Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (9 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
Button ($8.92)
SB ($16.42)
BB ($5.58)
UTG ($16.88)
UTG+1 ($10.94)
MP1 ($3.65)
MP2 ($5.77)
Hero (MP3) ($10.24)
CO ($11.46)
Preflop: Hero is MP3 with K
, K
4 folds, Hero bets $0.30, 1 fold, Button raises to $0.90, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.60
Flop: ($1.95) 6, A
, 8 (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $1.20, Hero calls $1.20
Turn: ($4.35) 5 (2 players)
Hero checks, Button checks
River: ($4.35) 9 (2 players)
Hero bets $1.80, Button calls $1.80
Total pot: $7.95 | Rake: $0.53
Reasoning process
Preflop: Standard raise w/ KK. Villain 3-bets from the Button, so what is his range? 3-bets at regular 10NL are rare but in Rush they are much more common. The fact that his 3-bet is from the Button against my raise from the Hijack means his range is fairly wide for a 3-bet. In regular 10NL a 3-bet is usually AA/KK/AK, absent a read to the contrary, with QQ sometimes thrown in. In this situation we can safely include QQ, JJ, perhaps TT, maybe even as low as 99. Possibly also hands like AQs, but 10NL players who are willing to 3-bet aren't usually as comfortable 3-betting overcards besides AK as they are 3-betting pairs and speculative hands. I'd even go lower on his PP range here before I included hands like AQ/AJ. So I decide to call the 3-bet since a 4-bet is likely to fold out much of the weaker part of his range, while getting 5-bet from AA.
Flop: Raising KK and seeing an Ace fall on the flop is incredibly frustrating, and now I'm out of position against the 3-bettor. If I CB here and get raised, what then? This is clearly a way ahead/way behind situation: I'm either way behind a pair of Aces or a set, or way ahead of the rest of his range. So I opt to check to see what he does and he fires a ~2/3 pot bet. Decision time. I realized that his preflop 3-bet actually helps me in this situation because his range is far more narrow than if he had just flat-called. The Ace on the flop reduces the odds of him holding AA, and the fact that I have KK also greatly reduces the combinations of AK he could be holding. It's possible he could have AQ but there are actually more hands in his range that I beat here: QQ, JJ, TT, and 99. So I opt to call, planning to check again on the turn to see if he fires again.
Turn: Turn is a trash card and I check. He opts to check behind, which is a big show of weakness. If he had flopped a big hand, such as a set, why would he bet 2/3 pot on the flop but pull back on the turn? Most players in that situation would slowplay the flop, or bet smaller to entice a call. Similarly, why would he check behind with AK or AQ after firing the flop? Sure, he could be trying to entice me to bet the river (I often do that myself), but isn't it more likely he has one of his lower pairs and has been scared by my flop call?
River: River bets are actually one of the weaker parts of my game but I felt confident about this one. One of the golden rules of betting is that if your bet will only fold weaker hands but get called/raised by better hands, there is no point in betting. So why did I bet this river, and why so small? Based on my reasoning process thus far, I felt he had a hand with value but one that he didn't feel all that confident about with the Ace on the board and my play thus far. So I wasn't too concerned about getting raised but I knew he would also have a tough time folding one of his better pairs (QQ, JJ, even TT). I didn't want to bet too large, because a large bet might just fold out these hands.
Result: Villain flipped over TT.
Button ($8.92)
SB ($16.42)
BB ($5.58)
UTG ($16.88)
UTG+1 ($10.94)
MP1 ($3.65)
MP2 ($5.77)
Hero (MP3) ($10.24)
CO ($11.46)
Preflop: Hero is MP3 with K
, K4 folds, Hero bets $0.30, 1 fold, Button raises to $0.90, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.60
Flop: ($1.95) 6
, A, 8 (2 players)Hero checks, Button bets $1.20, Hero calls $1.20
Turn: ($4.35) 5
(2 players)Hero checks, Button checks
River: ($4.35) 9
(2 players)Hero bets $1.80, Button calls $1.80
Total pot: $7.95 | Rake: $0.53
Reasoning process
Preflop: Standard raise w/ KK. Villain 3-bets from the Button, so what is his range? 3-bets at regular 10NL are rare but in Rush they are much more common. The fact that his 3-bet is from the Button against my raise from the Hijack means his range is fairly wide for a 3-bet. In regular 10NL a 3-bet is usually AA/KK/AK, absent a read to the contrary, with QQ sometimes thrown in. In this situation we can safely include QQ, JJ, perhaps TT, maybe even as low as 99. Possibly also hands like AQs, but 10NL players who are willing to 3-bet aren't usually as comfortable 3-betting overcards besides AK as they are 3-betting pairs and speculative hands. I'd even go lower on his PP range here before I included hands like AQ/AJ. So I decide to call the 3-bet since a 4-bet is likely to fold out much of the weaker part of his range, while getting 5-bet from AA.
Flop: Raising KK and seeing an Ace fall on the flop is incredibly frustrating, and now I'm out of position against the 3-bettor. If I CB here and get raised, what then? This is clearly a way ahead/way behind situation: I'm either way behind a pair of Aces or a set, or way ahead of the rest of his range. So I opt to check to see what he does and he fires a ~2/3 pot bet. Decision time. I realized that his preflop 3-bet actually helps me in this situation because his range is far more narrow than if he had just flat-called. The Ace on the flop reduces the odds of him holding AA, and the fact that I have KK also greatly reduces the combinations of AK he could be holding. It's possible he could have AQ but there are actually more hands in his range that I beat here: QQ, JJ, TT, and 99. So I opt to call, planning to check again on the turn to see if he fires again.
Turn: Turn is a trash card and I check. He opts to check behind, which is a big show of weakness. If he had flopped a big hand, such as a set, why would he bet 2/3 pot on the flop but pull back on the turn? Most players in that situation would slowplay the flop, or bet smaller to entice a call. Similarly, why would he check behind with AK or AQ after firing the flop? Sure, he could be trying to entice me to bet the river (I often do that myself), but isn't it more likely he has one of his lower pairs and has been scared by my flop call?
River: River bets are actually one of the weaker parts of my game but I felt confident about this one. One of the golden rules of betting is that if your bet will only fold weaker hands but get called/raised by better hands, there is no point in betting. So why did I bet this river, and why so small? Based on my reasoning process thus far, I felt he had a hand with value but one that he didn't feel all that confident about with the Ace on the board and my play thus far. So I wasn't too concerned about getting raised but I knew he would also have a tough time folding one of his better pairs (QQ, JJ, even TT). I didn't want to bet too large, because a large bet might just fold out these hands.
Result: Villain flipped over TT.
Posts
Mr PhD, I saw that you didnt reraise with this hand preflop, but that might be a negative ev play for the following reason. It seems like you are giving the opp a great opportunity to flop a set or if he holds a-k, a-q, a-j, or a-t, then you are giving him a great chance to flop top pair. In either situation, you will be behind. Additionally, if we take your approach and see a flop then I dont think there are a ton of flops where you will be able to take your opp's stack. For example, on a q-t-4 rainbow flop, the 10s wont lose their stack. I think the optimum approach would be to reraise preflop instead of trying to get cute with a flop, turn and river. Just my two cents.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the feedback. Choosing not to 4-bet preflop is not about getting cute, it's about not wanting to fold out the weaker part of his range. Sure he can hit a set with a lower pair or spike an Ace with AK/AQ/AJ/AT but I'm a significant favourite against those hands. I'd much rather let him take a flop with those hands, giving me the potential to get more $ from him postflop, than 4-bet and have him fold many of those hands. Moreover, even if he calls my 4-bet, it will be harder to get money from him postflop when he doesn't improve. Think about it: if I 4-bet and he calls with his TT, he's going to totally shut down if he doesn't spike his set because he's going to put me on a very strong hand (AA/KK/AK). By not 4-betting I keep my range a bit wider, which enabled me to get what I did out of him on this hand.
ReplyDeleteHey man, blog is very interesting, I like it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the other guy who commented. While I understand your reasoning, and know that you were thinking beyond simply "getting cute" as it were, I think that if you get 3 bet in that situation you should be looking to play for stacks. I think a 4 bet is a better play here for a couple of reasons.
1. all the hands in his range either call or ship, none of them fold outright. (I think you are being a little wide with his range, im not sure id count AJ or AT among the hands he has here.) So lets say if when he pops to .90 you make it uh... 2.30, give or take.. that money is in the pot regardless.
2. If villian has a 10s+ here, you stack him on every undercard flop so if he has 10s js qs... its just a stack every time. Similarly with AK, its a stack. However, if he has 10s+ and you flat, you run the risk of letting him see a scarecard (which was the case here) and slowing down. If he sees a dry board with AK in his hand, that will slow him down as well.
Again, I undderstand where you were coming from, but with a guy who wants to put the 3 bet in (especially in rush) I think we should be trying to play for stacks.
You could be right, it really depends on his 3-betting range - which we unfortunately don't have in Rush. If this were regular cash NLHE and this guy had stats of something like 8/6 VPIP/PFR with a very small 3-bet percentage, then I'll 4-bet 100% of the time because I know his 3-betting range is tight enough that he's calling with his entire range.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, thanks for reading. Drop in again to discuss more strategy.