TPTK + nutgutter in 3way 3bet pot. Standard fold?
Posted by Suniram
Posted by
Suniram
posted in
Low Stakes
TPTK + nutgutter in 3way 3bet pot. Standard fold?
BN: $26.19
SB: $26.74
BB: $25.89
UTG: $25.89
HJ: $25.81 (Hero)
CO: $23.32
SB: $26.74
BB: $25.89
UTG: $25.89
HJ: $25.81 (Hero)
CO: $23.32
Preflop
($0.35)
(6 Players)
Hero was dealt
K
6
Q
A
UTG raises to $0.75, Hero raises to $2.60, CO calls $2.60, BN folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls $1.85
UTG raises to $0.75, Hero raises to $2.60, CO calls $2.60, BN folds, SB folds, BB folds, UTG calls $1.85
Flop
($8.15)
J
2
K
(3 Players)
UTG bets $7.75
Hey guys. Another hand from me. :)
Villain was playing 55/26 over only 31 hands. No reads or significant stats on postflop so far.
CO is a laggy regular but not too much of a concern in this hand.
Q: What's the best play on the flop? Calling or folding? (I think shoving would be very optimistic). I typed in a range for villain that consits of 20%!AA:(KJ,KK,JJ,KQT,K:dd,(AQ,AT;QT):dd, AKQ). I have 35% vs that.
Since we are 3way his donkbet is ofc even stronger than HU and I can't know what CO is up to so this is a (semi-)sad fold, right?
Q#2: If flop was rainbow. Would we still fold?
Loading 17 Comments...
Calling is the worst play here by a mile for me. I hate it SOOO much, not only 'cas you don't turn a lot, but also 'cas you invite CO to stick around when you have a hand that deteriorates massively multi-way. I'm torn between jamming and folding, but given the size of the pot, I think I'd shove here with TPTK, nut gutter and backdoor nut flush draw. It can't be that bad and I'd expect the strongest parts of the range you assign to check/shove sometimes (whilst also figuring him for some weaker hands - K2, J + decent draw etc.). It sucks that CO is still to act, but given action and what we have/block, I kinda assume this will go in HU.
Note: Whilst I don't mind your 3-bet, I would probably lean towards just calling pre. UTG ranges are generally somewhat stronger so we don't wanna 3-bet a ton against them and this hand does pretty well in multi-way pots. Also, I would hate to get 4-bet 'cas it becomes a really close spot which doesn't work out well for us.
Okay. I agree on your statement about calling. I should've thought bout that myself. :S
I would def just coldcall this hand if I thought there would be a good chance of being 4bet, but vs. a positionally unaware, loose and weak opponents I feel like 3betting and pumping the pot has got to be beneficial.
Wow @ flatting pre against someone running 55/26 I know it's only 31 hands but still... With the A blocker we only run into AA 16% of the time here and this hand flops amazingly well. I'd rather 3 bet this than AA75ss especially against a villain that appears loose.
As for the flop, we have to put him on a tight range without further reads and we have 39% vs { KK, JJ, 22 , Add, K2, QdTd, JdTd92 }. We need 42% to gii without taking into account the CO. Looks like a fold to me.
Even a nit can run lag for 30 hands. 30 is nothing, realy. Could Ben just a hot deck.
You can only go on the information you have available, your leaving money at the table by not using this information imo. I'm not really hot on maths but I'd like to see the probability of these stats being +-10/5 of his real stats. Got to be a lot more likely than him being a 18/12.
However, I wouldn't take these stats as important enough on their own to justify 3-betting here given if they are inaccurate it could be a big mistake whereas flatting will always work out pretty well for us.
How could it be a big mistake? As I said before someone else on the table has AA here only 16% of the time when we have an A. If we do get 4bet we fold and yeah that sucks but we only lose 10bb whereas the amount of time we get called by hands we dominate and gii with better draws or made hands would be much more significant. Flatting with this hand we end up with a tonne of bare top pairs which would of happily got it in with a lower SPR but now have to play a multiway pot with nfd + pair being best case senario or big lockdown straights which hardly ever get any action.
1) That 16% number is completely misleading because it's failing to take into account all the information available. We have a UTG open which completely alters things given that he'll have AA >16% having opened from that seat before even considering what the others can have.
2) Yes, we'll probably have to fold if 4-bet, but it's gonna be reasonably close due to our hand being double suited. In general, we REALLY don't wanna keep putting ourselves into positions where we're making folds which are close 'cas it means we're getting blown off substantial equity which gets very costly.
3) With a hand containing such strong, nutted components, you can get yourself into very profitable situations where you either flop a dominant hand/draw against which your opponent makes a large mistake or by pushing hard with your equity and forcing a player into an incorrect fold. Low SPR spots aren't my ideal with a hand that makes so many hands which I want to put a lot of money in with, because it makes it far harder for your opponent to make a mistake.
4) Thinking about having to fold to a 4-bet as merely losing 10bbs is a bit of a misconception imo. You aren't just losing those 10bbs, but also the chance to play a clearly profitable hand which had great postflop potential. So, on top of the money we lose by folding, we have lost out on the opportunity we would have had just flatting. Basically, we'll have turned a clearly profitable spot into an unprofitable one which sucks quite a bit.
5) I'm perfectly comfortable playing bare top pairs etc. with a hand like this 'cas, on those boards where I really don't have anything else, they will either be dry enough that my top pair is probably good and can be played reasonably strongly or we have a very weak hand which we can avoid losing a lot with. (Note: It's actually super hard to have bare top pair with a hand like this as we'll always have at least some backdoors, but also a legitimate draw to a very strong top two etc.).
If we give him 15% UTG range which seems very realistic then he only has AA 17% of the time. If we have an A he only has it 10% of the time! We want to get as much money as possible against a strong high card weighted hand - we're just going to print money. The lower the SPR the lighter villain will stack off, by just flatting we're losing all the times where we can get it in as a big favorite. The majority of good hands for us postflop with a high spr are essentially just bluff catchers where we're not going to get much action on.
Also, you could look at the losing 10bb thing the other way round and think of reverse implied odds of the times they have AA/KK and you end up calling all 3 streets with top 2 pair etc when you could have just 3 bet/folded.
I wish I could add more but think Tom has nailed it at this point. The six dangler sucks and will effect the smoothness of our equity (imagine we did not have it in this spot, we would gii on the flop with a pair and an OESD or better, no tread no discussion)
Seems like a lot of the argument is that we are loosing value against the UTG player however by 3b we are narrowing the ranges of the players behind us which is also a way of loosing value.
If it was checked to us what would have been the plan b/c, b/f, check and evaluate.
We built a pot pre, flopped pretty well or at the least what we can consider to be a common flop for this hand and we are thinking about folding. If we flatted pre and this went three or four way we would still be in a good spot to float with our nut outs and BDFD.
Equally, the assumption that lowering the SPR will simply enable us to get it in well ahead every time we're against a dominated hand and we both flop top pair etc. is... optimistic. In reality we'll often be read for having a strong hand on the boards we hit hard and thus our opponent(s) will react more cautiously when faced with our aggression.
Finally, the equity advantage this hand holds over a 15% range is negligible. Against 15%!AA (so one possible calling range) we are 51.14%. This drops to 48.66% when we include the AA hands so for the opening range you assigned. These are not the kinds of numbers which suggest we are anywhere near "printing money" by 3-betting here to reduce SPR (and, by extension, our positional advantage) merely to allow us to get in all top pair hands.
Loving this discussion and I can fully see your points as valid. However I'm still not convinced that we aren't losing value.
What I meant by the bluff-catcher part was that when we flop hands like AQ*r we're going to get hardly any action when we're good. Most players will 1 and done these type of flops and certainly won't call a raise unless we're beat. You could of course say we'd get less action if we 3 bet but I think most players would call 1 60% bet on the flop with A + gutshot in a 3 bet pot so we'd make more money.
The flops we can get a lot of money in where we're massively ahead are:
K high/Q high dry flops, especially those players who love shipping these flops with any K/Q to attempt to get AA to fold.
When we flop a flush draw*.
Your last point you make about our hand only being slightly ahead of a 15%!AA is true. However, the hands that make this equity closer are KK-JJ hands. These types of hands will sometimes fold preflop (think bad KK) which is a massive win for us as we're folding out hands that could potentially dominate us and cause a massive implied odds situation (set vs top 2 etc). These hands that do well against us preflop also have an extremely hard time realizing their equity as most of the time all they flop is an overpair which we can put a lot of pressure on and usually fold out at some point in the hand.
The final point that kind of ties in is that by just flatting here we are inviting the one type of hand we really don't want - set mining hands. There's plenty of flops we would love to get the money in with this hand on the flop but none of them are doing well against a set except wrap+ flush draw.
I only use the online ppt, in odds oracle can you get the odds of you flopping a flush draw?
I like flatting this hand pre but for an additional and important reasons. We have a Laggy player who is in the CO, if he has high 3b in position stats than I love to sandbag this hand and then make a light 4b if UTG flats the 3b. We should have great equity if this hand goes multiway and I want to change the stack off ranges for the flop (make opponents more willing to stack of with OP hands that we crush). I just relish the opportunity to play hands that will dominate the lags range for big pots which will have his range dominated (pre and post flop)
Also when we 3b a UTG player we are saying that we have a strong range. Sure UTG player might not get this concept but CO will probably be cautious (good laggy players are typically positional aware).
I think I would also shove for the same reasons that Tom has given. I am not in love with the idea but I figure that with some nut outs, BD nut outs, and the fact that majority of players c/r the range that crushes us it can't be that bad here.
Thanks for the answers guys. I like each one of them.
In this particular hand I like 3betting more than flatting b/c even tho CO is laggy he wasn't 3betting a crazy amount (also 3bet =/= squeeze). Facing more aggressive reraisers I really like the sandbagging option especially since we can discount AA from UTGs range once he just flats.
Flop: I didn't think about the fact that some very strong hands will x/shove. If we knew (theoretically) that UTG will never x/shove but just donkshove or x/f I would muck this hand. Since he will x/shove some hands I think it's pretty even money between shoving and folding. In such decision I usually take the fold line b/c rake is really high at my stakes and I can decrease some variance this way.
Wow, I'm surprised so many are arguing against 3betting this hand. Maybe I'm 3betting way too much!
I think the arguments for flatting make a lot of sense, honestly I would probably just be thinking "AKQds go go go!" But I could definitely be leaking here. I love it when I find out my autopilot is wrong, lots of potential for value there.
Be the first to add a comment