[NL10] 3bet pot BB vs SB
Posted by Aubady
Posted by
Aubady
posted in
Low Stakes
[NL10] 3bet pot BB vs SB
Blinds: $0.05/$0.10 (5 Players)
SB: $6.89
BB: $10.41 (Hero)
UTG: $10.23
CO: $10.97
BN: $10.00
BB: $10.41 (Hero)
UTG: $10.23
CO: $10.97
BN: $10.00
No history against vilian. It's the beginning of the session.
Seems to be recreationnal as 70BB deep
Seems to be recreationnal as 70BB deep
Preflop
($0.15)
Hero is BB with
A
J
, , ,
Flop
($1.70)
8
4
J
,
I call to keep vilian's bluff range
Turn
($3.32)
8
4
J
Q
,
Seems standard?
River
($6.48)
8
4
J
Q
6
, ,
Don't know what's the better to do. The feeling that I should have check for showdown value?
Final Pot
SB
wins and shows a pair of Queens.
BB lost and shows a pair of Jacks.
SB wins $13.16
Rake is $0.62
BB lost and shows a pair of Jacks.
SB wins $13.16
Rake is $0.62
Loading 9 Comments...
You already gave thoughts about villains bluffingrange OTF. What do you expect villain to bluff the flop and XF the river that beats you?
Imo we have decent SDV and there is no need to bluff this one.
Was under the impression that the river bet was for value :p
If it was a bluff, 100% check, enough SDV.
If it was for value it gets tricky and I guess you'd need to count the combos but it's very hard to do so against an unknown rec. Would he call 9To pre? Who knows... Would he c-bet an 8 twice and call if of "putting you on AK"? I've seen it happen more times than I can remember but also doesn't seem likely.
Overall my instinct is a check, after 2 calls AJs seems to be to weak to value (maybe rake is a thing to consider here? If I win half the time or even a couple % more I'm losing money betting) but I have a problem (that I'm working on a lot) of not getting enough thin value on the river and I already know that he had a queen so I can't possibly think straight about this one.
Also, sets are a thing against 3 bets a lot, maybe I'm just overcompensating my problem of not getting enough thin value by even considering betting here...
haha...obv a huge difference.
So i would also not go for thin value anymore. But if we are planing to valuebet here thinly, we have to go a lot smaller as hero does not have so many bluffs in his range anymore (some FDs obv or 79s).
So with that huge bet we isolate ourselves vs everything that has us beat.
RaoulFlush Doesn't matter if Hero has x amount of bluffs in his range or not. In regards of valuebetting or checking is more EV OTR. This is exactly a spot what I was referring to before, when I said there are spots at smaller stakes where people mess up the thought process with trying to implement some kind of solver/gto based stuff.
The only thing that matters is villain's range OTR and what he's gonna call with. He's not gonna think about our range in the classic way, in the same way as a reg does, therefore how we play the rest of our hands here doesn't matter at all. His decision of calling or not will mostly be based on his own card and emotions. By emotions I mean a wide range of things like he could be the kind of player who has a huge ego and just can't fold any weak pair. Could be someone who is always afraid of the better hand so folds stronger hands (not too common). Could be an emotion based on previous experience like winning a big pot with a bluffcatch a week ago, that's gonna be a positive emotion paired with calling light... You get what I mean.
Point is he's not gonna consider our range in a classic way but rather based on his own emotions and stuff that happened to him in the past and how he usually interprets those things. Everything considered, fish is gonna call you pretty light most of the times.
I like the idea of this valuebet, I play it exactly the same. Wouldn't say it's super easy, feels kind of close but the idea itself and that Hero is thinking about this is a very very good thing. Whether or not in this exact case it'll be a small +EV or BE or a small -EV, I don't think that matters and it's also hard to say. I feel like it can be a small +EV.
Hey, really enjoy reading your comments.
Thinking about it the rake is a killer here...
Assuming 4.5% rake that doesn't reach cap we'd need to be right around 59% of the time to break even, that seems very discouraging for very thin value hands in small pots. Should we in theory bet for thin value more often in big pots when we do it rake cap?
Thanks mate :)
Good point about the rake. As I'm not very sure about the vbet anyway, this can be a reason to convince me about the check.
hmmmmm...i agree partly on what you say. Because even if villain doesnt think about heros range, villains callingrange will still be elastic here. So the fact that we isolate ourselves vs a stronger range with a bigger bet will still happen naturaly cause even weaker players fold more vs bigger bets.
You are right that this decision might be influenced by emotions or the weather or whatever, but this can go one way or the other about his decision making.
So im still not a fan of pot size shove otr.
I see what you mean now, you were talking about a pot size OTR. That would be an overkill and would make fold hands we need in the calling range. But villain had a bit more that half pot left, so it was basically between 50-60% pot size shove.
But it might be thin here even like that, I can get behind the check as CrappyTimeSlot said. And Mudkip made a good point too about the rake.
While I like the justification for a thin bet above and I like that we're talking about it a lot, I think the bet is a bit over the edge here.
With the turn bet, I think we can think of the villain's range as fairly full of value bets, including hands he is protecting too thin like TT or 99. Much of what he would semibluff got there, excluding KhXh, which he may continue to semibluff.
The river is a blank and he checks. Now there's no question a queen or better is calling. The question is, will a jack, nines or tens/ And if so, how many are in his range?
-made hands - a few (sets, straights, Q9, QJ)
-queens in his range - plenty(AQ, KQ, QT, we'll throw in a "fun factor" of say Q7s and Q5s of the heart also)
-jacks in his range (All AJ, KJ, JT, some J9)
-underpairs - a few (99,TT, and deuces because deuces are lucky)
-missed draws
Excluding the draws, we're a slight dog to this range and I don't think we're folding out the better hands. I don't think he'd look us up without an ace and we have the ace he'd draw with.
I think it's a check.
Be the first to add a comment