[NL20-NL50] NL25: AJo 3Bet

    • Avatars91
      Avatars91
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.12.2009 Posts: 2,689
      Poker Stars $25.00 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players - View hand 1982612
      DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

      MP: $9.30 - VPIP: 17, PFR: 13, 3B: 6, AF: 2,7, Hands: 217
      CO: $37.59 - VPIP: 33, PFR: 28, 3B: 11, AF: 3,8, FoldTo3Bet: 86(7), Hands: 89
      Hero (BTN): $25.00 - VPIP: 21, PFR: 18, 3B: 5, AF: 4,8, Hands: 90087
      SB: $25.00 - VPIP: 24, PFR: 18, 3B: 21, AF: 6,0, Hands: 34
      BB: $28.54 - VPIP: 80, PFR: 59, 3B: 32, AF: 1,1, AFq: 26, Hands: 61
      UTG: $24.80 - VPIP: 17, PFR: 15, 3B: 8, AF: 1,0, Hands: 98

      Pre Flop: ($0.35) Hero is BTN with J :club: A :heart:
      2 folds, CO raises to $1, Hero raises to $3, 1 fold, BB calls $2.75, 1 fold

      Flop: ($7.10) 2 :spade: J :diamond: 3 :spade: (2 players)
      BB checks, Hero bets $3.25, BB calls $3.25

      Turn: ($13.60) Q :club: (2 players)
      BB checks, Hero checks

      River: ($13.60) Q :diamond: (2 players)
      BB bets $6.75, Hero calls $6.75

      CO folds a lot to 3Bets and BB is quite the maniac when it comes to 3Betting and squeezing, so I guess that a 3Bet is the way to go in this spot preflop.

      Postflop:
      1) Would betting the turn for a free showdown + value not be a much better line?
      Since his range might very well be wide and it might make sense to avoid difficult river decisions like this one, perhaps betting is the absolute best way to play the hand without much additional knowledge about the guy?

      2) Can river be called if we assume that villain likely doesn't have a lot of Qx hands in his range apart from QJ, which on this board and with us having Jx is a rather unlikely scenario? + any other Qx hand is combo-wise unlikely as well.
  • 3 replies
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      Hello Avatars91,

      1) Would betting the turn for a free showdown + value not be a much better line?Since his range might very well be wide and it might make sense to avoid difficult river decisions like this one, perhaps betting is the absolute best way to play the hand without much additional knowledge about the guy?

      Depends of course on the opponent, vs passive players we don't need to do it, vs aggressive players we rather want to do it to avoid huge bets. :) Again not possible to answer with simple and clear play. Cause clearly you ain't gonna get called from a lot worse, he may easily even have Qx holdings which he floats.

      2) Can river be called if we assume that villain likely doesn't have a lot of Qx hands in his range apart from QJ, which on this board and with us having Jx is a rather unlikely scenario? + any other Qx hand is combo-wise unlikely as well.

      Why? He could easily even float with some AQ/KQ holding with some backdoors or something, so you can't say that he has only QJ. Of course could also have a FD with Qx. So before asking what the guy has or does value-bet/bluff-bet this way should ask what was your turn-plan with the Check-behind? Did you plan to fold any blank? Did you plan to Call aka bluff-induce?

      Best Regards.
    • Avatars91
      Avatars91
      Bronze
      Joined: 18.12.2009 Posts: 2,689
      Why? He could easily even float with some AQ/KQ holding with some backdoors or something, so you can't say that he has only QJ. Of course could also have a FD with Qx. So before asking what the guy has or does value-bet/bluff-bet this way should ask what was your turn-plan with the Check-behind? Did you plan to fold any blank? Did you plan to Call aka bluff-induce?


      I sort of thought that an OOP float with Qx hands that are not QJ is, of course, not impossible, but still somewhat unlikely not only because it is very opponent dependent (it's not like some sort of a standard to float with AQ there) but also because it just combo wise is so unlikely.
      Originally I intended to fold if he bets the river but this particular river card made me think that he can't have much there that has me beat. Is it that bad an assumption?

      In general I guess that since I know relatively little about him, I suppose that it is difficult to find the optimal line anyway.
      Thus we should choose one of the safe options, e.g., either check behind turn and fold vs normally sized river bets OR just 2nd barrel and ensure a free showdown.

      Given that he has folded quite often to 3Bets thus far, I suppose that it would make sense to check behind turn, hope that he checks and then vBet thinly vs any PP or weaker Jx hand.

      Makes sense?
    • veriz
      veriz
      Black
      Joined: 20.07.2008 Posts: 65,504
      Originally posted by Avatars91
      Why? He could easily even float with some AQ/KQ holding with some backdoors or something, so you can't say that he has only QJ. Of course could also have a FD with Qx. So before asking what the guy has or does value-bet/bluff-bet this way should ask what was your turn-plan with the Check-behind? Did you plan to fold any blank? Did you plan to Call aka bluff-induce?


      I sort of thought that an OOP float with Qx hands that are not QJ is, of course, not impossible, but still somewhat unlikely not only because it is very opponent dependent (it's not like some sort of a standard to float with AQ there) but also because it just combo wise is so unlikely.
      Originally I intended to fold if he bets the river but this particular river card made me think that he can't have much there that has me beat. Is it that bad an assumption?

      In general I guess that since I know relatively little about him, I suppose that it is difficult to find the optimal line anyway.
      Thus we should choose one of the safe options, e.g., either check behind turn and fold vs normally sized river bets OR just 2nd barrel and ensure a free showdown.

      Given that he has folded quite often to 3Bets thus far, I suppose that it would make sense to check behind turn, hope that he checks and then vBet thinly vs any PP or weaker Jx hand.

      Makes sense?
      Yes, makes sense. :)