16NL - Second Pair and GS

    • 16NL - Second Pair and GS

      Poker Stars, $0.08/$0.16 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 6 Players
      Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.


      SB: $10.28 (64.3 bb)
      Hero (BB): $26.71 (166.9 bb)
      UTG: $18.15 (113.4 bb)
      MP: $16 (100 bb)
      CO: $18.06 (112.9 bb)
      BTN: $6.30 (39.4 bb)


      Preflop: Hero is BB with :qd :kh
      2 folds, CO raises to $0.43, 2 folds, Hero calls $0.27


      Flop: ($0.94) :ah :jd :5c (2 players)
      Hero checks, CO bets $0.54, Hero calls $0.54


      Turn: ($2.02) :qh (2 players)
      Hero checks, CO bets $1.45, Hero folds


      Hi, guys. Please tell me how you play this hand. Villain: 28/20/7,0/agg 2,4/208 hands. Thanks.
    • Hehe, interesting one :)

      To be honest, calling the turn seems like a least attractive of the options, particularly because it's not the final street of the hand. K :heart: is also not a great card to have here as it reduces villain's bluff combos (now a whatever flop bet followed by a turn barrel with gutshot+NFD is not possible), while turned pair of Q doesn't have a great deal of showdown value.

      Folding looks a bit nitty, but don't mind it - on one hand you will have better hands to continue, on the other, it's getting problematic in a sense that villain shouldn't really have pure bluffs, maaaaaaaaaybe 1-2 combos of 9 :heart: 8 :heart: / T :heart: 9 :heart: , but even those have decent equity and can barrel you off the hand still. Also you're basically calling to hit either Tx where it would be very hard to get paid OOP on 4card straight (so no implied odds), or Q, WHICH MIGHT NOT EVEN BE GOOD....

      I thought about maybe turning your hand into a bluff, but that doesn't look too attractive either - if anything, it's purely from the side of you having turned quite a few gutshots (probably all 16 combos), but it's just a really variance-raising play, because if you're bluffing you're basically looking to get folds from better hands. If we think villain won't go crazy bareling A8s or something, especially for that size, then you're targetting 2p+ (maaaybe AK or AT at the worst) and so it doesn't sound like you have much FE, particularly for the turn street, so you should then be looking to stackoff on most rivers too..... IDK maybe...?

      I think i'd still stick with folding this hand, if anything i would probably like bluffing without K :heart: , as in that case there's a bit more villain can fold by the river....

      Anyways, no CLEAR answer from me unfortunately, would love to hear others' thoughts, particularly interested in what we would want to balance our KT combos with :)

      Thank you for responses :)
    • motiejus wrote:

      @painlezz

      motiejus wrote:

      particularly interested in what we would want to balance our KT combos with - OR DO WE RATHER NOT HAVE TURN X/RAISING RANGE AT ALL???
      TY :D
      well from solvers view we def have some kind of xr range and want to have some equity. Maybe hands like T9hh, 5hxh and maybe even KQ or KJ typish hands? In practice I dont think that I got a bluffing range at all on this texture.
      "Spiele nl100/200/500 Zoom agressives Konzept"
    • painlezz wrote:

      well from solvers view we def have some kind of xr range and want to have some equity. Maybe hands like T9hh, 5hxh and maybe even KQ or KJ typish hands?
      Well, i don't think T :heart: 9 :heart: will be calling flop, so yeah, 5 :heart: X :heart: actually sounds reasonable (haven't really picked on it myself), but we can't go nuts with it, as it doesn't have no blockers to villain's nuts (except 55 of course), but then it pretty much comes down to turning some kind of weakish~ pair with K or T with them into a bluff, that's why i asked about it (but again, don't like this particular HEROs hand because of holding K :heart: ).

      painlezz wrote:

      In practice I dont think that I got a bluffing range at all on this texture
      Yeah, i agree with you here - don't see myself pulling the trigger pretty much ever, also i think it's really good to have nuts in this line for the river where we can have much better options to play our range and not allow villain buldoze over us (it might not be maxEV line - not to x/r turn - for KT hands, but overall for the BBs calling range, i actually think i preffer calling).

      Still, would you be looking to maybe x/r KT ONLY (exploitatively. VS weak players makes total sense, but vs more competent competition..?) on the turn or rather play your whole range as turn call?
    • painlezz wrote:

      I think T9hh is a pretty clear call on the flop!!
      Sorry for being so pesky, but i've always felt like i don't really understand this concept (maybe @lnternet could give a few words on this subject as well, highly appreciated!) - CALLING with nothing but BACKDOORS -

      I have done quite a few calldowns, particularly in 3bet pots, since they are a bit easier (narrower ranges + most of the time no raises too) and it always got me confused - in a sense of not wanting to OVERFOLD to bets, we have to defend particular number of combos, some are strong, some are weak and even though before i was actually afraid of calling even with gutshots ("oh man, how can you call that, only 4 outs!"), but what really got me confused is that sometimes we get to a point where we have to call with nothing but backdoors.

      I would pretty much never do that in game actually, because i don't understand how it's possible to have a +EV call with a hand that doesn't have showdown value and can only improve to a backdoor on the next street AND even if it did, can be barreled of it right on that next street, so it pretty much can only expect that villain won't play it aggressively enough to be able to hit a BD draw or a pair (basically realize equity), which will happen so infrequently (BD flush/BD straight/Runner 2p/trips), or that somehow it can win the pot later by x/raising or betting the river if villain checks back the turn and folds river...

      I know i'm probably missing something, or have a wrong understanding of the concept, but for me it seems it's not any worse to overfold a bit right away than to call (invest more money in the pot) and have to fold on later streets most if the time anyways - like in this hand, this is pretty much the best turn for T :heart: 9 :heart: yet, as we spoke, raising is not that attractive, but the runout that would improve our hand to a winner at showdown would happen so rarely (right turn AND right river cards), again, i don't see how can our flop call be justified ATM... :/ :/ :/

      I know BUvBlinds spots occur most often, but i don't love them particularly because of the above, as in rarer spots with more narrow ranges the decisions are a bit easier as you can defend enough even while not including those no showdown value/only BD equity type of hands...

      It would be much more appealing to have those combos as x/raises to at least have a chance to win the pot right away, but if our range is way weaker, especially on particular boards (thus can't r), just calling them seems <X

      Here's T :heart: 9 :heart: equity vs the whole CO RFI range on the flop :



      Thank you very much for explaining this!!! :)
    • I don't think you should call T9hh against a 60% flop size. Against a 30% it's close, but here not.

      Turn, I agree he's not bluffing enough. As CO, he doesn't even have that many Kx and Tx gutshots to bluff with. K9o T9o might not be in his range,then what can he even bluff with.

      If we accept that, exploitively we should never bluff raise turn, and never slowplay turn (always value raise KT).


      Theoretically, if he does 2barrel a bunch of bluffs, and also triples a fair amount, with KT we can do both on the turn. I'm not sure what the right mix is, but since the nuts can change to the river I'd say you should raise most of the time, like 70/30 approximately. You balance those turn nut raises with a few bluffs that have good equity or blockers, so FD or pair+gutshot (or both). KQ is fine, FD is fine, while K5 fd is a great hand for it.
    • In a quick solve, T9hh is -1bb flop call, so that's just really bad. Solver actually folds a few 5x and KTo/QTo gutshots directly on the flop, which is crazy tight. But 2-highcard board smashes CO so you can't fool around too much.

      His 2barrel bluffs are not too many crazy hands, but some 22, 98 (no fd), and all available Kxs/T9o
      KT raises turn like 40% of the time, a bit less than I thought. Balanced with a tiny bit of KJ/QJ/JT and a lot of 5xfd and 43fd.
    • God damn it, @painlezz ! You owe me a coaching!!!

      Nah, just kidding, actually funny what kind of a snow-ball effect one little mistake made :D

      If anything, could you briefly address the issue as was so desperate to talk about yesterday? Isn't it THAT BIG OF A LEAK to sometimes overfold (in a sense of not calling enough % of the range, given the bet size), if i don't really feel comfortable calling and playing a larger pot on further streets with a very weak parts of the range - 4 example (quick one, just out of my head) i'm pretty sure i remember doing a calldown in a BBvBU 3bet pot scenario, where BU on something like A 7 2 r has to defend (not to sound foolish, so AT LEAST vs smaller sizing :D ) stuff like T9s/98s (so pretty much stuff that wraps around the middle card and has BD flush too) in order not to overfold, but i already wrote how i hate to be calling with no clear options to win the pot later, if i don't expect villain to slow down a significant amount of the time. I know that in this example ok BB is supposed to have his polar bluffs that those T9s/98s would technically be ahead of if it went to showdown right away on the flop, but if we expect that those 34s/53s type of hands to keep barreling, not that much better...?

      So just what (major) drawbacks could this have and is there anything i should keep in mind regarding this topic?

      Thank you! :)
    • lnternet wrote:

      Axx is boards are great to float, people cbet+give up A LOT there

      Generally all hands that are close have EV of both options almost the same, so it doesn't matter what you do. If you then prefer one option and play that always, it's absolutely fine. It only becomes a problem if your opponents are aware of it AND exploit it.
      So just to be aware of it - what kind of an exploit in theory i could open myself up to if i played vs very competent players who would be aware of it?

      I suppose it involves them getting out of their way expanding 3betting / cbetting ranges in some way, increasing their barreling frequencies...?
    • lnternet wrote:

      Axx is boards are great to float, people cbet+give up A LOT there

      Generally all hands that are close have EV of both options almost the same, so it doesn't matter what you do. If you then prefer one option and play that always, it's absolutely fine. It only becomes a problem if your opponents are aware of it AND exploit it.
      Do you think this spot is underbuffed when it is bet bet shove on Axx? I know solvers call pretty much every Ax on good run outs and I see alot of players now calling down every 1 pair Ax as BU but in practice I don't think this is good (At NL25-Nl100)?
    • If you have ~zero EV bluffcatcher on the river, and you always call -> exploit is never bluffing and value betting thinner
      If you have ~zero EV bluffcatcher on the river, and you always fold -> exploit is always bluffing and value betting tighter

      If you have ~zero EV float on the flop, and you always call -> exploit is not cbetting weak hands without 2barreling them, and cbet/check/calling many medium strong hands
      If you have ~zero EV float on the flop, and you always fold -> exploit is cbetting weak hands, but not 2barreling them, and checking many medium strong hands