[NL2-NL10] [NL5 SH] aggro 66 middle pair

    • Th334
      Th334
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.11.2012 Posts: 971
      Poker Stars $5.00 No Limit Hold'em - 4 players
      DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

      BTN: $7.19 - VPIP: 15, PFR: 11, 3B: 7, AF: 1.3, Hands: 94
      SB: $2.09 - VPIP: 14, PFR: 0, 3B: 0, AF: 0.0, Hands: 7
      Hero (BB): $5.00 - VPIP: 23, PFR: 19, 3B: 8, AF: 4.0, Hands: 20611
      CO: $5.00 - VPIP: 19, PFR: 18, 3B: 9, AF: 0.8, Hands: 57

      Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BB with 6 :club: 6 :spade:
      CO raises to $0.20, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.15

      Flop: ($0.42) Q :heart: 2 :diamond: 4 :spade: (2 players)
      Hero checks, CO bets $0.30, Hero raises to $0.80, CO calls $0.50

      Turn: ($2.02) 3 :spade: (2 players)
      Hero bets $0.95, CO folds

      I both extract value from his air, and want it to fold as well, because it still has decent amount of equity against us.

      On a high turn card, I just check, and probably call a small bet with my new gutshot. He's kinda passive though...so not really sure.

      If he calls the turn, he probably has a queen, so I just check the river most of the time.
  • 7 replies
    • BogdanPS
      BogdanPS
      Basic
      Joined: 12.05.2010 Posts: 27,588
      Hi German,

      Preflop: looks fine

      Postflop: Bluff raising with hands that have little equity on dry boards where we represent nothing is not the best way to play these hands against an unknown player.

      I much more prefer raising a hand like A4dd here than 66. Can you guess why?
    • Th334
      Th334
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.11.2012 Posts: 971
      Hey Bogdan,

      I think I misunderstood one concept.

      Something like a raise with 66 on 882 board is a completely different story, right? We have heaps more equity here, but just by adding a Queen to the board, we lose a ton of it and it gets kinda break-even, so we go for pot-control.

      That's why Q dry board is good for cbets, because even hands that beat us do not have a lot of equity against our range, right?

      As a conclusion, we do raise flops with medium vulnerable pockets, but not when there's a high card already on the board :facepalm:

      PS: I think my TT hand I posted is kinda the same story.

      PPS: You would prefer A4 because we can improve to a strong hand, top 2P? That's actually pretty smart, I'll write down this feature of low aces :)

      PPPS: Did you crush the other soccer team? :s_cool:
    • BogdanPS
      BogdanPS
      Basic
      Joined: 12.05.2010 Posts: 27,588
      In the example I gave us not only do we have 5 outs to improve to 2p or trips we have another 10 outs that give us a nut flush draw on the turn.

      The idea is that raising as a bluff here can be done with a better range especially since all you are trying to get him to fold is mostly air and if he is very fit/fold some better pairs. But once we get called we have so little equity that we can't continue on many cards and there aren't that many scare cards in the deck that we can try to represent.

      If you raise this 66 on a 548tt or 589tt against someone that cbets a lot at least we have a gutshot and we can represent more, plus there are potential scare cards we can use.
    • Th334
      Th334
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.11.2012 Posts: 971
      I'm a bit confused. I wasn't thinking of it as a pure bluff actually.

      I've seen in three places a similar play:

      1. In his book Harrington cold-calls preflop with 66 on the BU, the flop comes 882r, he argues that we probably have the best hand on such a dry flop, so we raise the villain's CB. Kinda it's better than calling, because on a bad turn we won't know where we stand anymore, and we don't mind him folding overcards.

      2. In the video from the beginners course, insyder19 played aggressively with 88 on J66 board, but I believe he just bet after a skipped flop CB by the villain. Anyway, he was saying the same thing: our equity is cool now, but it won't be anymore on most turns, so we want to take it down.

      3. I think I remember mbml giving me an example of 88 even on A22r board, like we bet here, because our pair is vulnerable, and he compared it to KK on same board, which is a check.

      So I concluded that we often bet (raise?) dry low flops with medium pockets, since most of the PFA's range has missed it :f_rolleyes:

      Could you please explain me what did I get wrong? TY
    • BogdanPS
      BogdanPS
      Basic
      Joined: 12.05.2010 Posts: 27,588
      Every example you gave there was on a pair board and only one has to deal with ck/raising.

      In theory your ck/raise is fine as long as villain plays fit/fold and is not a thinking player (which most nl5 players are). However, at the same time you can ck/raise your entire range of bluffs there given that you've chose to turn into a bluff 66. We can't really consider the ck/raise for value because while not much worse calls it for more than one street and we have a very small chance to improve our hand.

      Value raise means that you get called by worse often. What you did here is raise to take down the pot and get him to fold his equity in the hand (ie: 2 overcards) or maybe a small bluff to get him to fold some better pairs.

      The problem you will run into versus thinking opponents, and more so on paired boards like the Harrington example, is that you are raising a board that you represent nothing on which means you will get called lighter by better hands and floated by weaker hands as well which may try to get the pot from you later on.

      So tell me this, how is our raise for value when we ck/raise flop and bet turn? What worse hands are calling you there for those two streets?
    • Th334
      Th334
      Bronze
      Joined: 26.11.2012 Posts: 971
      Thanks, Bogdan.

      Yeah...I don't know. You are right. It's not actually value.

      So it's basically turning our pair into a bluff? Well, then I agree that we might find a better board to do this, and a better hand for a bluff as well. Betting after a skipped CB seems fine against most non-aggro opponents (as a bluff), but raising is a bit over the top, I guess.

      I think betting is fine, because although we have a pair, we will get to the showdown with it only when the opponents has nothing (or a weaker pair) and decides not to bluff. So it's not that often, and trying to take the pot with a bluff here on the flop is fine.

      Am I getting there with these small pairs? Basically we prefer checking/calling, and bluff only when we have a good opportunity for it?
    • BogdanPS
      BogdanPS
      Basic
      Joined: 12.05.2010 Posts: 27,588
      Ck/calling is villain dependent and works well versus guys that bet only one street and then play face up the rest of the way (like most regs at these limits). Of course, the weaker our pair the weaker the bluffcatcher actually is.

      A lot of the time you want to give up with hands that have little equity in the pot (or lets say hands that have some showdown value but can't make it there) early on. You don't have to win every pot on every board.