nl10 cbet range check #2

Hi Lewis,

Are we playing against a complete unknown?

He called in CO vs UTG so his range is tighter and that should be the first consideration (rather than what our range is).

So what range do you put him on?

What do you think of creating a x/r range on this kind of board?

Originally posted by BogdanPS
Hi Lewis,

Are we playing against a complete unknown?

He called in CO vs UTG so his range is tighter and that should be the first consideration (rather than what our range is).

So what range do you put him on?

hi! yeah the assumption is that we are playing against a table of unknowns. i'm trying to just come up with some sort of an approach to playing against unknowns first and then i feel like i'll be able to adjust for player types or when i have more information.

so then how can i possibly put him on a reasonable range when i don't know if he's a 90/40 maniac or a 14/12 nit? does it not make more sense to focus on my own ranges when i don't have any information?

but if i were to consider how i think the average player in this pool would play, then his range will probably look something like this: {JJ-22, AQs-A8s, KJs+, QJs, JTs, T9s, AQo-ATo, KJo+, QJo} -- people love to set mine and they call a little too many broadways and Axs hands IP so that's the sort of range i'd assign a random caller in his spot... but then i really don't know how i feel about the idea of assigning a complete unknown nl10 player a range for calling preflop.

Originally posted by holmeboy
What do you think of creating a x/r range on this kind of board?

this was going to be my follow up question ♦

Originally posted by DrDunne

Originally posted by holmeboy
What do you think of creating a x/r range on this kind of board?

this was going to be my follow up question ♦

Haha. Its a board I kind of like it. Its fairly wet considering we're dealign with UTG and a calling range v UTG so both will have lots of BB hands. Which means villain will bet a lot once checked to.

With something like KK we block a lot of value combos our opponent can have so x/r seems like a good option because we can play 2 streets v his draws and get more value

i was thinking if i were to have a x/r range it would probably need to include like A♣Ax. i'm just not really sure it's very necessary.

[edit] i muddled up the hand, thought this was the other one i posted ♦ but yeah i am interested to see what sort of checking range would be good here.

Hi Lewis,

Why should we have a ck/raising range vs a complete unknown? Most people at these limits are

A) not too loose vs Co
B) don't bluff that much

So we should absolutely just bet our value range and the hands with equity (similarly to how we discussed the previous hand).

right so we bet our strong hands and hands that have equity i.e. draws, but what about: QQ, AJs, QJs, JTs, AJo, TT-77?

these hands are pobably doing ok against his total flop range, but against a calling range they will drop in both equity AND playability. ofc when we bet with our QQ we have FE which is always nice if we can have the best hand as well, however when we get called i get lost and start regretting my decision. but it's like both checking and betting suck:

checking = we pot control, induce bluffs and might induce lighter calls on later streets if he checks back. however we almost always end up on in a crappy spot which often leads to levelling.

betting = we MIGHT get value from worse but nothing better is really folding. however we also fold out some hands that he might push us out with if we check, so having FE is nice in that sense but we still have the best hand, just we can't realise our equity.

so my thinking is that i should just take the aggressive option and bet and stop thinking about value/bluff and what worse calls etc but start thinking about the overall strategy in this spot. and it seems like checking would only really be an option for me if i had some sort of read. or what do you think?

With a hand like 77 nothing stops you from ck/folding which I think is fine.

But Jx or QQ can be used as a thin value bet/protection/take down pot.

Checking and calling, at least at these limits, is your worst option imo as you always end up building pots OOP without initiative, good hand or much equity and drop them later on.

Thank you, that makes a lot of sense and it all seems a bit clearer now...

Originally posted by BogdanPS
Checking and calling, at least at these limits, is your worst option imo as you always end up building pots OOP without initiative, good hand or much equity and drop them later on.

This is something I spent almost 100k hands doing and I feel like it was a bit of a learning curve but at the same time not very useful as a default strategy.