1/2NL: How do you play this turn? (1 Viewer)

[Lemonzest]

I dont necessarily agree with the jam. I like a small bet to keep people in. Their redraws are minimal against you.

You could bet the turn and then bet the river in hopes of getting people to come along.

Nothing wrong with jamming tho.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

I dont necessarily agree with the jam. I like a small bet to keep people in. Their redraws are minimal against you.

You could bet the turn and then bet the river in hopes of getting people to come along.

Nothing wrong with jamming tho.

I debated this for a short while, but here's why I think it's non-optimal:

1. V1 is probably not putting in any more money with a hand that I beat, and since he's already checked the turn on a dripping wet board, I think he folds to any bet that isn't ridiculously small.
2. V2 has repeatedly shown that he will call off his stack with weak draws and weak made hands. He thinks aggression = bluffing.
3. If I bet small and V2 calls, it gives him a chance to fold to my river jam when his draws whiff.

 

[Lemonzest]

I debated this for a short while, but here's why I think it's non-optimal:

1. V1 is probably not putting in any more money with a hand that I beat, and since he's already checked the turn on a dripping wet board, I think he folds to any bet that isn't ridiculously small.
2. V2 has repeatedly shown that he will call off his stack with weak draws and weak made hands. He thinks aggression = bluffing.
3. If I bet small and V2 calls, it gives him a chance to fold to my river jam when his draws whiff.

If that is your read on V2 then hard to disagree. If V2 likes to call big bets with mediocre holdings then by all means jam that shit in.

 

[DrStrange]

From Hero's point of view, there are 21 non-brick cards out of the 46 unknown cards
- 9 non-heart jacks, tens and sixes either make a bigger straight with a single card or counterfeit Hero's straight.
- 12 cards pair the board.

From villain's point of view (but knowing Hero holds two hearts) there are seven non-pairing hearts that also could prove to be scare cards for someone holding a set or two pair or top pair+..

Hero needs to be careful about selling cheap cards, much less giving free cards. A cheap card from Hero means he is pot committed under most situations. (Maybe he could use his table read vis-à-vis the old man coffee) That makes it harder for villain to make a mistake with modest draws since he gets both the direct odds from the turn call plus the implied odds. Also any mistake made is significantly smaller.

If we knew villain's holdings were limited to worse flush draws, one-pair hands and perhaps two pair then maybe Hero could safely make a fancy-play small suck bet knowing the risk was minimal. The problem is all of those 21 scary river cards complete several of the "safe looking, four out draws" Hero isn't going to be able to dodge getting stacked on hands he loses on the river.

Almost as important, hero gives up value vs hands like that would have called an all-in on the turn, but will snap fold to a river brick unless they make their hand. Or, Hero checks on a river ten (for example) and fails to even attempt to extract value from sets / two pair. Or sets that couldn't fold to a turn bet but give up calling their last chips off looking at a 4-straight / 3-flush board.

Hero also needs to be mindful about setting up bet sizing tells if these are people he sees a couple of times a month. Doing plays like this as regular course of business eventually will teach your villains when to be bold and when to duck away from trouble.

I think Hero is best served by keeping matters simple. It is always tempting to second guess a decision not to slow play / soft play after we see the table fold. That doesn't mean the original decision was wrong, just that we are disappointed by the outcome.

DrStrange

 

[Schmendr1ck]

From Hero's point of view, there are 21 non-brick cards out of the 46 unknown cards
- 9 non-heart jacks, tens and sixes either make a bigger straight with a single card or counterfeit Hero's straight.
- 12 cards pair the board.

From villain's point of view (but knowing Hero holds two hearts) there are seven non-pairing hearts that also could prove to be scare cards for someone holding a set or two pair or top pair+..

Hero needs to be careful about selling cheap cards, much less giving free cards. A cheap card from Hero means he is pot committed under most situations. (Maybe he could use his table read vis-à-vis the old man coffee) That makes it harder for villain to make a mistake with modest draws since he gets both the direct odds from the turn call plus the implied odds. Also any mistake made is significantly smaller.

If we knew villain's holdings were limited to worse flush draws, one-pair hands and perhaps two pair then maybe Hero could safely make a fancy-play small suck bet knowing the risk was minimal. The problem is all of those 21 scary river cards complete several of the "safe looking, four out draws" Hero isn't going to be able to dodge getting stacked on hands he loses on the river.

This is a great insight that I hadn't fully considered. Nearly half the deck costs me value if I don't jam turn; some cards scare me into a check, some cards scare villain into folding, and some cards simply cost me the pot (though there's an argument that against V2, I often lose anyway since a lot of his crappy draws call the turn shove).

Hero also needs to be mindful about setting up bet sizing tells if these are people he sees a couple of times a month. Doing plays like this as regular course of business eventually will teach your villains when to be bold and when to duck away from trouble.

I was out of town, so no concerns here. However, it's always good to be aware of this when playing in my regular room.

I think Hero is best served by keeping matters simple. It is always tempting to second guess a decision not to slow play / soft play after we see the table fold. That doesn't mean the original decision was wrong, just that we are disappointed by the outcome.

While I was obviously a little disappointed in the folds, I created this thread feeling strongly that my shove was correct.

I spent a couple hours after this session in a car with @ni9n3r, and we had a good discussion about this hand. I posted it here not because I thought I screwed up, but because I wanted some additional insight (like your nugget above) from better players than me, and because I thought the particular villains in the hand made it a little more interesting than "lol jam."

 

[chicubs1988]

I think jamming is a bad play here. Maybe the nutcase calls with a hand you have dominated, but they both likely fold. The only hands that call you would be hands that have you beat. You have to ask yourself "what do they have?" If you think either player has enough of a hand to call here (i.e. top pair, over pair) you bet ~$40-$60, which is about 1/4-1/3 of the pot. If you think they don't have enough of a hand to call to see one more card, you check, and hope that they perceive that as weakness and/or they make a better hand on the river that will motivate them to either bet into you or call on the river. You've got the straight, which is almost 100% the best hand right now, and you've got a chance to hit the nut flush on the river. Most of the cards on the river are good, great, or neutral for you. If a 10 or card that pairs the board comes out, you have a tougher decision on the river, but keeping them in hand with you to the river is good for you in most situations. I'd bet ~1/3 of the pot here, because you either: (1) take down a good sized pot right now; (2) get some more value before a heart comes and potentially scares the other two players away; or (3) get a big pot built already before maybe a heart helps one of the Vs and you take down a huge pot with a flush or flush etc....

Ultimately, any bet between 1/4-1/2 of the pot, or a check is an ok play here. I think the only wrong move is jamming.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

I think the only wrong move is jamming.

Agree to disagree? I've explained in previous posts why I came into this thread thinking a jam was the right play, and I haven't changed my mind:

I debated this for a short while, but here's why I think it's non-optimal:

1. V1 is probably not putting in any more money with a hand that I beat, and since he's already checked the turn on a dripping wet board, I think he folds to any bet that isn't ridiculously small.
2. V2 has repeatedly shown that he will call off his stack with weak draws and weak made hands. He thinks aggression = bluffing.
3. If I bet small and V2 calls, it gives him a chance to fold to my river jam when his draws whiff.

 

[Steve Birrer]

I might be missing something but seems to me the size of the post you showed preturn is incorrect.

You raised to $10 preflop and had three callers. That makes the pot at least $40 (even if the blinds were two of the four). Then post flop the bet was $40 with two callers. That's an additional $120 making the post flop pot total $160 not $120. Might not change anybody's view on shove or not but to me shoving with a $160 in the pot is different than doing so with $120. Its hard to say what I would have done in your shoes not having seen the players and the dynamics in play. But I would likely have made a decent sized bet versus shoving.

 

[JustinInMN]

Yeah, I think in general the shove is the right play. I really don't like a small bet at all here unless you think you can escape a bad river getting 4-1 on a call, or if you think it will induce a shove. Checking is really bad unless you're pretty sure V2 will bluff at it, but if you think V2 is checking behind here, it's really bad. It sucks because it's feels so tough to get value, but it's likely to get tougher on the river for all the reasons @DrStrange points out.

I think there's value to be had from t-x and two hearts. Having the Ah yourself is nice insurance, but makes it tough to get called.

If you were deeper (300 in your stack), I'd probably bet 80 here , but since you are almost 1:1 SPR, I think it has to be a shove here. Hope someone will call with 2-pair, or hearts, or a straight draw they miss. All you can do here.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

I might be missing something but seems to me the size of the post you showed preturn is incorrect.

You're not missing anything - it should be $160 on the turn. Thanks for the catch, I'll update OP for posterity, though I don't think there's much discussion left.

I'm not sure it makes a huge difference in how it plays out, though. My $140 turn shove goes from slightly over pot to slightly under pot.

 

[daniel song]

i think the way the hand was played was fine, but some thoughts:

with your stack size, i would bet less on the flop. $40 bet into $40 pot when you have so much equity on that board folds out worse draws. I would either bet $20 (half pot) to price worse draws in continuing. A less standard play that I would also consider is checking back given that you are early position, with the intention to check raise all in.

with the pot size being 160 and you having 140 behind, i would bet 50-60$ on the turn. you having the nut draw really means your opponents don't have much. at worst someone is playing 10j but even that hand loses on some river runouts.

on river, barring a non-heart 10, ship it in.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

Reread the OP: villain donked the flop, I just called.

 

[DrStrange]

It would be interesting to see how the ebb and flow of opinion would shift under a different set of facts.

Let's say hero tried a fancy play and bets "same bet" - $40 on the turn and succeeds getting both villains to call < exactly as several people suggested >. There was a 46% chance of a "bad" river card - in this fantasy future river the board pairs and Old Man Coffee shoves all-in. It is $100 to call looking at a $340 pot, V2 lurks in the shadows . . . so hero folds or calls? Do we think his one-fourth pot turn bet was a good idea now?

Let's say hero shoves and gets called by V2, who tables and is drawing dead. Did hero make a mistake by betting so much on the turn? Hero wasn't going to get a singe extra chip unless the river makes the flush (or perhaps V2 makes top pair on a river king).

Once the results are revealed, it is tempting to let the knowledge of the outcome color our judgement. Ever more tempting for times when the decision was close or times where the villain's range was huge or cloudy. The same sorts of things can happen in after action review of military or police actions - discounting the affects of the "fog of war" or the need for split second decisions given the luxury of hindsight and perfect knowledge.

It borders on impossible for the collective community to make judgements while ignoring the illicit knowledge of the results. As we see in this hand, it is "obvious" that Hero would run everyone off their lesser hands by betting all-in and that makes all the other options a lot more attractive.

It is easier to be a successful Monday morning quarterback -=- DrStrange

 

[Steve Birrer]

Good post Dr. Strange. I like all these strategy threads but you are correct that knowing the outcome makes it hard not to lean your thought process to the one that gives you the best answer based on that result.

The part of these discussions I have a hard time with is when someone categorizes a player to set the stage for the discussion. The table dynamics and each persons own view as to how they see other players are different. Its pretty hard to describe on a message board how a certain player is acting and have it ring true for the rest of us. One persons TAG may not be even close to what I view as a TAG for example.

Still I love the discussions.