having a value range there too ?

btw his raise size is extremly small

btw his raise size is extremly small

I don't trust it

Villain has a 3B percentage of more than 14 percent so he will hold 99 pretty seldom since he just flatted preflop. OFC his range can be polarized but I think that at least weakens the chances that he hold excactly 99.

You did however play the session tight on the button but if he only has 33 hands on you he probably 3 bet 99 anyway. It's not that likely he is all ready adjusting to your opening range.

KK is obvious unlikely and if has that particular hand you can just write another chapter in your bad beat book.

The chances that he calls your cbet with 66 are pretty slim on that wet board. I think you can exclude that hand almost entirely.

That leaves only 22 and some 99 for at total of something like 4 combos (if you exclude some of the 9s he 3bet). He is also likely to CR any set on the flop because of the wet texture of the board. He didn't.

He could also hold K9 for at total of 6 combos but again he is probably raising preflop or on the flop.

You can't be sure of anything ofc but I think that thinking this way about his range makes a call a lot easier. Then you have to play some poker on river. His high agg. factor also make it easier to call IMO.

Stats are 100% useless in this scenario. His 14% 3 bet means he 3 bet once in seven opportunities. He could be a guy that only 3bets AA and all that stat tells you is that he got dealt AA once and 3 bet it. To attempt to draw conclusions and make statements about villain's tendencies to 3 bet hands like 99 based on a meaningless sample size is the sort of thought process that is going to get people into trouble. As a collective, we are way too dependent on HUDs and stats. A HUD is a tool that you can use to help support decisions that you are making based on fundamentals, reads, and experience. It should not act as the foundation of your decision-making process, especially when the information it is giving you cannot be used to draw any meaningful conclusions.

As a rule, I don't give a lot of midstakes players credit for floating out of position then checkraising the turn as a bluff. It's kind of a random play to make against someone you have no reads on. Since we are basically readless ( and, hence, villain is as well ), it is perfectly reasonable to put both 22 and 99 in his range here. I think the 2 pair combos are extremely unlikely ( maybe K9s? ), so villain's value range is basically 6 combos of sets.

What we really need to decide is whether or not we think villain can be bluffing here or not. Justifiying your decision of whether to call or fold based solely on villain's very narrow value range is only half of the equation. You have to consider his bluffing combos as well. If he doesn't have any, then it doesn't really matter how many value combos he has. It's a fold. I know you know these things, but I like taking these opportunities to speak to whomever is reading in the hopes that someone will get something meaningful out of what I say.

You're getting great pot odds to call on the turn, but it is very unlikely that you'll get to showdown for free on the river. In these spots, calling turn and folding to a river bet is lighting money on fire because villain check/raising turn then giving up river happens so infrequently. I would fold turn. If he floated you OOP and then check/raise bluffed you, good for him. You have no reason to think he is capable of doing that, and a vast majority of the player pool doesn't do it. You'll be much better off folding every time an unknown does this to you than calling every time.

Crackmonkey, thanks for the very informative post. I actually folded the turn here as well. These players are better than me but I just thought it would be inconceivable that a villain would check-raise this board (repping almost no value combos) and not follow through on the river with a hand that beats my face-up strong K. I posted this hand because I wasn't sure if I was being weak-tight.

It looked like a leveling spot that only a psycho would take vs someone with my image (snug, passing on buttons, and possibly too inexperienced to fold). I was still being aggro and mixing it up though with 3b's.

Always look at both sides.. Sure there are not that many value combos.. but what is he bluffing with?

The flop is allows villain to rep a fair bit of bluffs and a lot of turn cards will hit your perceived calling range => you he cannot expect you to barrel => I would not expect to see many sets on the turn. Given your info I would consider it to be FPS from his side.

On the other side if he does not expect you to barrel he might very well call with draws. That makes it way more likely that he is XR some random GS or FD.

Not a big fan of the fold.

Crackmonkey, thanks for the very informative post. I actually folded the turn here as well. These players are better than me but I just thought it would be inconceivable that a villain would check-raise this board (repping almost no value combos) and not follow through on the river with a hand that beats my face-up strong K. I posted this hand because I wasn't sure if I was being weak-tight.

It looked like a leveling spot that only a psycho would take vs someone with my image (snug, passing on buttons, and possibly too inexperienced to fold). I was still being aggro and mixing it up though with 3b's.

Well if they are better than you should consider playing at another table. That's gotta be the most sound advice one can give you. Looks to me that your are just looking for a confirmation that you did the right thing. What did you actually learn from the hand? That you should fold top pair every time an relatively unknown CR turn?

I don't think you should count on villain knowing anything about your experience either. And if you do indeed strike villain as very tight weak tight why would he expect you to barrel again or wait for a cooler to come on the turn. If you barrel again that must mean a King ( maybe a FD) given your image. So why wouldn't he CR the flop? It seems like the logic thing to do against a villain with your perceived image.

Given your info I would consider it to be FPS from his side.

Given what info? Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anything that suggests villain is making some random FPS play with QJ or a float OOP with air. The only thing I know about villain is that he is a total unknown. JJyykk only has 33 hands on the guy, some of which were probably played after this hand took place. In instances like this, I assume players are playing in a straightforward, common manner until I have reason to believe otherwise.

Stats are 100% useless in this scenario. His 14% 3 bet means he 3 bet once in seven opportunities. He could be a guy that only 3bets AA and all that stat tells you is that he got dealt AA once and 3 bet it.

I disagree. After all villain and heroes stats are all we got at this point. Nothing else is presented, no dynamics, no history. Are the stats reliable 100 percent? No, they should be treated with caution as you point out. But are they 100 percent useless? No way. Thats the info we got and I think we should make use of it.

In 33 hands he has been 3betting 4-5 times. Maybe he has just been dealt aces every time - as you point out - but thats just too unlikely. I can't see why it's better to treat villain as a complete unknown.

For example all of us reckons just by looking at those stats that he is probably not the kind of villain who limp / folds pre-flop. The 30 / 24 do suggest that he is not raise / fold ABC either. He probably has some weird lines and floats in his arsenal. He's not our most common calling station fish either. He could be a maniac though. But if fact most of us will think that he's a reg. just based on those very few stats and I bet we be right 95 percent of the time.

After all how many has the HUD set to begin after more than 33 hands?

I do agree that I went a little to far in my range analysis - overusing the stats. But again. Thats all we got and we just have to deduct the uncertainty somehow. Looking at the hand as if it was played in a vacuum is a poor solution IMO.

Given what info? Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anything that suggests villain is making some random FPS play with QJ or a float OOP with air. The only thing I know about villain is that he is a total unknown. JJyykk only has 33 hands on the guy, some of which were probably played after this hand took place. In instances like this, I assume players are playing in a straightforward, common manner until I have reason to believe otherwise.

We don't have anything that suggests that this player is bad or makes strange plays.

I consider XC with a set a really strange line..

they are useless, hero even didn't have them in the hand and the ones he does have are likely after the hand too. He said he assumes villain is a good reg, I think the discussion should be based on the assumption that villain is a standard NL400 reg and we should find the optimal line against an average NL400 reg. and I am very curious about what it is

I disagree. After all villain and heroes stats are all we got at this point. Nothing else is presented, no dynamics, no history. Are the stats reliable 100 percent? No, they should be treated with caution as you point out. But are they 100 percent useless? No way. Thats the info we got and I think we should make use of it.

So besides learning that villain does not seem to be passive preflop.... they are useless..

they are useless, hero even didn't have them in the hand and the ones he does have are likely after the hand too. He said he assumes villain is a good reg, I think the discussion should be based on the assumption that villain is a standard NL400 reg and we should find the optimal line against an average NL400 reg. and I am very curious about what it is

There is no such thing as an avg reg. That said I would consider folding the turn a pretty bad play. It makes no sense for villain to XC the flop with a set (unless hero is known to be a barrel monkey).