Edit: Sorry, typo in the original post. The SB completed pre-flop, he did not fold, which is how he was able to bet the flop.
This is from a $5/$10 NLHE live game. Opponents are some combination of intimidated by and annoyed with Hero, who has won a lot of good-sized pots recently without showdown. Effective stacks are around $1500.
SB and BB are both recreational players, mostly just trying to make big hands and then make sure they win the pot.
MP identifies as a pro but seems a little spazzy/tilty. Still, he’s got a clue and doesn’t like playing big pots without big hands. I’ve seen him limp stuff like offsuit broadway hands that a lot of people would raise. There was recently a pot where he raised in MP, I called with K9s on the BN and raised him on a T86 flop. A 7 on the turn went check check, I called a bet on the river and she showed 97s for a flopped straight and was pretty annoyed when I claimed half the pot with my three-outer.
UTG1 limps, MP limps, HJ limps, I limp 65o in the CO, the SB folds, completes, and the BB checks. FWIW I was pretty sure the BN wouldn’t get involved as much as he should and would limp a lot more than he would raise, but I’m still not at all certain that limping this is a good idea.
Flop ($60) K74r. SB bets $25, BB calls, two folds, MP raises to $75, Hero?
What’s your plan? I realize a lot could happen but try to say a bit about what you’re anticipating for future streets. The central questions are whether you want to play the flop passively or aggressively and what could cause you to deviate from that course? If you call, would you ever bluff the turn? If you raise and are called, which turns would/wouldn’t you bet?
I’ll respond to comments throughout the week and will post my own thoughts and results on Sunday.
I flat here and accept the decent pot odds (75 to win 185, plus potentially heaps implied). Dude seems pretty oi w us and I’d hate to fold a hand that has good equity to a re-raise, and don’t really like 4bet shoving this flop. He also may give us a free card if we flat flop. And if we hit turn or river, we’re probably getting paid.
Seems like the threat of a 3-bet is a big part of what you don’t like about raising? What do you think his 3-bet range will look like?
If we raise, it IS a 3-bet. It’s the threat of a 4-bet from SB or MP that risks us not realizing our equity when we 3-bet (because we clearly aren’t getting it in on this flop with $1,500 effective).
But I think another point is that while the argument for 3-betting is a decent one (our 3-betting range needs to have some draws in it because on a flop this dry our raises are going to look super strong and be made up mostly of 77/44, which is quite narrow), I think the argument for flatting has even more merit — and that’s also because of the dry flop. Any 8 or 3 that falls on the turn will look like enough of a brick that we can expect implied odds to be bigger than if the flop were two-tone (and our straight also filled a flush draw) or if the OESD were more coordinated (like 98 on JT2). Furthermore, I don’t think we have much fold equity with a 3-bet because MP’s raising range in a multiway limped pot will likely be stronger on balance than it would be in a short-handed raised pot. If not, then the raise will at least be more honest. (As will SB’s lead-out, which is still a threat to be a hand like 74s, K7, or K4 that is never folding). Yes, Kx will fold a lot, but with the SB and MP showing strength, I still don’t like the fold equity. I like a flat.
I think K4, K7, 44, 77, KQ are hands he could 4-bet with– maybe even KJ because he would correctly assume that we would have raised KQ pre and therefore he can eliminate that from our range. Raising in this spot does give us possible fold-equity, on top of the equity from our draw, but I’m not sure this guy is raise-folding much here. Another benefit to raising is it might get us a free river card. Still prefer flatting, but wondering now about clicking it back in this spot. If we raise to $125 it might get us a cheaper look at the river than if we flatted and he bombed the turn.
I can’t think there are too many hands I want to 3-bet here for value (are we limping 44 or 77?).
I flat here mostly hoping to get paid after I hit. This is due to the reads on the other players. Blinds could overprotect a strong hand, and MP can just spazz out.
I can’t follow your setup. SB folded pre and led the flop? How is the BN relevant? Sounds like he folded pre. Could be reading comprehension fail, but I haven’t had anything to drink yet.
Sorry, typo in the OP, SB completed pre, thanks for catching. BN did indeed fold, I just mentioned him as a (partial) explanation for a questionable call on my part.
Flat calling actually seems kind of strong to me. There are hardly any marginal hands in our range.
Villain’s ranges are a bit tougher. MP’s impression of SB could widen his range here, but I don’t expect him to have air.
We are in position and flatting may allow us to bluff/value bet later.
That being said, villains are rarely going to have monsters here. It’s hard to hit a set. If MP is limping broadway stuff he could have more marginal hands than usual.
Considering how polarized our range is I like going for the semi bluff. Even if MP flats the 3bet with Kx, he’s likely not going to be thrilled heading into later streets.
Is folding too weak? I mean, you are facing a bet and a raise with action to come. You could get caught in the middle if you got 3-bet after calling.
If you call, you have to have a plan to bluff the turn sometimes to make the call profitable. You could bluff a turned Ace for sure, but beyond that I don’t know.
I don’t have a clear idea of what “too weak” means, but I think that folding an eight-out draw to the nuts with very deep effective stacks is passing up a profitable opportunity. You’re correct that some sort of implied odds are necessary to make a call profitable, but they can come from some combination of bluffing or getting there and winning additional monies. One of two things has to be true:
1. No one has a hand he’s willing to take to the felt, in which case bluffing will be profitable; or
2. Someone has a hand he’s willing to take to the felt, in which case chasing the straight will be profitable.
The only tricky thing is deciding which objective to play for.
With a bet into six players from the SB and a raise from MP, you have to believe at least one of them is strong. Chasing the straight will be profitable if MP has a set and if SB doesn’t reraise and if you either make your ~4.75:1 draw on the turn or the turn checks through.
All of those unknowns would seem to reduce your implied odds substantially, wouldn’t they?
I guess your point would be that you still have enough implied odds to continue because of the 150bb starting stacks, right?
You’re right that the risk of a 3-bet is an important consideration. I think both that the potential rewards are sufficient to make up for this risk and that the risk is lower than you assume. I really doubt anyone 3-bets the flop with less than a set, and it’s quite unlikely that anyone limped has KK, so that leaves just 6 combos of sets to worry about, and even if MP has a set he can’t 3-bet. So yes, I think call >>>>> fold, and the question is how it does compared to raising.
Based on your description of the SB and BB, they will play pretty straightforwardly and their bet and call probably don’t represent big hands that they want to play for stacks. I think they are mostly likely going to fold or call (only if you call). If either is slow-playing then they will raise over whatever you do. As for MP, I think he either has it (set) or is bluffing these weak players hoping you don’t wake up with something. So I think there are arguments for raising or calling (well folding too, but that’s no fun). If he’s bluffing more than he’s raising for value here then I think we can profitably raise to $200. If you get callers, you will probably get checked to on most turns so I would plan on checking back unless I hit (thus getting two free cards to hit my straight), but I would consider bluffing a 6 or 5. I’m done with the hand otherwise unless it gets checked to me twice and then I’ll re-evaluate on bluffing based on how the board runs out. The argument for calling is it’s cheaper when any of them do have a big hand, you will most likely get to see the turn in position, and you invite in two weak players who could make a big mistake on a later street. Again I would bluff a 6 or 5, definitely if checked to me, and possibly even if someone bets in front of me, but would depend on who it is and how much they bet. Otherwise, I think I check back the turn or fold to a bet unless it’s small enough to warrant calling (including the 6 and 5 bluff outs).
Thanks for posting this hand Andrew, this is a very interesting spot. For starters, with this board, we have the thinking poker trademarked “nut bluffing hand”, so unless we decide we are literally never bluffing this board, we cannot fold. So how to proceed?
We need to think most about MP villain, as sb and bb should play straightforwardly, which means they probably aren’t limping K4, K7, or KK, if they have a set they will let us know probably by the turn, and they can probably be counted on to fold most K’s if put under enough pressure (since they don’t have AK in their ranges). So what about MP’s range? I think this is a perfect flop for MP to flat with a set, as raising could scare sb/bb off a K and there are not many scary turn cards. Could he have a set or 2 pair? Sure, but I’m willing to discount it quite a bit. So to me this raise looks pretty bluffy. So what do we do?
We can start by thinking how we would play our sets and two pair hands. If I flopped a set here, I would be content to just flat MP’s raise, to try to encourage occasional calls from sb/bb and give MP rope to bluff again on the turn. I don’t think I would have a 3-bet range at all here, so I don’t want to 3 bet as a bluff either. If anything, the flat looks even stronger, and we have position after all. I think if I flat the flop, and everyone still in the hand checks the turn to me, I would put in a big bet on all turn cards except for a K. If MP bets again on the turn, I would use sizing and live tells to decide whether it is worth putting in a big raise (assuming we missed the turn). If sb/bb do anything other than make a crying call on the flop (snap call/raise/bet turn) I would slow way down and give them credit for a big hand. If my big turn bet was called by MP, I would give up on the river without a clear read that barreling would be profitable.
After thinking more about stack sizes, I’ve changed my mind a bit about MP wanting to raise with a set. Since it was a limped pot, everyone is still very deep compared to the size of the pot. So I do think it would make since for MP to be raising sets here, but still there aren’t many combos of those so if he’s bluffing much it is still a bluff-heavy range.
If the alternative is folding, then yes 65 is the nut bluffing hand (though really 65s with a backdoor would be the very best, and as you point out bluffing all combos of 65 could be too much). If we have a profitable call and good reason to believe that 3-betting could result in a big 4-bet somewhat often, though, then hands not quite good enough to call, such as gutshots with backdoor flush draws, might be the better bluffing candidates. That’s more of a caveat than a disagreement, though.
I always level myself in these kind of situations at low stakes. Vs good hand readers cold calling here looks so much stronger than raising but my opponents often thinks otherwise…
I don’t hate raising here. If we do raise, we’re basically repping a set. so i don’t see what cards are bad for us to barrel on the turn. MP’s hand looks a lot like Kx trying to deny free cards to three players once he sees the weak betting in front of him. I’d probably bet small if we hit on the turn: he’s going to raise his sets anyway and it’s hard to get much value from his Kx after showing so much strength.
In theory if we’re raising 77,44 and some 74s here we need to throw in some bluffs, too. but there are only 4 set combos and 2 two pair combos and 16 56 combos. that means we can’t raise 56 every time or our raising range is going to have a lot more bluffs than value hands.
I think I’d call here, taking advantage of the pot odds. if he’s a pro, hopefully he’s capable of recognizing our calling range being strong. Calling also reps a set so again i’m going to bluff the turn, trying to get him off Kx. i’d probably fire any turn cards. (Maybe not a K,J,T bc he’d probable be reluctant to fold two pair or trips.)
BTW I’m not too worried about getting raised out of the pot, tho. I think even very straightforward players would slow play their monsters in this spot at least sometimes.
Interesting thought calling hoping MP perceives strength.
Doesn’t raising guarantee this and give him a chance to fold at the same time?
Considering that we’re looking at a bet a call and a raise, these hands all look surprisingly weak to me. The sb only bet $25 into a pot of $60, which feels a lot more like a K that isn’t sure where he stands than like a set. The bb could definitely have a set, as he’s very likely to flat on such a dry board in the hopes of keeping others in the hand or even inducing a range from the maniac in the cutoff, but he also has plenty of kings and even some sevens in his range, as well as 65.
MP’s raise size looks like a post-flop squeeze, since it’s only $50 more into a pot of now $135 after his call. For the same reasons as the bb, I think a set would flat here, although I suppose the relatively small raise could also be to try to bloat the pot without chasing people away. Still, I think a big K, two pair, or another 65 are more likely.
All that said, this board is dry enough that even with deep stacks, I think it’s more profitable to flat call 44/77 here and invite the blinds to stick around than it is to raise and shut them out. If we make it $225, for instance, then if the blinds both fold and mp calls, we only have $50 more in the pot than we would if we just flat and both blinds call. And obviously, only one opponent left to put more money in the pot. So I think I’m flatting 44/77 which means my only real value raises here are two pair hands. Since you’re limping 56o, I assume you’re also limping at least some combos of 47s and maybe even K7s or K4s. There are 6 combos total of those hands, so let’s assume you have 4 of them. Raising all 16 combos of 56 seems to skew your range too much to bluffs, but you’re also not sure that you would always call 56o. So I think we should raise with our four two pair hands, 56s, and a few bottom pair/backdoor flush hands (are you limping A4s? 54s? 43s?)
With this specific hand, calling also gives you a chance to get away from the hand cheaper if either blind (more likely bb) bombs in a 4-bet after you 3-bet. And actually, once the blinds call MP’s bet, their ranges are probably weak enough that having the blinds both call is both good for our implied odds and not much of a threat to our bluffing equity, in that they might call once but if we decide to bluff the turn and barrel the river they’re unlikely to have hands strong enough to stand up to the pressure.
All of which is a long way to say I call.
MP seems pretty likely to be weighted to value when he raises a recreational player who leads from the small blind into 6 people. This includes Kx and a few sets, and maybe a 65 with which we are chopping.
I think a 3bet is going to be very difficult to balance here, as it’s hard to see what sort of value hands we could have after overlimping preflop. Maybe K7s, K4s, 74s and 44, but those are only 7 combos total. Also, it’s possible that we isolate with K7s or even 44 – I am assuming we do so with 77.
Since we have so few value combos with which to 3bet, 65o seems pretty far down in our range to semi-bluff with here. 65s with a back door flush draw seems like a much better hand to 3bet semibluff, since it gives us the potential to barrel run outs that turn a flush draw. If we are 3betting 65o here, it seems like we are pretty unbalanced towards bluffs (unless my assumptions about Andrew’s overlimping range are off). MP should recognize that we are unlikely to have a strong hand (but have a decent chance at having one of the various straight draws available here – quite a few one and two gappers have gutshots) and is likely to call with Kx.
The other drawback to 3betting is that it is much more likely to blow SB (who likely has plenty of 7x and Kx) out of the hand. While getting SB out of the hand when we have 6 high is good, it seems likely that a recreational SB is a big source of implied odds if we hit our straight. Also, just because we are not getting SB out of the hand with a bluff on the flop doesn’t mean we can’t do so on the turn. If we call the flop and then raise MP’s bet on the turn, we are probably getting him to fold the same hands he would fold on the flop, but after he put another $50 into the pot.
Calling lets us see the turn in position. While it’s true that if we call, SB could 3bet and we would have to fold, that seems pretty unlikely – it’s hard to make a set and, given Andrew’s description of SB, it seems very unlikely that that SB 3bets less than a set or two-pair. I expect SB to simply overcall the large majority of the time here. The other reason for calling is that we are getting pretty good immediate odds because of the small bets $75 to call with $160 in the pot. If the SB calls as well, $285 will be in the pot, but with over $1400 still in the effective stacks and plenty of room to manuever. On the turn, any 2, 5, 6 or A (14 cards) is a good card for us to put pressure on MP’s single pair hands (i.e., Kx), which seem likely to make up much of his range, based upon the sizing (though he can of course have a set of 4s or 7s). With our 8 straight outs, that lets us continue with half the deck.
Im going to consider 3betting v flatting flop, since folding is ruled out and both are likely to be +EV,
benefits of calling are that we keep weaker hands in from SB,BB and am unlikely to reopen the betting from hands worse than sets from those two,
benefits of 3betting is folding out the dead money forcing MP to have a pretty strong range to continue (as he can be raising for reasonably thin value with the 2 recreational players in the hand.)
however I’m unsure whether we can actually balance a 3betting range, as we don’t really want to 3bet 44/77 here as we would much rather have the players behind put money in virtually dead, and we don’t have many other value hands we want to 3bet here. so i think we should call.
Haven’t read the Results yet.
I think I flat, simply because I’m risking less money. I think I you can still rep a set by flat calling here, and therefore you can still bluff the turn/river if you miss. Although, I would only fire the turn, because if MP calls a 3bet on the flop AND a turn barrel, he probably has a set.
Plus, calling allows SB to stay in the hand, which is good because he’s a fish. Also it makes the hand easier to play on the turn if it comes 3 way… sometimes I like taking the easy way out lol.