100NL: TripsMK vs. nit BvB

Villain is 12/9/2.8 over 315 hands

$0.5/$1 No Limit Holdem
6 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com

Stacks:
UTG Gorvacofin ($118)
UTG+1 Jesus Lester ($107)
CO creator 9 ($117)
BTN coeckie ($162)
SB Hero ($100)
BB bataa3 ($206)

Pre-Flop: ($1.50, 6 players) Hero is SB 9 Q
4 folds, Hero raises to $4, bataa3 calls $3

Flop: Q Q 8 ($8, 2 players)
Hero bets $5, bataa3 raises to $17, Hero calls $12

Turn: A ($42, 2 players)
Hero checks, bataa3 bets $24, Hero calls $24

River: 6 ($90, 2 players)
Hero checks, bataa3 bets $58, Hero folds

Final Pot: $90

bataa3 wins $145 ( won +$42 )

Hero lost -$45

bdon22 wrote:

Villain is 12/9/2.8 over 315 hands

$0.5/$1 No Limit Holdem
6 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com

Stacks:
UTG Gorvacofin ($118)
UTG+1 Jesus Lester ($107)
CO creator 9 ($117)
BTN coeckie ($162)
SB Hero ($100)
BB bataa3 ($206)

Pre-Flop: ($1.50, 6 players) Hero is SB 9 Q
4 folds, Hero raises to $4, bataa3 calls $3

Flop: Q Q 8 ($8, 2 players)
Hero bets $5, bataa3 raises to $17, Hero calls $12

Turn: A ($42, 2 players)
Hero checks, bataa3 bets $24, Hero calls $24

River: 6 ($90, 2 players)
Hero checks, bataa3 bets $58, Hero folds

Final Pot: $90

bataa3 wins $145 ( won +$42 )

Hero lost -$45

You are commited in this pot with half stake,so for me ship it on river...you dont have position,but with shoves he will call you only if he had 88 or bad played AA...

I would call here although he is a Nit playing 12/9. His range contains 8-8, K-Q, J-Q ( A-Q is 3 betting i guess) but also busted flushes, straights, and random bluffs so if you stick to the river, you are getting almost 3:1 to call. The real problem is a turn call becouse if a tight player like this goes into a random bluff he will put a third barrel so if I decide to call a turn I am calling a blank river!

I'm a calling station and you know it. I call. Realistically though, for me, this just might be the fold that would separate me from lower class to the middle class

ps- wjy $5 on flop?

Im golden fish for folks that can fold this.

His blind defending habits would be of a great help. Maybe he is a type of player who is very nitty, but very loose when it comes to blind defence. Especially when the attacker comes form small blind. In that case he might have a weaker queen also, and you must call.

For the information given, I will still call because there are two spades, good pot odds, and I dont think little over 300 hands sample is enough to catch all the habits, and note someone as a real nit.

He might as well be a nit and play A8 as that.

Alright, I guess the consensus is that we're going all the way with this hand.

That being said, is it best to get it in on the flop, CRAI the turn, or as-played?

I don't think you are getting more value out of your hand any other way then as played.

I forgot to mention that despite I would probably call, I dont think folding is a big error here, if error at all. I think decision in that spot is very close one, and neither folding, nor call will lose you money in the long run.

If Ivey or Brunson where on the other side I would not lay that hand down....

I think it was a bad fold, you invested half of ur stack, be a man call, and if you loose re buy and play again....

miroror wrote:

If Ivey or Brunson where on the other side I would not lay that hand down....

I think it was a bad fold, you invested half of ur stack, be a man call, and if you loose re buy and play again....

Don't go there please. It's not about being a man or not. It's about making the correct decisions, and I think Martini wrote the best so far about this hand.

Also, people, please refrain from comments like this in strategy forums or strategy topics. We are all trying to improve and help others to improve, and this we can only do with good arguments and solid reasoning, something no strategy post here should lack of.

np red, I was just refering that if I invest half of my stack on trips, and on flop without straight or flush posibilites It is right to call, even if he had Q it is the right decision....

just my 2 c

I think the river is really close. In general I would never fold this, but you can fold it if...

1. Your opponent to raise non ace-high flushes on the turn.
2. Your opponent won't bet the turn and river with AXss.
3. Your opponent doesn't bluff raise on flop (like raise KJdd or 9T whatever).

If you are very confident these are all true, then sure, muck it. I think they're rarely all true but this seems like one of the rare villains where they all might be over 70% of the time.

FWIW I think most of you guys are overestimating how often people will raise low flush draws on the flop. I also think this is a spot where a flop bluff will always get followed through on the turn (since an ace is a great card to continue on), yet the river barrel often sucks because non-ace high flush draws will fold on the turn and any made hand which calls the turn (like A8 or whatever) says "Well I have pot odds and have to call the river" and snaps off the jam. So bluffing the river is pretty crappy usually so you should be folding the river more because of that.

Personally in general I will fold A8 on the river and prolly call Qx since Qx means my opponent is only half as likely to have me outkicked by a queen even though A8 = Q9 probably 90% of the time.

^ DH that's exactly what I was thinking of during the hand but I couldn't think of a way to express it in words.

FWIW I used my entire time bank on this hand thinking of how sick of a fold it was going to be.

I felt that the A was a good bluff card for him, but I expect him to give up on most of his bluffs by the river especially after raising the flop and barreling the turn. Shoving $58 into $90 doesn't exactly look like it has a lot of fold equity. so if he's rarely ever bluffing that river then I think I can fold.

DoctorHandles wrote:

1. Your opponent to raise non ace-high flushes on the turn.

DH, your post is intriguing and I am eager to continue disscusion, but I am not sure If I understand the assumption #1 well.

So... if you could explain what you meant saying: "opponent to raise non ace-high flushes on turn".

Yeah wow #1 doesn't make any sense, sorry.


1. Your opponent won't raise non-ace high flushes on the FLOP.

DoctorHandles wrote:

I also think this is a spot where a flop bluff will always get followed through on the turn (since an ace is a great card to continue on)

I am not sure how much this statement is true. It would certainly be very true if villain was original raiser. In my opinion not so when he is a PF caller who raised us on flop.

I dont think he would bluff to much that turn because of two reasons:

1. Ace on the turn hits our (heros) range in solid part when we are calling villains flop raise with AK, AQ or Axss on the paired flop. ( I do that even against nits).

2. He canot represent the ace with too much credibility, unless we believe he is capable of raising Ax on flop

DoctorHandles wrote:

Personally in general I will fold A8 on the river and prolly call Qx since Qx means my opponent is only half as likely to have me outkicked by a queen even though A8 = Q9 probably 90% of the time.

If we believe that ace is a great turn card for a vilain to continue bluffing, that should be so because he can easily have it (otherwise we believe that villain is totally unaware of his image, and playing unconsistently to it)
... meaning he could have done the flop raise with AK, AQ, AJ off suit and other ace high flush combos.

If we follow that logic, I think its possible that villain is valuebetting AK, AQ, AJ on river, wich would justify the call and make the difference between A8 and Qx more significant.

I think a lot of players (myself included) will bet the turn with Qx/Ax/bluffs and only bet the river with Qx/bluffs and check behind with Ax. I do this because I want to charge flush draws and prevent my opponent whose range has a lot of flush cards from seeing a free river card.

Yet once we get to the river, there is little point in value betting Ax. Our opponents range on the river will have a much higher frequency of Qx in it since so many pp's and flush draws fold the turn, so why bet against a range of pocket pairs/flush draws/Qx on the river?

Overall I still like your thinking a lot and I think you're spot on if people are going to bet the turn and river with Ax, I just think most people only bet the turn.

DoctorHandles wrote:

Yet once we get to the river, there is little point in value betting Ax. Our opponents range on the river will have a much higher frequency of Qx in it since so many pp's and flush draws fold the turn, so why bet against a range of pocket pairs/flush draws/Qx on the river?

Yes this is true. Especially with such a nitty stats, villain cant expect a call from PPs. As we have seen, hero even managed to fold queen to him.

I tought that he might valuebet river maybe with AK, AQ and get a call from hero holding weaker ace, but I am not sure how often will both have ace in holecards in comparision to pot odds and hero holding a queen.

I think this example shows very clearly why playing like 12/9 is inapropriate most of the time.

Villain has ranges so tight that he is always polarised, representing monster or bluff. He can hardly make profitable VBs with marginal hands, and has a hard time when trying to representing a hand.

I think my statement about valuebetting AK, AQ, AJ on river would be much closer to truth if villain is looser player who can expect ocassional calls from PPs, and weaker aces when danger of hero holding a queen and just calling flop and turn is relatively small.