Strong Draw IP with initiative on the Turn-Deep stacked

I wouldn't 3bet him preflop with hand like that. Not strong enough.

What was your intention to reraise him on the flop with only flush draw? To make pot bigger? Or to chase him away?

Instead, I would called, because he is loose-aggressive player, and LAG's want to bet themselves; get a hand and trap him.
I don't think reraise on the flop was neccessary. Pot odds?

The 3bet preflop is a general strategy to create an aggressive image and take the pot now (didn't really have stats for that, his 3bet call was 1/1) or on the flop where i forgot to say that he had folded 3/3 cbets. So what is a better chance than IP, against a wide range, with a hand strong enough to play with the initiative but not strong enough to call when stacks are deep? Since i have decided to play Tag I have to use spots like that here and then or else i will end up being a nit.
On the flop i semi-bluff raised him because i thought that he would have check-raised me with AK, KQ, KJ, JJ, 44. So, i thought that when he leads half pot has some AJ, QT or weaker FD (which of course i want to stay in the pot). If I call a lead i show weakness and if i do not complete on the turn I am done with the hand. If i raise and get called i have outs plus I can fold better hands (?). If I get 3bet (that's interesting) probably i shove with at least 12 outs and hope he does not play sets like that.
Of course the question remains... should I check back to take a free card on the turn or should i Semi-bluff again? and if I do what hands am I hoping to fold ?

The 3bet preflop is a general strategy to create an aggressive image and take the pot now (didn't really have stats for that, his 3bet call was 1/1)

Fair enough.

...or on the flop where i forgot to say that he had folded 3/3 cbets.

Ahh, now I understand better what you did and why.
Did you have any notes on his donk bets - meaning does he do it when he have hit something in flop?
If not, maybe, its useful to make them something like this:
DB = 2nP (2nd Pair) etc

Just saying.

So what is a better chance than IP, against a wide range, with a hand strong enough to play with the initiative but not strong enough to call when stacks are deep?

IMO, your play makes sense in strategical area, but we all have to remember time to time, that big part of poker is odds.

What are your pot odds if you just called?
~3.10:1
And if you 3-bet him?
~1.55:1

What are your odds hitting flush?

• Number of outs: 9 (the nine remaining cards of the suit)
• Odds to hit on the turn: 4:1
• Odds to hit before showdown: 2:1

Article: How do You Play Draws?

Harrington in his book states:

If the pot odds are bigger than the odds of making our hand, then it's profitable to call. If smaller, then we're not being offered enough odds and we should fold.

Also I like concept: big hand, big pot; small hand, small pot.
Taking in account everything said above, I would called him flop. And see how did he respond in later streets.

Since i have decided to play TAG I have to use spots like that here and then or else i will end up being a nit.

I don't see connection, sorry.
Are you saying, in order to be a TAG - you need to be aggressive in all streets (as side effect: ignoring odds)?

As I understand Nit is someone with stats like 4/4, 8/6, 10/8. Wheras TAG: 18/16, 20/17 etc
The difference between Nit and TAG is in the range of hands they play.
Or am I misunderstooding something?

On the flop i semi-bluff raised him because i thought that he would have check-raised me with...

Where did he check?

has some AJ, QT or weaker FD

Btw, what is "FD" ?

Of course the question remains... should I check back to take a free card on the turn or should i semi-bluff again?

Considering your odds and utilizing pot control concept I would just checked.

I hope this helps! ♠_smile:

First of all, I would like to thank you gigenieks for the time you spent to reply to my post and help me with a trouble hand. Hope the whole process helps your game also.

So to the subject... My opinion is that this hand is not so strong to call with. We can have some arguments for that but is a part of my strategy not to call with these hands especially vs aggressive opponents. By saying the above you understand why my range will be smaller since it is a 3bet/fold for me in most cases.

You asked me also when did he check-raised me, he didn't. I said that I thought he would have check-raised me if he had... To answer your other question FD is flush draw and no i got no read on his donk-betting range.
To conclude i agree that a check is more appropriate on the turn since i don't think i am folding anything.

P.S. It's intersting i think to keep in mind that my bluff-raise generates fold equity if he leads to protect some hands he doesn't want to check/call with. And also sometimes if called gives me the option to check back and take a "free" card (or double barrel). If I had call on the flop i would have to call a turn bet 70%+ of the time to stay in the hand. So in monetary terms, most of the times, there is no difference.

Played the Flop fine for me, I would want to raise my strong draw also.

I'd also bet the Turn $2.60~

I only skim read the other posts but some great advice here, glad to see you all helping each other, but it seems like you've missed some of the odds, he has FD + GS (Flush Draw + Gutshot) = 4 more outs.

I'm really interested to see what veriz has to say about this... Find myself in a similar position post flop quite a lot.

Preflop I'm not sure I'd flat with Q9s would 3b or fold. Against such a player I'd prefer to fold. You said yourself to take pot there and then bt is villian likely to fold that often? While it could be +ev I'm not sure I have the post flop skills to make it +ev in the long run. I'd much prefer to 3b broadway type hands.

On the turn I prefer check behind. Your not betting for value. And whatever he called flop with is calling turn too imo so no better hands are folding. Plus checking on turn might induce so when you hit your straight/fd

i didn't read your essays but going to give my opinion

i'm not a massive fan of 3betting with such unconnected cards, rather pick random suited connectors.
but as played you flopped quite the nuts, i'd play it very aggressively
if you checkbehind turn on this board it's quite apparent that you have a draw.

another option is that since he donkbet so low you can just call IP for good (implied) odds. your hand is very disguised, unless people actually know that you 3bet hands like Q9s

Hello Deomedes,

Raising the flop is kind of standard here I'd say if you playing aggressively preflop but I wouldn't be 2nd barreling the turn anymore cause his calling range will contain mainly those hands what have you beat of course and you rarely will have much fold equity. I'd rather Check it behind while I doubt that he is ever folding Kx.

Best Regards.

Hope the whole process helps your game also.

That is the reason why I post in Hand Evaluations forum in the first place. Basically it, probably (in most times), helps me more than the "thread starter".

We can have some arguments for that but is a part of my strategy not to call with these hands especially vs aggressive opponents.

"These hands" ? Flush draws?

It would be nice if you explained your thinking process of "flush draw hand = don't call a bet" ?
"especially vs aggressive opponents"?

I said that I thought he would have check-raised me if he had...

Hmm... Let's think about this. By looking at his stats, we can easily categorize him as: LAG.
Right?
As far as I know (from theory and experience), LAG doesn't do defensive poker. Slow-play is defensive. They are all about offense - particulary, if you bet enough (put pressure) your opponent will fold.

Why do you think, that if he had, let's say, two pairs in the flop he would slowplayed there?? Have you any reason for this or is this, maybe, illusion?

..keep in mind that my bluff-raise generates fold equity if he leads to protect some hands he doesn't want to check/call with.

Huh???? ♠_o:
I have to admit, I have zero clue what are you saying or what does it mean...
"bluff-raise", "fold equity", "protect some hands" - some fancy terms here.

I see you are like me (like to analyse and sometimes overthink). My guess: you are overthinking this.

This is micro-stakes, not WSOP. ♠_biggrin:
Mostly, guys are you using VERY simple formula which let's them win or at least enjoy playing.
Like - "Play only strong hands" / "Bet until he folds"

Pot control improved my play (and $) quite a bit.
I wanted (just like many) go up ladder fast, so in many hands I was too aggressive.
Result? Odds were against me = lost $

That is my experience.

These hands refering to Q9s. It is not a flush draw it is Q9s.

Since when check-raise is a slowplay? Why a Lag would lead two pairs? Being a Lag doesn't mean to lead very strong hands and make my life easier. No lag in the world does that with no perpurse. I would cbet most flops and especially K high ones and he might know that. By check-raising he applies more pressure to me and allows me to put a bet in the pot I wouldn't if i knew he leads super strong.

And finally i put no fancy terms and no overthink I just noted that a move like that (flop semi-bluff raise) in terms of money spent can be the same as calling. But in terms of money won is not. If i call (follow the pot odds you say) I give the betting initiative to him and i reveal the nature of my hand. So if i call i win less and if raise i spent the same in most cases.
Just do the math i call on the flop 0.37$ and pot becomes 1,52$. He then (more than 70%) bets let's say at least half pot so another 0,76$. All in all i spent at least 1,13$. By raising i spent 1,40$ and i could take the hand on the flop, keep my hand disguised and buy the river card also (in most cases).

To conclude, i think that in this hand we would all have done somethng different but most of us would raise the flop and check the turn.

Since when check-raise is a slowplay?

I'm sorry, you are right - it isn't. I misunderstood Harrington. My fault.

Being a LAG doesn't mean to lead very strong hands and make my life easier. No LAG in the world does that with no purpose.

If by "lead" you mean bet, raise etc, then I see them often do it in my games.

And finally i put no fancy terms and no overthink..

Just expressing my opinion - nothing else.

If i call (follow the pot odds you say) I give the betting initiative to him and i reveal the nature of my hand. So if i call i win less and if raise i spent the same in most cases.

Is this from experience?

Just do the math i call on the flop 0.37$ and pot becomes 1,52$. He then (more than 70%) bets let's say at least half pot so another 0,76$.

All in all i spent at least 1,13$. By raising i spent 1,40$ and i could take the hand on the flop, keep my hand disguised and buy the river card also (in most cases).

I'm just seeing that from different perspective.
Why bet vs. aggressive opponent? Especially if you have only draw (no pair yet), mostly he will bet even if he has 2nd best hand (any pair); so keeping that in mind I would prefer to trap him.

But, I see now, after you explained in greater detail, what are you doing - you are playing more strategical. I in other hand, viewed this situation more from the odds side etc

I don't say that your play is bad etc; in fact Harrington in his book states:
that sometimes bluffing LAG's is a great move.
As I haven't used this particular move (bluffing LAGs) I have almost no experience, and can't really add to it: works or not.
I apologize if you took something from my earlier post personaly.

I just expressed some thoughts, some other perspective of what could you had done INSTEAD.

So, how often do you bluff LAGs? How does it work for you?

Didn't take anything personal man but i had a bad day that might affected my writings.... Nevertheless I liked to explain you my thoughts better. Having a conversation open makes me come back to the forum more times a day.

I used the word lead as donk betting (betting first into the previous street aggressor).

Yes it is from experience if i call on the flop i win less when the flush comes, if my gutter comes it is still the same though because it is still a disguised draw.

And to answer your final question at the micros stakes it is difficult to make bluffing +EV in general. But what i did is to semi-bluff the guy. With 13 outs it is a profitable move, yes.

Generally, i consider my bluffing bets more like bets to collect the dead money in the pot. You know take pots that are of no ones interest. Of course i make some double barrels when there are some tags with 18/17 stats flatting from the blinds and they check/call my cbet on some K64 or T55 rainbow boards. They usually have some medium pairs like 88 which fold to a second barrel. Situations like that but is not the right place to describe all the spots i bluff.