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.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

$3.50 45-Man Early; Very Loose Villain Takes Aggro Line, Does His Range Have Bluffs?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • $3.50 45-Man Early; Very Loose Villain Takes Aggro Line, Does His Range Have Bluffs?

    Villain was running 55/5 over 50 hands with an aggression frequency of about 15. Game had just started.

    What do you think the minraise means? Can I give credit for a hand when the board pairs? Do the villain's stats argue that he's strong, or on a bluff? What do you think of my line overall?

    PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, 3.5 Tournament, 15/30 Blinds (9 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

    UTG (t1400)
    UTG+1 (t1790)
    MP1 (t1450)
    MP2 (t1460)
    MP3 (t1470)
    CO (t1570)
    Panicky (Button) (t1460)
    SB (t1400)
    BB (t1500)

    Panicky's M: 32.44

    Preflop: Panicky is Button with Q, Q
    3 folds, MP2 calls t30, 2 folds, Panicky bets t120, 2 folds, MP2 calls t90

    Flop: (t285) 4, 2, K (2 players)
    MP2 checks, Panicky checks

    Turn: (t285) 7 (2 players)
    MP2 checks, Panicky bets t165, MP2 raises to t330, Panicky calls t165

    River: (t945) K (2 players)
    MP2 bets t990, Panicky calls t990

    Total pot: t2925

  • #2
    Hey Panicky! That is a REALLY tough spot. Preflop, I'm making the same std raise and the opp calls, so they limp/called (not totally unexpected if running 55%VPIP). Flop: a flush draw and an overcard. I can see checking for pot control, but with both and overcard and a flush draw, I'd rather make a value bet on the flop, then if called, check the turn for pot control if I miss. This way one bet would get me to the river. The turn completes the flush and if I didn't bet the flop, then I would bet the turn. The opp min-raises here. If I were the opp, I'd check the flop, then check/raise the turn with Ax and the A of spades or 7x with the 7 of spades. I might think a 7 is good, as by not betting the flop, it'd be really hard to put the hero on a K, as if so, the hero should want to price out a flush draw. If I had the flush, I wouldn't raise unless I thought the opp had 2 pair or a set (and really neither of these make sense as either should have bet the flop to price out the flush draw). The river pairs the board. The opp, that had been playing the entire hand pretty passively, now leads out for 990. With that bet, I'm noting that instead of pushing, he leaves a few chips behind... which is odd. Normally if the opp is bluffing, they'll shove, not bet all but a hundred or so chips. I'd be putting the opp on a small flush or a bluff, with an outside chance of 77. It's one of those hands were QQ is either way ahead or crushed and by not betting the flop, I don't know which one it is. Due to that, I'd muck the river. I'd have made a c-bet on the flop after the preflop raise. That would help to define the opp's hand some. If they called the flop bet, then I can re-evaluate on the turn and if they check the turn, I can then check behind for pot control. By not betting the flop, I think it's tougher to define their hand and that makes the river play an even stickier situation than it is. Tough situation and I'll be interested in seeing what the others would do here too. Hope this helps and good luck at the tables.umbup: John (JWK24)
    Super-Moderator



    6 Time Bracelet Winner


    Comment


    • #3
      I hate getting in these situations! Is this a turbo or regular speed?

      I agree with JWK24 here. I would make a 70% pot sized c-bet on the flop hoping he folds. If the villain reraises (even a min-raise) the flop I'm folding. If he flats, I'm still pretty much done with the hand. With the villain's stats, we are crushing his range preflop, but there is an overcard on the flop, the turn makes a flush possible and pocket 2s or 4s would be my best guess as to his holdings.

      This early in a tourney, I don't want to risk my entire stack with "just a pair", especially when it is not even an over pair to the board.

      As played, I would have folded to the villain's mini reraise on the turn. Yeah, it doesn't cost much to call, but I often see small turn raises followed up by big river raises that I would fold to. I assume the guy flopped a set, got passive because he was afraid of the flush, got a boat on the river and shoved hoping you would play along.

      Curious how this one actually played out!

      GL

      Roland GTX

      Comment


      • #4
        It's a turbo.

        My reasoning for not cbetting the flop was, I didn't want to turn QQ into a bluff. I figured that if I bet, I was only after the current pot, and I'd have to give up entirely if I got called. By checking, I was hoping to get the guy to take a Kx hand out of my range so that he'd possibly call or bet on a later street with worse. When he checked both the flop and turn, I took all Kx hands out of his range, which left me confused when he min-checkraised. Checking the flop wasn't necessarily good, but if anyone's curious, that's why I did it.

        Comment


        • #5
          I would have cbet the flop check back turn for pot control ,if he leads river call ..much more standard imo and lose way less(if this is the case) ,if he checks river i would have thin value rbet.

          Comment


          • #6
            It sounds like you are thinking one level beyond me. I see that flop and think "Hmm, That flop didn't help me at all. I want to take this down ASAP before it gets any worse".

            GL!

            Roland GTX

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi ya Panicky, that was a tough spot m8, im not guna give my advice on the matter, you dnt need my advice at all pal.

              What im wondering is what was the outcome of the hand? Sorry if thats a nooby question, its just i dont see the outcome in our post? Did the Opp win the hand?

              Comment


              • #8
                He might have won. I don't like to post results in case it influences the discussion. I'll post them later though when some more people have responded. Interesting that everyone so far is in favor of c-betting. inking: Cool.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi Panicky!

                  This is the wrong guy to get tricky and pot control against. He'll gladly call with worse so you should be c-betting the flop. If he ever raises, you fold. Loose-passive players are not check/raising as a bluff, and they're not check/raising worse than QQ for value. Therefore you're ahead of zero percent of his check/raise range and need to fold the turn (unless you had a draw). River just confirms this. Snap fold.
                  4 Time Bracelet Winner


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by PanickyPoker View Post
                    Villain was running 55/5 over 50 hands with an aggression frequency of about 15. Game had just started.

                    What do you think the minraise means? Can I give credit for a hand when the board pairs? Do the villain's stats argue that he's strong, or on a bluff? What do you think of my line overall?

                    PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, 3.5 Tournament, 15/30 Blinds (9 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

                    UTG (t1400)
                    UTG+1 (t1790)
                    MP1 (t1450)
                    MP2 (t1460)
                    MP3 (t1470)
                    CO (t1570)
                    Panicky (Button) (t1460)
                    SB (t1400)
                    BB (t1500)

                    Panicky's M: 32.44

                    Preflop: Panicky is Button with Q, Q
                    3 folds, MP2 calls t30, 2 folds, Panicky bets t120, 2 folds, MP2 calls t90

                    Flop: (t285) 4, 2, K (2 players)
                    MP2 checks, Panicky checks

                    Turn: (t285) 7 (2 players)
                    MP2 checks, Panicky bets t165, MP2 raises to t330, Panicky calls t165

                    River: (t945) K (2 players)
                    MP2 bets t990, Panicky calls t990

                    Total pot: t2925
                    Hi Panicky,

                    For me this is an easy fold to the turn action. This villain is a huge fish (based on 55/5) and a min-c/r from a weak player is tell of a very strong hand. Additionally this villain is very passive both pre and post flop so far, so it's likely he has little to no bluff range at all. I wouldn't be surprised if he shows you a flush or better tbh.

                    Dave
                    Head Live Trainer
                    Check out my Videos

                    4 Time Bracelet Winner



                    Comment


                    • #11
                      BTW I think checking back the flop is ok here. Although c-betting the flop vs. this loose an opponent is fine because we can get called by worse pairs and flush draws (not a lot of combos of flush draws in his range though). But I do like Panicky's thinking that we may get looser calls even still on the turn and river simply because we check back the flop... the villain is often going to give is 2 streets with worse pairs now because he thinks we have AQ and bet the turn with a flush draw, or because he just doesn't believe us. An important note about this is that the guy is so passive, we don't really have to worry about him bluffing at us if we check back the flop and make a delayed c-bet on the turn.
                      Head Live Trainer
                      Check out my Videos

                      4 Time Bracelet Winner



                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by oriholic View Post
                        This is the wrong guy to get tricky and pot control against.
                        I wouldn't call pot controlling being tricky, but alright. I guess I could fold the turn, although I really hate folding to a minraise when someone's line doesn't make sense to me. I suppose I should have at least folded the river on the grounds that big bets from big fish usually mean only one thing...

                        I guess I'll consider c-betting the flop more in future spots like this one, although it's not a line I like all that much. It does keep me in control of the action, it gets value from worse hands, and it disguises my range (since I'd usually c-bet this without a hand), but if he calls me, I leave myself vulnerable to being bluffed off the pot later, which random fish are still capable of even if they're passive.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TheLangolier View Post
                          An important note about this is that the guy is so passive, we don't really have to worry about him bluffing at us if we check back the flop and make a delayed c-bet on the turn.
                          That makes sense. I'm wondering if I'm interpreting his stats wrong though, because I didn't view him as extremely passive postflop. An AggFreq between 10 and 20 isn't by any means high (or even average), but they can get much lower. If he's only betting ~15% of the time, then I'd assume he just doesn't know how to bet and is therefore more likely than a normal player to have random bluffs in his range, even though he's overall less likely to bet.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by PanickyPoker View Post
                            It's a turbo. My reasoning for not cbetting the flop was, I didn't want to turn QQ into a bluff. I figured that if I bet, I was only after the current pot, and I'd have to give up entirely if I got called. By checking, I was hoping to get the guy to take a Kx hand out of my range so that he'd possibly call or bet on a later street with worse. When he checked both the flop and turn, I took all Kx hands out of his range, which left me confused when he min-checkraised. Checking the flop wasn't necessarily good, but if anyone's curious, that's why I did it.
                            Originally posted by PanickyPoker View Post
                            I wouldn't call pot controlling being tricky, but alright. I guess I could fold the turn, although I really hate folding to a minraise when someone's line doesn't make sense to me. I suppose I should have at least folded the river on the grounds that big bets from big fish usually mean only one thing... I guess I'll consider c-betting the flop more in future spots like this one, although it's not a line I like all that much. It does keep me in control of the action, it gets value from worse hands, and it disguises my range (since I'd usually c-bet this without a hand), but if he calls me, I leave myself vulnerable to being bluffed off the pot later, which random fish are still capable of even if they're passive.
                            Cool stuff panicky!! umbup: I'll have to reread this until I really get it, try it on for size, etc. umbup: I guess my guess for the villain's had would tend towards 22 or 44 (emphasis on guess). Like, maybe they checked the flop, hoping you'd cbet? Then when that didn't happen, the turn came bringing 3 to a flush, and now they're not sure they're good any more, but then you reraise and it's small. So now they're confused about where they stand - like do you have a flush draw or have you just hit and you're already there? Then the river comes, and they don't care any more because they've got a boat - now they're just hoping you do have the flush? Just a guess ... I get what you were thinking about them not having a K, and then if they had the flush, shouldn't they have been worried by the board pairing? I guess that's why I figured they might have instead had 22 or 44, but maybe they did have the flush or the K, eh? But even if they had the set, then shouldn't they have been worried about the 3 to a flush? So either way, they might have been raising when the might have been behind I guess - which is indeed confusing. Unless they had KK, which would be shocking!
                            Last edited by TrustySam; Fri Mar 02, 2012, 11:10 PM. Reason: Got some details of the hand wrong :)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The reasons you would check behind are to keep the pot small and induce bluffs (which should be small since it's a small pot, thus easier to call), or for deception, to make your hand look weaker than it is and get called by worse that won't call a flop bet. Clearly this guy isn't bluffing so we can take reason #1 out. Do you think he would fold a medium pair, 4x, etc. to a flop bet but call a turn bet with them if you check the flop? If that's the case it makes sense, but do you really think he's that tight?
                              4 Time Bracelet Winner


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              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.