Full Ring No Limit Poker Forums

While it may not necessarily be the best line bet/3bet is not necessarily as terrible as you think. Get out cardrunnersEV and go over it.

The crux of it is that frequencies matter, there's a point where we start to lose EV by creating passive dead money. Not saying it necessarily happens here, but I'm saying that you should actually go to more effort analyzing it before you say that the line is terrible.

I think 3 bet bluffing flops at 10nl is a mistake, you beat 10nl by value betting thinly not by bluffing people who cant find there fold button.

Prestomp, hand reading means to estimate a villians range. This is done by interpreting information, thats why position is so imporant because you get the most information. Street by street you gain more and more information so its safe to say a plan of what you will do on further streets is useless if it is static.

When people tell you to plan ahead they mean for example do you want to play a big pot or a small pot, will you bet or check if the flush hits, fold call or raise if the board pairs.

If i am playing against someone who likes to bluff, i will sit back, let him bluff and hit call all day long. I have no problem playing passive against someone who likes to bluff multiple streets.

Poker is about making the most +ev play you can, it just so happens being aggressive is much more +ev in almost every situatio in poker than being passive. But in certain situations being passive can have more value.

@euEra, I never once said 3-bet bluff. While I appreciate your attempt to explain hand reading to me, our current estimation is that he has a wide range on the flop. We are left to wonder whether he is going to triple barrel a wide range, but the advocates of the passive strategy are certainly hoping for it.

I advocated 3-betting for value under the general assumption that the villain would: fold air, call a draw, , and shove a monster. Many casual players will fall into this general profile. We need the OP to clarify whether he would shove a draw or not. If he would, then my plan isn't the best. However, a value raise on a non-heart turn card becomes attractive.

I play a fair amount of air in NL. I've gotten pretty good. I feel I could profitably play air in this villains spot, because the flop call is defining the hero's hand as rather weak, and I'd look to take the pot away on a future street. This is to say, I'm happy to fold out his air because I don't feel it's the great value generator that the passive advocates are assuming it is.

I would like to point out that the passive plan seems to be forming to either call all bets on all streets because his range is so wide, or call certain undefined "safe" street cards and for certain undefined amounts. I don't like this vagueness of this plan, and feel it's a money loser anyway.

We need the OP to clarify whether he would shove a draw or not. If he would, then my plan isn't the best. However, a value raise on a non-heart turn card becomes attractive.

Had not seen the villain do this. Although he would bet larger than any of the other players he never shoved. I think if the pot got big though, he was definitely capable of it.

Another reason I wanted t keep the pot smaller

which

Did you ever see him triple barrel total air? For that matter, how does he play his air? Does he check fold ever flop his misses? Does he make one x/r and give up?

Sorry i miss understood, so you want to 3 bet the flop for value. Thats way way too thin imo the best worse hand that calls is Q9 or a very good draw which would probably fold a huge percentage of the time anyway or spaz shove. This just isnt a line i would ever take at the micros unless it was against a reg i had a good solid read on.

3 betting isolates us with a better hand most of the time and makes villian fold out all of his air which we want to keep on to allow him to bluff with it on the turn and hopefully the river.

I'm going to assume that you also didn't see my 3bet amount of $25. If he's folding his draws for $25, then let's do it.

So are you going to tell us how it ended?

ahh, yeah, sorry, Easter Weekend

He bet the $50 on the river, I wound up calling, and he flips over 54

Said "nice call, couldn't believe you called , especially with the ten coming"

??

which

Doesnt suprise me, well played OP you got max value from the situation.

Indeed, but you need to ask yourself if you would have laid down the hand if a heart or face card came. As the hand played out, K9 ended up a pretty good hand on the river, and the call was fairly easy. If the board got scarier, were you still going to call. Which comes back to your flop plan. Were you going to call all bets regardless of what fell, or only non-heart turns and rivers?

If you were going to only call if there was a non-heart turn and river, then your opponent wins roughly 30% of then time when a heart comes plus another 16% of the time when he makes his gutshot. Suddenly your break even or worse on the plan. That's why I'd encourage you to start coming up with strategies to not allow these dead money situations to come up against aggressive opponents.

Pre--

I admit, I am still not completely planning through the river, so I do understand your points about getting lucky to not have to face a tough decision here.

I think part of it is my LHE background.

I still have a mindset that NLHE players (some) could at any time pull the trigger and go all in (no matter how unlikely). So what is the standard way to play a single pair hand like AK on a Kxx x x board, when the Flop and Turn caller goes All In suddenly?

I mean I would have no clue, and anyone could play a set that way, right? (not saying it is best way, just a possibility)

so, I think I put a little too much stock still in "okay, I will call the flop, evaluate both the size and comfort of the opponent on next street, and add in whatever I know about his tendencies.

thanks for the input guys I really appreciate your bearing with someone beginning like me.

which

That's a fear, but an easy one to overcome. In general, they best thing to do is show aggressive interest in the pot with a raise. Live players are used to playing other unsophisticated live players. Their general fallacies are that they call too much. They've never seen someone make a value raise and then fold, so they're not going to be coming over the top of you with bluffs too often. For the most part, if you're betting or raising and they're shoving, they've got a monster.

That's why I recommended the 3-bet. In this case, it would have ended the hand early. You would have taken down a modest pot and gone to the next hand. As it played out, you made more money, but you could have possible lost the entire pot if the board had gotten scarier.

cool hand..

i'd play it exactly the same way.. once he bets turn he really only reps 62 or 66 (you have blocker to 9x combos and 2x wouldn't x/r flop)..

his comments after the hand are typical live players donk comments and i chuckled a little upon reading them.. he has so few Tx combos in his range and whether or not he would vb river upon hitting it is questionable also

gg

I'm amazed that something like this happened in a low-limit live game to be honest. For me, I would have probably leveled myself into folding the flop unless I had a really really good read.