Best of ... Sample Hands - Part VI (Short handed/6max)

    • Stefan1000
      Joined: 24.01.2006 Posts: 1,649
      ******* Hand 1 ********

      PartyPoker 1.00/2.00 Limit Hold'em [color:#0000FF](5 handed)[/color] HandRecorder

      BB (30/20/2/40)

      Preflop: Hero is SB with 8:club: , Q:club:
      [color:#666666]3 folds[/color], [color:#FF0000]Hero raises[/color], [color:#FF0000]BB 3-bets[/color], Hero calls.

      Flop: (6.00 SB) 4:heart: , 9:club: , 4:club: [color:#0000FF](2 players)[/color]
      Hero checks, [color:#FF0000]BB bets[/color], Hero calls.

      Turn: (4.00 BB) T:heart: [color:#0000FF](2 players)[/color]
      Hero checks, [color:#FF0000]BB bets[/color], [color:#FF0000]Hero raises[/color], BB calls.

      River: (8.00 BB) A:diamond: [color:#0000FF](2 players)[/color]

      Final Pot: 9.00 BB.


      Final Pot: 9.00 BB.

      We find ourselves in the SB with Q8s. This is an open raise from the small blind according to the chard and we get a prompt 3-bet from BigBling. We hit a flush draw on the flop and now have these options:

      a) check/raise Flop bet Turn
      b) c/c Flop c/r Turn

      Hero decides to just check/call the flop and then to check/raise the turn. That is, we've decided to execute our semi-bluff on the turn.

      Why is line b) so much more effective and better than c/r flop, bet turn in this situation?

      - A c/r flop generates so little fold equity against the WTS of the opponent that he'll call down with almost any pocket and ace high.
      Meaning: We'll hardly bring a better hand to folding with c/r flop

      - The board is not very scary and the opposition will often guess that we have UI overcards after a c/c flop, since we'll often have 6 outs on a 494 board and the pot is large enough to draw on these. This assumption on the part of the opponent has the consequence that...

      - ... The opponent will bet almost every turn again and we can generate more fold equity with c/r turn against A high and pockets which would have called down against a c/r flop, bet turn.

      - we get 1 more SB with c/c flop, c/r turn from UI overcards that would have folded against a turn bet after a c/r flop.

      - The opposition can't use his advantage of position as well since we don't have the initiative on the turn. With c/r flop, bet turn we run the risk that LAG's and aggressive opponents raise for a free showdown with A high or small pockets/draws. The free showdown raise, the one from the opposition on the turn, means that we couldn't generate any fold equity in comparison to the situation where the opposition has the initiative on the turn and we can check/raise him.

      - our draw is strong with 12 outs and we don't need a lot of fold equity.

      Against which kind of opponent is this move inappropriate?

      This move is not appropriate against TAG's who will check behind too often with A high and pockets on the turn and call the river. Against these opponents, c/r flop, bet turn is better.

      Now let's see how much fold equity we need.

      Our opponent is loose-aggressive but has a PFR value more like a TAG.

      Because of the known 3-betting range (SB vs. BB0 of around 25% (about our 3-betting range), we have an equity of around 32% according to Pokerstove.

      Villain's 3-betting range according to Pokerstove:


      Fold equity Hero needs without the probability of a 3-bet.

      p(fold) > (1 - 2 * EQ) / (((pot + 2) * (1 - EQ)) + 1 - 2 * EQ)

      p(fold) > (1-2*0.32) / (((7+2) * (1-0.32)) + 1 - 2*0.32) = 6%

      So we need the opponent to fold in at least 6% of all cases to make our semi-bluff profitable.

      If we look at Villain's range, we'll see that almost all pockets <9 and all As and Ao hands will fold, thus satisfying our conditions.

      We semi-bluff our opponent on the turn but he calls our raise and the A drops on the river. Once again, Hero has 2 choices, but without much consideration there's really only one action to be done.

      Bet River!

      We have to bet the river again, especially on a scare card:

      A lot of draws were possible on this turn. The board is double-suited and with odds of 1:7 an opponent with a high WTS will often legitimately call hands like KQ, KJ or QJ. We are behind against all these hands and want him to fold flush draws and straight draws with a better Q or a K. Furthermore, he could have called with a pocket <9 because he suspected our semi-bluff and now has a difficult decision of whether to call on the river against another bet and will probably choose to fold his lowest pair.

      ******* Hand 2 ********

      Pure Bluff Flop


      Pure bluffs on the flop are often the result of such situations as follows:

      We're in the BB: CO calls, SB completes, Hero checks

      We're in the SB: CO calls, Hero completes, BB checks

      We're on the button: CO calls, Hero calls (suited connector ala T9s 89s), SB folds, BB checks

      On which flops against which opponents from which positions should we donk the flop as a pure bluff? Since an unraised pot is 3SB in this situation our move only needs to succeed in 1:4 cases and is very profitable on the following flops under the following conditions.

      a) uncoordinated rainbow flops with a high card

      Flop: (6.00 SB) K:heart: , 7:club: , 2:spade: [color:#0000FF](3 players)[/color]

      This flop is good from any position for a bluff on the flop. The opposition will seldom have hit anything, no draws are possible and they'll rarely call with any 2 because they must discount their outs strongly as there is a chance that we have the K, thereby reducing their chances for drawing.

      Under what conditions should we check/fold the flop?

      - Both opponents are very aggressive and have a high WTS. A flop bet will often be called if not raised.

      - The opposition are calling stations and often call against all odds with any 2 cards.

      b): paired Highcard- Boards with a rag card

      Flop: (6.00 SB) K:heart: , K:club: , 4:spade: [color:#0000FF](3 players)[/color]

      Here, too, it's possible to bet with any 2 independent of position. Because the high card is paired, it is unlikely that anybody hit it and the draws are thin for the opposition as they must reckon with us having a K, so almost any 6 outer will fold.

      The exceptions are the same as in the example above.

      c): Ace high rainbow Board with 2 rags

      Flop: (6.00 SB) A:heart: , 2:club: , 6:spade: [color:#0000FF](3 players)[/color]

      Whether we bet the flop here is dependent on our position and the customs of our opposition.

      If we're OOP in the SB and are first to act, we should only donk the flop if we know that the CO limper would rather raise an ace than call it and that the BB is tight enough to fold pockets or better hands like the 2. If we are in the MP (BB) or are IP, we should definitely donk the flop as a bluff.


      The more positive information (the opposition are tight and have low WTS, for example) we have about our opponents and the better our position (we have more information when we are IP and none when OOP), the more we should tend to donk the flop as a bluff. The less information we have or the more negative the characteristics of the opposition (LAG/maniac, high WTS, bluff resistant), the more we should tend to check/fold. On boards where cards are in the playing zone and a lot of draws are possible we should basically just check/fold and not try a bluff.

      Flop: (6.00 SB) J:heart: , T:club: , 7:club: [color:#0000FF](3 players)[/color] <- check/fold Flop

      Flop: (6.00 SB) A:heart: , 7:heart: , 8:heart: [color:#0000FF](3 players)[/color] <- check/fold Flop wenn wir keine höhere :heart: -Karte halten. <- check/fold Flop if we have no high cards

      It must also be said that you should not donk against a thinking player in 100% of cases, but rather check/fold for no particular reason on such boards about 20% of the time instead of donking. Wary players will notice if you bluff too often and will then exploit you with bluff raises on the flop.

      I wanted to address check/raise flop in unraised pots but won't get to it until next week.

      ******* Hand 3 ********

      Preflop:( 6 Players ) Hero is UTG with K :spade: A :diamond:
      Hero raises, 1fold, CO calls, BU folds, SB 3-bets, BB calls, Hero caps, CO calls, SB calls, BB calls

      Flop: ( 4 Players ) 5 :heart: , 2 :club: , 5 :club:
      SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets, CO calls, SB calls, BB calls

      Turn: ( 4 Players ) 3 :diamond:
      SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets, CO folds, SB calls, BB folds

      River: ( 2 Players ) 8 :diamond:
      SB checks, Hero bets, SB calls

      We find ourselves in MP2 with AKo and make a no-brainer open raise. We get one cold call from CO and a surprise 3-bet from SB. The BB decides to call 2 SB cold and based on the fact that our hand has above average equity, we cap pre-flop.

      We hit nothing on the flop, but it's still good insofar as a low card is paired and the 2 is unlikely to appear in the hands of the opposition. Therefore, we are often still ahead with the unpaired nuts AK. SP and BB check to us and we bet the flop for the reasons mentioned. CO calls.

      After the calls from all the players we can be almost certain that we have the best hand at this time. Why is it so?

      Almost every pocket is an overpair and these would probably have been raised on the flop since probably nobody hit anything on the flop and with a pocket one would surely be ahead here. The SB called the flop after a 3-bet pre-flop. If he had a pocket pair it would have to be a higher pair like 99+ and he would surely have raised it as a "sure thing".

      The turn card is good for us. The 3 will probably not help anybody and gives us the chance for a gutshot draw with the 4.

      The SB and BB check again to us and we bet again. The weakness that the opposition showed on the flop makes us sure that we are still ahead and furthermore, we can buy ourselves position. Also, since the pot is already 10BB and we still have 10 outs since nobody has represented an FD, a semi-bluff against 2 random hands and a 3-betting range of 10% from the SB effectively costs us only .6 BB.

      The opposition only has to fold in 5-6% of all cases to make our semi-bluff profitable. Since the turn is a super card for us and the opposition's behavior represents overcards, this condition is surely fulfilled.

      The argument for fold equity is less decisive here, however, since we ourselves only have A high and few better hands will fold. The main argument for a bet is that we are probably still ahead and can get calls from worse hands because of the pot size.

      The SB's behavior points to a high Ace like AJ or AQ and he'll be forced to call in an 11BB pot. Since CO already folded and BB would be last to act with his call, he'll often call the turn, too, with odds of 1:12 and overcards like QJ KQ.

      We bet the turn again and only SB calls.

      Since the pot is already 13BB after our bet and SB will almost always be sitting on an ace and thus feel committed to calling, we have a value bet against AJ/AQ on the river.

      Hero played this hand well.
  • 2 replies
    • Remoh
      Joined: 11.03.2006 Posts: 1,217
      Very nice.

      But I have two questions *g*

      1) can we make this semi bluff on the turn if the 4:heart: is a K:heart: ? Then we have only 9 Outs.

      3) Please, can you explain the valuebet on the river? My default line would be a check behind because I don't think that any better hand would fold for one bet and the most worse hand would fold.
      A little mathematical excursion would be fine. So I can see in how many cases he has to call hands like AQ or AJ to be +EV.
    • Remoh
      Joined: 11.03.2006 Posts: 1,217