Here’s an interesting hand that one of my students shared with me. We’d been working on bet-sizing, and his assignment for the week was to find spots to under- and over-bet the pot.
His reads here were that the BTN was a weak regular and the BB was on the loose-passive side (30/4 or so pre-flop):
No-Limit Hold’em, $1 BB (6 handed) Hand History converter Courtesy of PokerZion.com
BB ($60.80)
UTG ($119.40)
MP ($125.70)
Hero ($109.70)
Button ($103.65)
SB ($38.75)
Preflop: Hero is CO with Kc, Td.
2 folds, Hero raises to $3, Button calls $3, 1 fold, BB calls $2.
Flop: ($9.50) Jh, 2h, 4d (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $6, Button calls $6, BB calls $6.
Turn: ($27.50) 6c (3 players)
BB checks, Hero checks, Button checks.
River: ($27.50) 5h (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $55, Button folds, BB calls $51.80 (All-In).
Final Pot: $134.30
Results in white below:
BB has Qc Jd (one pair, jacks).
Hero has Kc Td (high card, king).
Outcome: BB wins $131.10. Hero wins $3.20.
I like this as an overbet spot because both players are likely to have a pair but neither is likely to have a flush. Even before seeing results, I told him that of the two, he ought to be a lot more worried about getting called by the BB than by the BTN. Not only is BB’s relative position better but he is also less more likely to do something spazzy like check a flush or call with toppest pair.
My only advice for playing the hand differently, and what I think makes the hand interesting, is that I think Hero should have shoved for ~$100, enough to put BTN all-in, rather than betting half that, which was half of BTN’s stack but enough to put BB all-in. What’s cool about this is that, assuming I’m right that BTN calls basically never, Hero isn’t really risking twice as much even though he’s betting twice as much. The real threat of a call comes from BB, who can only win $51.80.
It will look to BB, however, as though Hero is risking $100. Presumably BB is not a good hand reader and won’t realize how rarely BTN can call this. Thus, Hero gets credit for making a $100 bet even though his true risk is closer to half that.
Hey,
Long time reader, first time commenter. I really enjoy the blog and all of the thought you put into it. Great Stuff. I’m curious though why you think both villains are unlikely to have a flush? Preflop, the button is probably calling with a lot of suited connectors, on the flop it makes sense that he’s not going to be raising a flush draw after hero has bet into two players, and on the turn he would likely feel as if it’s not worth trying to semi-bluff two players, especially given the BB’s loose reputation. As for the BB, I would think that flush draws would be a decent part of his range for overcalling the flop.
Thanks for reading and commenting! Hope to hear more from you in the future 🙂
I actually would expect the BTN to bet his flush draws on the turn. BB’s looseness means he could have all sorts of crap that he called flop with, much of which won’t be able to call one more bet let alone two. From his perspective BB and Hero both look pretty weak, and I’d expect him to bet when he has no little to no showdown value or even when he’s vulnerable (ie 5h 4h).
As for BB, he could certainly have flush draws on the flop, but I wouldn’t expect him to check a flush first to act on the river after the turn checked through.
Hope that answers your question!
I’m not sure why we would discount FDs from BTNs range, as he really shouldn’t bet the turn w/ FDs if he doesn’t expect to have much FE vs BB (fish). I guess we have disagreements on what BTN would/wouldn’t bet. I expect most NL100 players to check back a decent number of FDs on the turn.
I also think overbetting 4x here is a mistake, BTN’s calling range is fairly inelastic btwn $50 and $100, and we’re just burning $ the times we’re called betting larger and he happens to have a flush.
I agree that a larger bet relative to the pot may ‘scare’ BB more, but given our read on him, he may not even be thinking on that level.