2c/5c aces flop overpair vs. aggro reg.
Posted by OMGredline
Posted by
OMGredline
posted in
Low Stakes
2c/5c aces flop overpair vs. aggro reg.
BN: $4.50 (Hero)
SB: $6.21
BB: $7.76
UTG: $24.96
HJ: $2
CO: $7.54
SB: $6.21
BB: $7.76
UTG: $24.96
HJ: $2
CO: $7.54
Preflop
($0.07)
(6 Players)
Hero was dealt
A
A
9
3
UTG folds, HJ folds, CO folds, Hero raises to $0.15, SB calls $0.13, BB folds
UTG folds, HJ folds, CO folds, Hero raises to $0.15, SB calls $0.13, BB folds
Flop
($0.35)
8
K
Q
(2 Players)
SB checks,
Hero checks
Turn
($0.35)
8
K
Q
7
(2 Players)
SB bets $0.30,
Hero folds
Final Pot
SB
wins $0.34
A common spot I'm unsure about, and don't really know if this should fall into my checkback or c-bet range, especially vs. aggressive opponents. Now I'm leaning towards c-bet and happily fold to a check-raise, although with my wide stealing range I tend to think heavy flops hit defending hands better than my range. If a c-bet were to be called, then I can't think of a very good turn card so imagine having to shut down after that.
Villain has 38/13 (13% 3b) over 250 hands. Check-raise total of 20% so far.
I'm going to review info on dry-heavy flops and take some notes on that.
Loading 6 Comments...
Well, this is a better flop for a SB flatting range than a btn opening range, so you definitely can't c-bet too much here.
I think checking is probably best, though I could be convinced otherwise. His check/folding range doesn't have much equity vs your hand aside from stuff like 8*** which isn't a very big portion of a sb flatting range. Additionally, you can call a bet on most turns as he'll lead a decent amount of draws and a few worse made. I would think J-9 are the worst, 8,Q,K are probably OK to peel in that order if his leading frequency here is high, and 7-2 seem uncoordinated enough w/ the board to peel. I'd probably consider raising Js, Ts turns or potting those turns if checked to.
you are saying this isn't the best flop since it hits SB range better, so I understand we can't cbet air too much here, but this hand is not air right? so why would that argument hold here?
I do agree this is probably a check, since villain c/r is 20% which seems quite high. Indicating we are probably folding away too much equity here some part of the time vs villain.
I guess you do have to call this turn as this is probably quite high in your check back range, and you would be folding too much if you are already folding overpairs against 1 bet here.
As a result we end up checking this flop back a considerable amount. AA just seems like a good hand for our check back range as it seems like the hand class that meets all of the assumptions listed in the above paragraph(not c-betting AA here isn't hurting out c-bet range in any way). It can continue on a good number of turns, and we assure that we realize as close to 100% or more of our hand's equity.
I would probably take a stab here on a dry board, being that I think it is the lesser of two evils (kind of like a protecting bet I guess). I think that once we check we have pretty well given up on the pot. Turn and river aggression could convince me otherwise. You want to get an idea of the hands and board textures that he c/r with. Does he c/r a lot of draws, bottom two hands? weak wraps, pair plus FD? There are fewer draws, and made hands on dry boards, plus our bet size will be smaller. Even if he c/r 20% and calls another 20% we have a cbet success of 60%. That coupled with some equity means that I think that this hand can be in our bet flop check most turns range and evaluate river, but I expect that the cbet to have enough equity and success.
Against this villain I would check as there are a few turn card you'll like as Overbet said; and any spade as well (obv) - meaning you can call a turn bet. If we stab and get x/raised then you prob have to fold and you give up some equity by doing this as say KJT might x/r but is obv behind at the moment and so on...
Love argument A and C overbet, but B is kinda weird, we are actually having less air because we don't have many value hands, so saying that again is a reason to value bet less doesn't make sense. we could just also up our bluff frequency and still keep our value:bluff ratio near optimal.
Be the first to add a comment