In honor of my first video series at Tournament Poker Edge, here’s a twist on the “What’s Your Play?” theme with an emphasis on hand reading.
Five-handed $5/$5 no-limit hold ’em game. Villain bought in about an hour ago for $500 and is down to about $440. He’s a very amateurish older man, probably mid-60s, and so far has been an extremely straightforward, level one, tight-passive player. He doesn’t do much hand reading and even less bluffing, needs to be pretty damn sure he’s good before betting or raising, and sizes his bets/raises in accordance with his hand strength.
At 30, Hero (me) is the second-oldest player at the table by several years, but also by far the most aggressive. He’s probably perceived by Villain as overly aggressive but slightly dangerous/intimidating for that reason. He has about $1200 on the table.
UTG straddles to $10. Next to act, Hero raises to $30. Villain calls on Button, SB folds, BB calls, straddle folds.
Flop ($102 in pot) Jh 9s 5d. BB checks, Hero bets $45, Button raises to $100, BB folds, Hero takes 8-10 seconds to call.
Turn ($302 in pot) Jh 9s 5d Tc. Hero bets $175, Villain seems genuinely to agonize for 30 seconds or so and finally calls.
River ($652 in pot) Jh 9s 5d Tc 4h. Hero checks, Villain checks.
As early as the flop raise, I was about 80% sure of Villain’s exact hand. After the turn, I expected him to have Hand A 95% of the time, Hand B 4% of the time, and I allowed for a 1% chance that my read was off. He showed Hand A.
Questions for you:
1. What is Hand A?
2. What is Hand B?
3. My hand is hopefully a bit harder to read than Villain’s, but what do you expect me to have and why?
Leave your answers and comments here, and I’ll be back with results and my own thoughts on Friday.
My guesses:
Hand A is AJ. Hand B is KJ. QT is another thing you might think. Bart Hanson has said that small flop raises from live players are often one pair or a draw. I don’t think this guy is raising a draw. (I also frequently disagree with Bart, but I think he’s roughly correct about this.) More evidence: if he could beat AA-QQ, I think he would have bet the turn. I suppose QQ is also possible, but I think he would have bet the turn with that (or the river, but the question is about turn hand-reading). His pause makes me discount QQ even more, though.
On the river you can’t beat AJ because you expect to be able to get more value on average by betting than by checking and letting him bet. You probably were not expecting him to fold the turn, although you might have thought there was as good as a 25-35% chance of folding him out.
So I think you had good equity against AJ but a hand that cannot beat AJ. No flush draw is possible, so that makes me think you had a pair and a straight draw–QJ, QT, etc. Betting as a semibluff trying to fold out one or two notches better is not a common play, but I think you are capable of it, and I think it is a fine play here.
I haven’t thought about this as long as I’d like, so sorry in advance for any poor logic / overlooked possibilities!
I don’t think a tight-passive older player is calling a 6BB pre-flop raise with those hands (loose passive yes). Maybe AJ suited, but I think it’s doubtful. Even if he had AJ, I don’t think he’s playing for stacks with it with one pair on the flop. His min-raise gives him only a pot size bet behind, so if he’s even somewhat aware of stack sizes, I think the min-raise shows a really strong hand from a player like this.
” if he’s even somewhat aware of stack sizes”
That might be a stretch…
Agree with Nate – Hand A is AJ, hand B is KJ. You have QJ or QT. Basically for the reasons he says.
The interesting question to me is why you bet the turn. I don’t think you’re expecting to fold out better. If you think he’s that susceptible to folding a good one-pair hand then why not bet again on the river? I suppose you think you have a small chance of taking it down on the turn if villain unexpectedly has a weak hand. (You’ve said that you think there’s a 20% chance on the flop that your read is wrong.) But, probably more importantly, you’re juicing the pot in case you hit one of your 11-13 outs on the river. If he’ll call a 2/3 pot bet on the river no matter what, then with a $650 pot you make ~$217 more than a $300 pot.
“you’re juicing the pot in case you hit one of your 11-13 outs on the river”
This isn’t something you’re ever going to catch me doing. If I’m going to win 25% of the time on the river, then I lose money I put in on the turn 75% of the time. This would essentially be charging myself to draw. Also in this case there isn’t much money behind anyway after he calls the turn.
Our Hero has been very clear on this type of thinking in the past. I still find it a bit contradictory to the ‘most aggressive’ tag he puts on himself but I think you have to make the assumption that he ‘has something’ in order to put money in on the Turn that will probably cause Villian to shove or call any River bet .. although it is very possible that if a 4th straight card hit the board that Villian would fold to a River ‘shove’. I’m a little late reading this post and posting from top to bottom ..
Hand A is 9’s. Hand B is J’s. This type of player likes to call with middle pairs and won’t re-raise with them. I think 5’s is unlikely because he probably wouldn’t even call pre-flop with than hand. 9’s makes the most sense for the agonizing call on the turn. With J’s, he’s more likely to feel “I have top set, I’m not giving this hand no matter what” (and there is some chance he might re-raise with that hand pre-flop, whereas he never would with 9’s).
Since you know you’re behind, based on the flop call you must have a hand where you have some outs. I think you are also calling because you think you might be able to get him to fold if a scare card comes. So I’m thinking a hand like T8 or QT suited, as it seemed like you bluffed the scare card on the turn but gave up on the river.
I’m pretty certain AJ is Hand A. Hand B is most likely also something including a jack, and judging from the flop, I’d assume it is something that would flop two pair, like j9. I would exclude a set in most situations because I’d feel he would continue to be aggressive all the way to the river. I’d put your hand on QT, based on the line you took.
From the action and description up to the turn, 55 fits the villain best to me, followed by 99. I’m not sure what to put you on however, but if I am sticking with the read of the villain I would lean towards a drawing hand like QT… should the villain have the hand I am reading him for it doesn’t make sense for you to have a value hand like JJ or KQ since you would bet the river, and perhaps you used the straightening board to try and bet him off his hand on the turn. Or perhaps I’m wrong on villain’s hand – although I don’t see him raising the flop and calling the big turn bet very often with a jack.
There are clearly two camps here in the comments: those who think he has TPTK as Hand A, and those who think he has a set.
I was originally in the latter category. But if you set aside the idea that this is a poker problem and just look at it as a logical deduction question based on Andrew’s clues, hand A more or less has to be AJ (if the two choices are AJ or set). There’s just no way you could be 99% sure he had a *specific* set (i.e. 99 rather than 55, or vice-versa).
That’s probably a deductive technique that falls outside the spirit of the exercise, but I also don’t see how it can be wrong.
I agree with those who think Andrew had pair + draw. I’m interested in hearing about whether you considered firing on the river.
matt
^ I really like this comment. Surely it must be right (at least insofar as 55 and 99 are not really possible answers to the question).
Also, I think he would have bet the turn with a set (not because he beats so much of Andrew’s actual range but because he beats so much of what he thinks Andrew’s range would be to call the flop raise).
I’m starting to think that I was wrong to guess that Andrew might have QT. I think he would have put Villain to the test on the flop with an eight-out draw. Now I think QJ or J8 is more likely.
I like the comment as well (from the deductive reasoning stand-point), but my feeling would be that he if did have AJ, that he would either call the flop, hoping to get to showdown cheaply, or he would make a much bigger raise if he is worried about Andrew having a drawing hand. Min-raising with AJ seems really horrible – is this really a play this type of player makes?
Usually they aren’t thinking of it as a min-raise. Rather, they think they ought to raise but aren’t comfortable putting in more than (in this case) $100.
If you liked this sort of ‘backwards’ hand reading puzzle, you should check out ‘retrograde analysis’ chess problems. There’s a really good book ‘The chess mysteries of Sherlock Holmes’. They’re similar to this – they’ll give you a board plus some information and you have to reconstruct how it came about to answer a question such as ‘where was the rook captured’, or ‘i knocked a pawn off the board, where was it’.
Thanks for the recommendation. I just put it on hold at the library.
If you do that again I will ban your account 😉
Like most I think villain has “top top” and is not folding it ever.
Hand A: AJ
Hand B: KJ
Your Hand: AT
Your donk on the turn but check the river is an interesting line vs a calling station. If you thought you were ahead on the turn then surely you would have bet the river. To me it looks like you cbet the flop, picked up equity on the turn and led out, then realized on the river you can’t bluff this guy off tptk and just checked it to save chips.
Why would I call his flop raise with AT?
I wanted to edit my reply but couldn’t. I am leaning towards Hand #3 being QT. Nevertheless Hand 3 is a range of hands that can’t beat tptk so the exact hand is irrelevant.
Hmm flop raise seems like 2 pair…
I don’t think Hero thinks Villain would fold JJ for 175$
He might fold 55,j9,99
I think Hero discounts 55,j9 pre so I say 99 for hand A
Hand B 55.(or really JJ just as likely)
Villain afraid of jj, 10’s, kq, checks river but can’t fold set 99 on turn.
Hero could have QQ (or KJ which would help explain why he knows villain doesn’t have jj)….semi-bluffing turn with equity.
If I put Hero on a set or two-pair on the flop, why would I call his raise with one-pair?
So Q10s fits the story a little better…
Well QQ might call since 20% of the time you think he has AJ.
I do feel like we are missing a piece of the puzzle.
To me betting 175$ on the turn when he only has 125$ behind screams like you are giving yourself a cheap price on an ALL-in semi-bluff (probably feeling confident he will never re-raise you without JJ+).
I just don’t know see how you could ever be 80% sure he had AJ.
If he plays AJ he could show up here with KJs, 9js, 55, QQ, JJ, 99..etc.
I guess you could have 9j and be 80% sure he has 55(5) or QQ believing he wouldn’t re-raise you with Aj tptk 3 handed.
Honestly amateur & 5/5 in the same sentence make me readless 🙂
Looking forward to the results.
5 handed, even a tight player would play j9s on the button no?
Anyway I would give him 55 this A hand.
B j9s
And for you q10 seems reasonable, aspecially if you called (assuming I’m right and you think he has 55), it looks like the only hand that doesn’t beat him, and would try to make him fold with a semi bluff on the turn, then assume that he doesn’t have enough behind to fold the river once he called the turn.
I started to think that J9 was hand A. What do you think about my reasoning behind: obviously agonizing on the turn means he is scared to be beat. So he is very scared of draws, so if he had a nutted hand like 55+ wouldn’t he raise more to “protect”. Let’s say j9 could be worth a raise but not too big because it’s not the nuts… (me trying to think for him, not my reasoning :)) )
But then I thought that with his stack size the raise was stronger that 2 pair and looking very valulinish. (even if it’s almost the same hand, I’m sure that for him having j9 and 55 is a huuuge difference).
1. Hand A is AJ. On a dry, rainbow board, it is typical live player mentality to raise TPTK to “protect your hand”. This man, although described as Tight-Passive, probably will 3b AA/KK pf, and possibly QQ, which is why 80% of the time on the flop, Andrew can put him on one “exact hand”.
2. I’m taking a stab here, but I think hand B is QQ. QQ is just possibly outside villain’s 3b range pf. Also, bc of what I think Andrew’s hand is, QQ is a likely guess at “5%”. If Andrew’s hand is QT, there are only 3 combo’s of QQ left in the deck, contrasted with 12 combo’s of AJ, making hand A much more likely than hand B.
3. As I alluded to earlier, Andrew has QT. On a J9xr board, QT is a standard c-bet, as well as a standard raise PF 5-handed. Andrew cannot have some of the hands listed above, such as AT, QJ, KJ, because if he puts Villain on Hand A (AJ) 80% of the time, these hands have almost no equity, so flatting the flop raise makes no sense. His hand must be able to beat this hand (AJ) a large percentage of the time.
When he gets raised, against villain’s hand, Andrew has 11 outs, or ~44% equity with 2 cards to come. Getting something like 7-1 in implied makes this a call, while shoving against top-top probably doesn’t generate enough fold equity against an old-man type player. When turn card is T, it gives our hand 2 additional outs. When combined with the fact that villain views us as “slightly dangerous/intimidating”, and the board now reads 9TJx (semi-scary), a barrel here might generate enough FE to be worth it.
After villain calls, and river bricks, old-man folding to a river jam is questionable at best, since he still has top-top. Combined with our showdown value, which Andrew estimates at 1%, he checks, and hopes for a check-back and a super-small chance of winning at showdown (he doesn’t).
I really like this post .. being the first to mention an overpair as a real possibility and calling out our Hero’s ‘logical’ Flop raise flat and ‘donk’ Turn bet reasoning. However Hero had already commented about 20 minutes earlier that he would not bet the Turn if he was on a draw AND thought he was behind. The longer pause before calling the Turn bet shows real concern for this board by Villian and for this reason I don’t put him on QQ since he has picked up draws. But it could also show some thought being put into shoving the Turn. Is he really that scared of Hero having 2 pair or straight right now??
What I meant to say in that post is that I wouldn’t bet with a draw just to sweeten the pot in the hopes of hitting. That suggests that I know I will be called and am betting just to make the pot bigger, which I don’t think is wise. Betting as a bluff/semi-bluff is a different story entirely.
Just some side-notes:
Andrew cannot have T8. It’s been mentioned as a possibility in a couple of posts that Hero might have T8. While he would probably play T8 like this PF and flop, on the turn T8 is a clear check-fold. On a board reading 9TJx, T8 is pretty worthless. While it looks like you have a pair and OESD, a lot of cards are bad for you. An 8 fills up QJ and QQ, and a Q gets there for KJ. You don’t really have a lot of “clean” outs, the same way that QT does. Because of these factors, I think it’s really unlikely for Andrew to donk the turn with this hand… he’s almost always check-folding here.
The flop raise by the villain with AJ is completely in line with Andrew’s description of “sizes his bets/raises in accordance with his hand strength.” On the J95r flop, he has one pair. He feels he needs to raise to protect his hand, but at the same time, only has one pair. Thus, he almost-min-raises the $45 bet to $100, in line with his hand strength, and from his POV, completely logical.
Sorry, last thought.
Andrew cannot have AJ+, or QQ+ because of his river check. In one of his previous strategy articles, he writes that it is always better to bet-fold, rather than check-call. He goes further, and says that if you check the river, you should be check-folding most of the time. The reason for this is because people’s calling range is always bigger than their value-betting range. Unless you have reason to suspect that someone has a large bluff range (which we know this particular villain does not from his description), you should bet yourself for value yourself to get value from a much larger part of their range.
Therefore, if Andrew had any sort of value hand, he would lead the river himself. The fact that he checks shows us that he does not have a value hand at all, and that he is likely check-folding the river himself. Thus, this precludes the possibility of AJ, QQ+, 2-pair, or sets from Andrews hand.
There are two scenarios that i think are consistent with your turn and river actions: 1) you expect him to have a draw/weak made hand which he can’t call a (really small) river bet with, or you expect him to have a better hand than you which you thought he would fold on the turn often enough to make a bluff profitable.
In 1), it’s really hard for him to have a busted draw or a very weak made hand – QT is about all I can see and that’s a stretch for him to play preflop or to raise the flop with.
In 2) the question is what you expect him to raise small on the flop but then fold to a turn bet. Is he really nitty enough to fold TPTK or TP2K? I don’t play live, but that seems pretty nitty. OTOH, as a man in a deerstalker once said, if you’ve eliminated the impossible…
The question then becomes, if you put him on TP, what could you have that made it worth calling the (even small) flop raise that you were then prepared to turn into a (semi)bluff on the turn. I think that QT/8T are the two hands that would be worth continuing with on the flop, but are then worth trying to semibluff with.
1) AJ
2) KJ (or maybe QJ?)
3) QT/T8
I want to start with excluding hands from Andrew’s range based on his river decision to check. It seems to me that based on villain’s turn action he should expect villain to never bet river. Therefore Andrew can never have a value hand. These hands include KQ/Q8/87, all of which more or less make sense to play the flop this way, as well as two pair and sets, since Andrew would also bet these for value.
This strikes me as odd since then I have to think of a hand that cannot bet for value on the river, in Andrew’s mind, that has an incentive to bet this size on the turn. The answer to this is surely in his assignment of the opponent’s range of 80% certainty given the flop raise, and 95% certainty given the turn call.
It seems to me that Andrew likely has a better hand than villain in the 95% case but not in the 4%(5%) case.
Let’s see why.
Andrew would not bluff the turn often. But he would value bet the turn were he to recognize that villain is likely to check behind the turn with hands he raised on the flop, on this particular card. This seems like (this type of) villain’s likely action given a top pair type hand such as AJ. Therefore I think Andrew’s most likely hand to bet the turn would be QQ.
The problem Andrew encounters, whatever his hand, in value betting the river, is the villain’s reluctance to call the turn. Andrew might be worried that, as odd as it is, he could not value bet facing AJ on this river.
I don’t know. I just can’t see Andrew bluffing the turn or betting QT for value against A9. The narrative of him betting QT for value against A9 on the turn makes sense in terms of his river play, but to assume that this villain type both calls A9 preflop and raises to this particular size seems far fetched given the degree of certainty Andrew is attributing.
Therefore I think I have to assume that Andrew believed villain’s continuing range facing a flop three-bet was small and strong, potentially a fraction of his flop (to this size) raising range, and that therefore the best way to extract value from his flop (to this size) raising range was to call and to lead turns for value on which he thought the opponent would check through, a straightening card like this being an exemplar. Then on the river Andrew read villain’s turn reluctance as a cue that villain’s river continuing range was going to be an unduly small fraction of his turn calling range and since his hand was better than 95% of villain’s holding, but worse than 5% of villain’s holdings, he decided checking his QQ was best, after which he won against AJ at showdown.
Maybe I am being too dismissive of the possibility that Andrew would try to start running a bluff on this turn, after all most of his hands that continue versus the flop raise that are worse than the hands that villain raises also improved on this turn, ie the river scare cards are the same cards that often make Andrew the best hand, negating the possibility of him turning a hand that had incentive to continue versus the flop raise into a bluff when the board runs out with cards that are in {scare cards} but do not intersect with {cards that make his hand}.
What puzzles me a little bit about this analysis is that the villain only has about $135ish left on the river. He would have to raise to $100 on the flop and (albeit agonizingly) call $175 on the turn yet fold for just $135 more on the river.
I agree. I think that the likeliest place my analysis could go wrong is in the assumption that Andrew played the hand well. But QQ does make perfect sense as a hand that wants to bet the turn for value against 80% AJ but can call off a turn shove given the price against a range that is comprised mainly of sets.
Like the very same stack size observation sort of rules out a multi street bluff attempt. So how could Andrew think he has a profitable one street bluff against this villain type? I don’t think he can. So how could Andrew then not be value betting the turn?
I think a one street semi-bluff is totally plausible here, although more so against a top pair type hand than the set i originall predicted since he has both more outs and (presumably) FE in that case. Why wouldn’t it be vs this particular bad guy?
I am not sure Todd. This hand has me doubting myself. But running a one street bluff against a player like this’ flop raising range is just not a play in my arsenal on a street with cards to come.
Gareth, I agree that this hand is unusual and has me doubting myself too! I surely wouldn’t suggest the typical way to attack the tight passive nit is to bluff him on the turn here – its just that that the villain clearly has a value hand of some kind, wants to be sure of himself before putting money in, he obviously doesn’t have the straight, a possible straight is on the board, and Andrew didn’t bet the river. Piecing it together its very hard for me to give Andrew something besides a semi-bluff. It is a strange hand and I am curious to see the results and Andrew’s thoughts on it.
If I put him on AJ but didn’t think I had a profitable value bet with QQ on the river, why would bluffing turn/river be bad?
I don’t think you should have checked the river with QQ but I assumed I was wrong about that.
Grunch
Hand A: AJ
Hand B: TT
Hero’s hand: J9
This super nit may only play 99+ and AJ+ on the BTN. Would fold AK, AQ, and (maybe, hence the 4%) TT postflop. Would raise AA, KK, QQ preflop and bet them post flop. Would bet JJ and 99 post flop, so that leaves TT and AJ, though I am thinking he might fold TT on the flop.
On the other hand, Hand B could be QQ, if Villain is so tight he won’t 3bet QQ from the BTN, nor raise them post flop. Maybe afraid Hero has AA or KK (or JJ or 99, etc.). TT is strange, because Villain should be very happy on the turn, but I think Villain sees monsters under the bed (straight) and so is not happy when turning his set which also makes a straight. I came to this conclusion, though, because it seems the only way Hero’s river action makes sense (Hero’s hand has to be between Villain’s two possible hands).
Another choice:
Hand A: QQ
Hand B: TT
Hero’s hand J9, really can be any hand that falls in value between Hand A and Hand B. (Could be KK or AA as well).
“it seems the only way Hero’s river action makes sense (Hero’s hand has to be between Villain’s two possible hands).”
I don’t follow – why does my river check mean I can beat one but not both of Villain’s hands?
I think you checked because you believed Villain only calls with Hand B, which beats you, and that Villain would fold with Hand A, which you beat. It’s the classic, “you will only be called when beat, so don’t bet” on the river. Your b/b/c pattern indicates that. However, the other option is that on the river, you thought Villains betting range was wider than his calling range. In that case, your hand could be ahead of both Hand A and Hand B.
I am rethinking Hand B though. I strongly feel that Hero’s hand falls in between Hand A and Hand B, on the river, but TT may be too strong OTT for the way Villain paused (assuming the pause was legit and not acting with a big hand).
Checking some other hands: Villain cannot have KQ, because that would bet the river. Villain cannot have JT or QT, because those are too loose to call preflop for this player type.
Another idea is:
Hand A: AJ
Hand B: KK
Hero’s hand: QQ
This fits with my theory that Hero’s hand falls between Villain’s two hands. The problem with this is Villain not 3betting preflop.
Reading the comments now I don’t see how Andrew can have a hand that, on the turn, has good equity against AJ, but can’t beat AJ, since he could just check such a holding on the turn expecting it to check through decently often when villain has AJ. To bet the turn without a hand that beats AJ he has to be hoping to bluff a decent number of rivers and there don’t seem like there are enough cards to either bluff or improve a hand that is semi-bluffing.
So I have to believe, when he places the turn bet, Andrew thought he had the best hand 80% of the time, and when villain hesitated to call (villain would not have hesitated with a set or two pair, since he has outs, villain would not have hesitated with any Q or 8 in his hand, or even a KJ type hand (gutterball) Andrew’s estimation moved up to 95%.
Why would villain hesitate to call with 99, 55, JT, QQ, QJ, etc on the turn?
This player type never hesitates to make a non-fold, non-raise.
I think sometimes you’re too quick to label your opponents as pure calling stations. I think that Andrew could reasonably have thought that the other guy would fold sometimes. Maybe I’m wrong about that.
Yeah that seems to be the emerging conventional wisdom. Thing is, the conventional wisdom can be sometimes be right! I am very interested to hear Andrew’s hand now since a lot of nutted hands make sense to me to play the turn this way.
You are certainly right about my pigeonholing of people.
How do you reconcile this with my river check?
I don’t know why you checked. Why did you check?
I reconcile it in a pretty metarational way actually: I assume I can’t actually read your hand, and that airing my faulty thought process will reveal its flaws, wherever they are!
One point that has been in my head that I haven’t written down yet here is that, if Andrew wanted to semi-bluff the turn, why did he choose such a size? I would think he would need to bet larger to have an effective chance at villain folding a portion of his flop raising range. Of course I might be wrong about that, since villain was pained by this size, and I would not expect this villain type to be that pained with exactly AJ or KJ or QJ. The plot thickens, the fog shrouds, a banshee howls in the distance.
This exercise reminds me of learning/fumbling to unhook bra straps in the dark. Thankfully the time limit is more lenient.
“This exercise reminds me of learning/fumbling to unhook bra straps in the dark. Thankfully the time limit is more lenient.”
And you’re not worried that uncle Fernando or whoever it was might come to hear about it…
Yes definitely. For one, Uncle Fernando is not a favourite to keep up with this blog. Second, I am safe and sound two countries away!
Te mataré, blanco!
Is it because you beat both Hand A and Hand B, but Villain will c or f with Hand A and will c or bet Hand B, so the only way to get value on the river is if Villain has Hand B and you check so he can bet?
I don’t have time to figure out new Hand B and new Hero hand under this theory, but I still think Hand A is AJ.
Maybe
Hand A: AJ
Hand B: 99
Hero: JJ
So this old guy could have been me not that long ago…
Hand A sounds like JJ to me. It’s just a call pre flop because he doesn’t want to re pop it only to see a flop with an A, K or even a Q. Hand B would then be AJs – also a call from the button – but only because Andrew has been so active and … the turn is scary to him since the straight completes but he has the re-draw so calls. He doesn’t value bet the river since Andrew could be checking the low straight with the intention of calling the small bet he has left – plus it is a nice pot that he is happy to take down.
I think Andrew’s hand range is pretty wide pre flop and includes a fair number of suited connectors, pairs 77+ and broadway hands. It gets narrowed on the flop when he calls the raise – but, it is only $55 more and there is $310 behind. Since we know he didn’t make the straight (he doesn’t bet the river which is after the fact information but we have it now) I’m thinking 86s, T7s and maybe 76s all fit and then there are the overpairs that make some sort of straight draw on the turn – QQ & KK. Maybe, but a lot less likely, AA. 88 is in there since it picks up a draw on the turn but it seems like a fold to the flop raise.
Hi AFG, thanks for commenting. I’ll say this much: I wouldn’t expect Villain to fold a set of Jacks on the turn, so it can’t be the case that I both put him on JJ and had a hand worse than JJ myself. You’re off on at least one of those points 😉
When I edited my post to clean up the flow, I somehow deleted QTs which I thought was your most likely hand along with T8s. Both of these pick up a pair and a straight draw on the turn and are good semi bluffing hands. Where I am mistaken is thinking you would try to fold the set – how did you eliminate JJ from his range?
Ok, so the main questions are:
1. Why does nit call pre. instead of 3bet.
2. Why does nit min. raise flop.
3. Why does hero call flop.
4. Why does nit _tank_ call turn donk.
5. Why does hero donk turn.
6. Why does hero check river.
#1 … So, can we exclude AA/KK and maybe QQ from villains range due to #1. Personally I’ve seen enough bad+passive players just call AA/KK with no good idea of what to do on the flop, just that they don’t like to raise and they aren’t folding so they have to call. They also can have some idea that if they raise it’ll turn their hand face up so just call (but with ~2 SPR who cares).
#2 … I initially assumed AA/KK here again, because after just calling pre. I’ve also seen enough players then play AA/KK like it’s the nuts on this kind of flop. Nate says people love to do this with AJ/KJ here too, even though that seems even more insane to me (let’s raise the bottom of our never going to fold range!). Obviously villain can raise any set here, and JJ/99 are the most likely but even nits can call 55 on the BTN vs. a LAG IMO.
#3 … hero can raise pretty wide pre., and probably cbet wide too … but villains raise shows strength, so I think calling QJ or worse here would be bad (even given that we only need 25% for this bet). The most obvious things to call are the two “big” draws QT/T8 and maybe KK/QQ (although just shoving seems better).
#4 … after the min. raise I’d assume villain isn’t folding that often, but this “looks” like a scary card so villain hates it but can’t find a fold with a good one pair hand. I’d assume we can rule sets out here, nit villains at worst snap call sets here IMO even if they think they are losing and even if they don’t fold river when they see how much it is.
#5 … my guess is that hero had QT and now has a bad pair an OESD and is now trying to bet something that might make villain fold 20% of the time but at worst will stop villain from shoving which he might well do if checked to. I’d have thought hero would bet less with that assuming villain won’t read a $100 bet the same way as a check, but that probably removes the 20% chance that villain folds AJ/QQ/KK/AA. It also makes it really hard for villain to fold when you hit on the river.
#6 … hero still has just 2nd pair meh. kicker on the river and doesn’t think villain will fold.
My first guess was:
hand A: AA
hand B: KK
hero: QTs
….but assuming villain can 3bet at least QQ+ and that Nate’s correct about villain overplaying AJ/KJ on this flop I’d go:
hand A: AJ
hand B: KJ
hero: QTs
One small point. A few people have asked why Andrew would bet the turn with a hand worse than AJ if he doesn’t expect his opponent to fold AJ. But if he will have to call a bet, or even has a close fold (which makes enough sense if he has a 13-out draw), then he might as well take a shot at getting the other guy to fold. This of course assumes that Villain won’t fold, but that is a safe assumption here.
given action on flop, reasons for why hero should lead out on turn with QT if he puts villain on AJ:
1. small possibility villain folds TPTK;
2. good possibility villain merely calls with TPTK allowing hero to set price for his OSD/2P draw;
2a. because hero has QT, villain is far less likely to have QQ which means he is less likely to jam and price out hero’s draw.
3. because of board texture (J95Tr), even if the straight draw hits, board will read four to a straight, so hero might not get paid by nit. better off inflating the pot on turn to improve the chance of thin value on river if the straight/2P rolls in.
60 year old amateur playing 5 handed 5/5 with less then 100BB???
Makes me curious about where this hand took place?
Sounds like it could be anywhere in the entire world!
based on your description of the villian, i would expect him to have 5-5 most of the time and possibly j-9 (for the 4%)… my thinking is that he raised with a set on the flop and then was scared when the turn came and put a possible straight out there, especially since you led into him… and then he checked his river scared of an aggressive check raise from you with a possible straight…
i put your hand on something with a q, so you probably have j-q or q-9, and hit a pair and cbet, and then when you hit an additional straight draw on the turn, you followed up with another bet with the plan to shut down if called and river didn’t help… it’s tough to put you on a specific hand cause since you are the best player at the table and know it, you can have a very wide raising range… so it could be a-q or k-q but i’m confident of the q in your hand…
since you called his flop raise, i’m going to narrow it down to q-9 or q-j…
and nevermind about kq since that would give you the nuts on the turn and you probably wouldn’t have checked the river
maybe a-j for the 4% after reading other people’s comments… and i didn’t consider qq pre but i still stand by q-9 or q-j…
wow, this turned out to be very popular in the comments… i just want to clarify one point since reading your comments to others… on the flop, you bet $45 and he raised to $100… even though his flop raise screams strength, he could think tptk is super strong… so given the price, and his range, you have to call the flop with one pair… however, when you turned a draw and bet and he still called, i think we can eliminate tptk and put him on a small or medium set… that’s scared of higher sets or straights…
but you did say you were sure about his hand 80% on the flop so in that case, i guess set doesn’t make sense for your flop call… still, this is my analysis, i’m guessing set for him and pair plus straight draw on the turn for you!
> so given the price, and his range, you have to call the flop with one pair
No, not even close. QJ has like 15% vs. a reasonable nit min. raise range, and that’s to the river equity which almost certainly means putting more money in. You also don’t know if a Q or J is good or bad.
PPT:
http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/show?b=Jh+9s+5d&g=he&h1=QJ&h2=AJ%2CKJ%2CQQ%2CKK%2CAA%2CJJ%2C99%2C55&s=generic
Which is why I said hero can’t have one pair hands, and I doubt he just calls (or takes the turn/river line) with anything bigger.
ok so then i guess you are putting him on j-9 for top 2? no other 2 pair makes sense…
Nit has QQ (95%) or AJ (5%). Andrew has AJ.
I think you are the first to put Hero on AJ and it certainly could be in his range, but Hero NEVER donk bets this Turn with AJ and a mindset that Villian is on QQ 80% of the time after Flop action takes place. That would mean he is betting a draw, which he professes to not practice, with 2 of his outs in his opponents hand AND the hopes that this opponent will fold an overpair.
I feel pretty confident that Villain has hand A as AJ and maybe hand B as QQ or much much less likely 99.
I think I might look absurdly foolish but… I think Hero has AJ as well.
The most difficult part of the puzzle for me is thinking of hands that Hero can bet turn and then check river with. If the turn bet is called, then Hero has effectively no fold equity with $135 stack and $652 pot.
If Hero beats hand A 95% of the time and loses to hand B the other 5% of the time, then given he is almost guaranteed to be always called then it makes his hand still a value bet. Whereas if he has AJ then a x is higher EV than a bet.
What a nice little hand here!! My inital reaction to the hand was that Hero had QQ and Villain had A=AJ and B=KK. The Hero check on the River is the most puzzling aspect to me. If Hero thinks he is ahead 95% of the time, he certainly should feel free to bet the Villain all-in on the River. The other aspect of this action is that Hero checks River to make Villain think he missed his draw somehow to induce the all-in with 100% intention of calling it.
The min-raise on the Flop shows the strength of a KK, QQ, AJ or a set in the Villain’s hand. I don’t think he Turn tanks that much with QQ (picked up draw) or set (would go all-in even against scare card with small stack behind) so I rule them out. I have certainly seen Villain’s type flat raises on button with KK (or AA) thinking he is up against a wide range of hands he certainly dominates in order to trap.
The calling of the Flop raise and Turn donk bet pains our Villain since our Hero’s (once trappable) wide range of hands has now come into full reality with 2-pr, straight and straight draws rearing their ugly heads (he may have folded if backdoor flush was out there!!), but he feels compelled to flat and hope to showdown a blank River, improve his hand or cry call a paired board bet (hopefully a 5) and perhaps cry call a blank River.
Hero’s River check is either AJ or a read that the only way to get the rest of Villain’s stack is to check-call with QQ and take getting beat by KK with a smirkish drink of water!!
Clarification .. Hero never actually stated that he was ‘ahead’ 95% of the time after the Turn, but also professes that he wouldn’t bet a draw on the Turn either if he felt he would only win 25% of the time. So Hero has a AJ or better (2-pr, QQ) holding and is not putting Villain on something better while donk betting the Turn. Hero sees Turn as blank to Villain so he feels free to stay aggressive and bet out .. and might have even picked up strength (if QQ).
The River check is still a puzzler .. would Hero bet into an 80% chance of a chop on Turn? A much smaller FYI bet would have done the trick if so …
Hand A – JJ
Hand B – AJs
Hero – 99
Hand A – AJ
Hand B – KK
Hero – AJ
Final answer.
assuming hero has QT (possibly suited with bdf), the real question is whether hero considered b/3b shoving flop.
villain’s likely flop-raising range: {AJ, KJ, QQ, 99, 55}
AJ, KJ: 24 combos.
QQ, JJ, 99, 55: 15 combos.
assume villain always calls with QQ, JJ, 99, 55, never calls with KJ, and cry calls 1/2 the time with AJ (which might actually be generous). combinatorically, villain folds ~45% of the time.
after villain raises flop, pot size: $245.
villain has $310 behind.
if hero b/3b shoves flop, his BEP is 62%. given pot size, stack sizes, and villain’s perceived nittiness makes this a pretty decent spot to b/3b shove. even if villain ends up calling with the strongest part of his range, hero is still only a 2:1 dog to draw out. but more significantly, close to half the time, villain folds the better hand.
ps. just realized combinatorically, villain only has 3 combos of QQ due to discounting of hero’s QT. consequently, this makes b/3b shove arguably even more appealing.
I put him on QQ for hand A and AJ for Hand B. Of course I’ve
read all the posts so far. And I’ve played against someone
very similar. In fact all I had to do was substitute then
name Jerry…and this is what he would show up with.
Also I put you on KJ or QJ; betting the turn hoping to
get a better hand to fold, but also picking up a draw.
If Gareth’s final answer (AJ/KK/AJ) is right, I don’t really understand the check on the river. If there’s only 4% that villain has KK, then I don’t see why hero wouldn’t shove. If villain legitimately hesitated on the turn before calling, then there should be a >4% chance he can fold AJ even to an underbet shove (and actually we need less f/e than that given the size of the pot). So shoving should be usually a wash, rarely a loss, and rarely a huge bonanza.
So Andrew must think that he’s beat 95% of the time and that he has limited fold equity. But if that’s true, then why would he bet the turn, since his read was already 80% solid? Why would he think there was fold equity in betting the turn, just to give up on the river?
Here’s one theory, which I don’t think anybody has mentioned – assuming Hand A = AJ, a villain shove on the turn if Andrew checked was quite likely. Villain had ~$310 behind and the pot was $302. By betting smaller on the turn, Andrew was able to draw to his 13 outs for $175 into $302. Assuming he didn’t think that he would get a fold, that works out to $175 to win $477, or 2.72:1. Andrew was 2.38:1 to hit his straight. So he gave himself the proper odds to continue, knowing that if he checked, the straight forward player would very possibly shove to protect AJ, and Andrew would have to fold, getting just shy of the right odds. This also allows Andrew to play perfectly on the river, and (virtually) always get paid off he hits and (literally) never lose more if he misses. Added bonus is that villain will almost never raise the turn because the straight card had hit and that’s just not how these guys play. And if he did raise, Andrew would clearly be getting the right odds to call.
In sum, Andrew bet the turn with QT without thinking he really had any fold equity against what he thought was almost certainly AJ, because it gave him the right odds to continue and represented basically the only way that he could actually win the pot (except for shoving the turn and getting lucky or check/calling-without-proper-odds all in on the turn).
I’m guessing Hand B is KJ, but I’m less sure. Nothing fits great. Guess that’s why it’s only 4%.
I’m assuming villian’s range pre is roughly 22+,AT+,KJ+. I’m leaving QQ-AA in his flatting range, some of the time, because he has been described as tight passive. If these hands are not meant to be interpreted as part of his pf range from the description, then I’m going to be way off. I also think KJ is pretty borderline. Hero’s range pre is obv. wide.
Given that his sizing correlates with his hand strength, I’m assuming sets are not in his flop min raising range. I am ruling out any bluffs or thin value hands (TT or worse). This leaves AJ,KJ,and QQ+. Hero’s calling range consists of any OESD,QQ+,and slowplayed sets. I’m not saying he would not raise these hands, but I don’t think he would fold any of them, and I think he would fold all worse hands like AJ,gutshots, and random floats. It seems like it would be very ambitious to try to take this away given the SPR. Granted, villian isn’t consciously thinking about this, but he knows he’s gotta lotta money in there.
Assuming hero is not bluffing the turn due to the pot being huge relative the stacks, he must have a value hand that can beat Hand A, and his hand must contain some blockers to Hand B. So I don’t think hero can have 55,99,JJ,AJ,or KJ. Hero also can’t have AA because that is also ahead of villian’s entire range and would be a mandatory river value bet, as villian is not prone to bluff or value own himself. This leaves Hero With KK or QQ.
Hero must be quite certain that villian will fold Hand A to a river bet and call with Hand B. To put it another way, Hero assumes he is not good more than 50% of the time when called on the river.
If Hero has KK then hand B would have to be AA. The problem is if Hand B is AA, then neither QQ or AJ can be eliminated as Hand A. Although AJ is combinatorically more lilkely than QQ is can’t be 95% of villian’s range while QQ is 0-1% as none of the villians actions eliminate either hand, and Hero has no blockers to either hand.
If Hero has QQ then Hand A must be AJ, but I can’t find any reason why KK would more likely be Hand B than AA or vice versa, as hero has no blockers to either hand, and villian’s line has not made either hand more likely than the other.
Thus I am stuck. I have made three assumptions based on the villian’s description, and at least one of them are wrong.
1. Villian might flat pre with QQ+, and is equally likely to flat KK or AA.
2. Hero’s turn bet is 100% for value in this spot.
3. Hero checks river assuming a value bet is not +EV because Hand A won’t call and that turning his hand into a bluff is futile because Hand B wont’ fold. Moreover, he assumes villian will never bet Hand A for value or turn it into a bluff. Therefore Hero checks with the intention of check/folding, although greater than 95% of the time the Hero expects to see a free showdown, because villian probably won’t value bet Hand B either.
This is a really cool hand, I can’t wait to see the results.
Well I don’t agree with most comments, so I’ll give my naive answer.
Hero says he knows on the flop hands A and B, given that villain is a 1st level thinker, it seems to me A=AA and B=JJ are consistent with the raise meaning villain is quite certain to beat any hand he thinks hero is betting on the flop like AJ.
Now what can hero have to bet the flop and the turn? I think J9 is the most probable as he puts villain mostly on AA, this is a value bet.
As villain has called a huge bet on the turn despite the possible straight, it is not impossible villain has JJ and hero is beaten, hence the check on the river.
What’s so huge about the turn bet? It was 175 into ~300.
Well thinking again about the 3bet preflop, maybe 99 is a bit more realistic for hero. I’m amazed on how many people see him hyper-agro with QT…