PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.


No announcement yet.


  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Deception

    Been sat at the table with this guy for over an hour I had him pegged as a bit loose Calling with Ax Kx Qx Tx suited or otherwise He was min raising with Ax , 3x bb with Kx and 4x bb with Qx and other hands Would call bets all the way to the river and would call river bet or raise with air and get burnt I know it states I should lead out after hitting the set on the flop but felt I might scare him off with an aggressive pot size bet Was checking it ok ?
    Last edited by spike8998; Mon Nov 14, 2011, 05:05 AM.

  • #2
    if they're playing loose, then they could easily have a straight draw... and if so, I'd have made a value bet on the flop to make them pay for drawing at me. The bet would also need to be enough that you don't give a straight (OESD if they have a 9 or 5) the right price to call.

    By waiting until the turn, there is now also a flush draw and your read said that the opp likes to play suited cards (although if the opp has Ax, then you're in a good position to possibly stack them, if an A doesn't come on the river).

    By not betting the flop, while, yes, you could chase the opps out right there, you win the chips in the pot without a chance of losing.
    If you bet too little, if either opp has a striaght draw, you can price them in for their draw (that's not a great option either).
    The best thing is to make a bet (especially with a loose opp that will be more apt to call it) that will be large enough that it turns the play into a -EV play for the opp.

    If the board isn't coordinated, I'll let the opps take a card if I hit a set, especially top set... but if there are draws out there, I'll bet the flop, to make the opp pay for drawing at me.

    6 Time Bracelet Winner


    • #3
      I talked this one out with spike in Team Speak.

      My immediate impression on looking at this hand was: "This board is too coordinated to check top set on the flop. Lead bet, because min raisers will tend to want to stick around in the false hope possibly hitting an over card will give them the win, or they may raise pp bigger than the board. Last thing you want to give a free card to is a hand like A9."


      I elicited some extra info on opponents he had:

      1) BB essentially would call a min raise on any "ATWD" range, as he showed he was willingly to defend his blind with call/folds or call/jams a lot.

      2) BB tended to jam any top pair+ hand, as well as jam oesd hands with great frequency when he sensed weakness.

      3) The open min raiser showed a tendency to jam pre on his truly big hands (AK and bigger pp).

      With this additional info, I would have this to say about the hand:

      The flop check is a much better play here than given the info you provided in the original post. It may not be the BEST overall play, but it is better than on just the info above. Consider...

      The BB holds roughly 25.5BB in his stack after calling the min raise, and if he is a frequent jammer on draws, calling the min bet lays you implied odds of around 20 to 1 if you flop a set and he launches. Taking the risk with a hand as big as 88 for 20 to 1 return potential a good bit of the time, is a lot better than checking this flop without that info.

      Since the range jams on this flop (per Spike) was uber wide, running to nearly 41% of possible start hands, possibly preventing a stack off by lead betting a standard amount certainly is reasonable is 40%+ of the time the BB will hold somethign he will launch on.

      Per Spike, this jam range included any made straight, any made top pair hand, and and any oesd (a "naked" 5 or 9). That leaves a LOT of hands which the villain might have in an ATC blind call range for a min bet, that he might launch on.

      A lot of those hands (like oesd's or top pair/weak kicker) may well NOT jam if Spike leads a standard type amount of around half to 2/3rds pot. This means while it MAY be "risky" to possibly allow a free card peel that could complete draws, Spike probably had enough reason with his hand strength to check the flop.


      When I asked Spike what he would do on this highly coordinated board if the BB jammed all in over his check, Spike said: "I'd fold". THIS IS A MISTAKE!


      1) He got about the BEST hand he could possibly expect to get by entering the pot with 88.

      If you decide to enter the pot by calling a raise, you really need to have an idea of the most typical hand you are likely to get on the flop. If that typical hand may well not be GOOD ENOUGH to be the best hand, or if it is not likely to flop a draw which will receive a good enough price to try getting to the best hand, you are better off folding without putting in even a call of a min raise.

      Calling 300 chips (1.5BB) on a 50BB start stack may not SEEM like much, but if you call/fold after getting what you are playing for too much, your stack will not likely STAY at 50BB for long!

      By this I am not saying you need to go all in if you enter a pot for a raise with AK on a 50BB stack and flop top/top. But I AM saying if you are not willing to put at least SOMETHING in the pot when you play a hand like that, you are probably playing poker in a paralysis of fear. You are probably going to CALL because you are in fear of a better hand, and when you check and opponent(s) check behind, you may end up giving free cards that allow worse hands to improve to beat you too often.


      That does not mean when you flop a "monster" you need to bet EVERY TIME, sometimes deception can get you a more profitable situation, especially versus overly aggressive opponents. But the more often an opponent will PAY your lead bet with a lesser hand, the more often you should be leading...even on your monster hands.

      Bottom line...

      If you are flopping what you'd expect to get when you enter, waiting for improvement before you start putting chips into the pot is often BAD, BAD, BAD!

      2) The range of hands that Spike puts in the BB's open shove range is wide enough to have many hands that are BEHIND Spikes top set.

      Part of the info I got from Spike in Team Speak, the thing that changed my initial thoughts about this hand, was that the WIDE RANGE of the BB's jams was they very reason a flop check with top pair is a decent choice. That huge range holds no hands against which Spike is worse than about 36% equity with his top set, and many of the hands have almost no equity against Spike's holding.

      When I input to poker stove the specific range info Spike provided, his top set held a HUGE 72.9% equity edge versus the range he gave me. To put this into perspective, you have about the same 72.9% equity when you hold KK versus a shove range of any pp 22 to AA, and any A9 thru AK (s or os).


      FOLDING, or even checking the flop with the idea of "pot control", would be a huge leak, especially since the BEST reason for entering with 88 for a small call here is to flop a set and (hopefully) stack off the BB on his loose shove range. The only reason you should NOT be leading is because you think you may get a bigger pot built by checking, but if you do not have info that points in that direction, LEAD, LEAD, LEAD on a co-ordinated board with top set!

      If you cannot see your way to getting the entire BB' stack here, if possible, then fold pre-flop and do not even waste the 300 chips on a call.


      As played out, it was the min raiser who ended up stacking off to Spike.

      Much of the same things I said about configuring the flop decision to exploit the BB goes here for the min raiser too.

      I do NOT like Spike's min bet lead on the turn at all.
      Betting 200 into a 1200 pot on that A may well look "suspicious".

      It is far better to put a more standard size bet, say half to 2/3rds pot, out there, and take whatever comes from that. The player Spike was trying to "exploit" left the hand for even that tiny bet, so you are down to just hoping SOMEONE caught enough of the board to pay you after the check through on the flop.

      If 200 is going to get paid off, then 400 or 600 probably gets paid off too, so why only put the smaller value amount into the pot?

      I am glad you did read the situation enough to see that any made straight or any AA hand is probably NOT slow playing this flop very often, and this led to you being able to go for it when your remaining opponent decided top and bottom pair was enough to stand on. The only thing I'd say is that a larger turn bet is probably going to make the chances even better that you get this beneficial occurence.

      Last edited by JDean; Mon Nov 14, 2011, 10:21 AM.
      Double Bracelet Winner


      • #4
        Originally posted by spike8998 View Post
        Been sat at the table with this guy for over an hour I had him pegged as a bit loose Calling with Ax Kx Qx Tx suited or otherwise He was min raising with Ax , 3x bb with Kx and 4x bb with Qx and other hands Would call bets all the way to the river and would call river bet or raise with air and get burnt I know it states I should lead out after hitting the set on the flop but felt I might scare him off with an aggressive pot size bet Was checking it ok ?
        With the info as given, checking the flop is not good. The guy calls bets all the way, why would you not bet when you flop a monster? There are a lot of scary cards that will kill your action, start getting money in right on the flop.
        Head Live Trainer
        Check out my Videos

        4 Time Bracelet Winner



        X Cookies Information

        We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.