Sorry but there’s no new podcast this week. The show will return next Monday, April 6, with Matt Savage as the guest. In the meantime, here’s a What’s Your Play? to occupy your mind:
The game is $5/$10 with $2500 effective stacks. Hero is widely perceived as tough but a bit too stubborn/bluffy.
HJ is a straight-forward, experienced recreational type. He’s TAG-ish with his pre-flop hand selection, continuation bets too much, and rarely barrels the turn with either a made hand or a bluff. Unless he has a huge hand, he usually c-bets the flop, check-calls or check-folds the turn depending on whether he has anything, and then check-decides on the river . If the turn checks through, he’s capable of both bluffing and value betting rivers.
The blinds are also recreational players, though more loose and passive than HJ. Their standards for calling pre-flop and on the flop are pretty low, but they tighten up a bit as the bets get bigger.
HJ opens for $40. Hero is on the Button with 7d 4d. What’s your play and why? Posts your suggestions in the comments section below. I’ll do my best to respond throughout the week, and I’ll post my own thoughts along with results on Friday.
Fold. This is a cash game, the blinds aren’t going up, and we’re going to be the button every single orbit. There’s no pressure to play every time we get the button, and even though position is important, and the stacks are deep enough to make 74s less ghastly than if we were 100BBs or shallower, there just aren’t enough reasons to play it. Furthermore, our image is bluffy, and that’s going to make it hard to barrel through this hand if we flop a draw/some equity and miss on the river and have to make a large bet because we either flatted a 4x pre (or 3-bet to even more) and raised or floated the flop and fired the turn. With a stubborn/bluffy image, I’d rather have a hand that wants the call it’s going to get (because our opponents are keen to look us up) instead of one that wants a fold. Sure, the flip side is with deep stacks if we make a well-concealed monster we’ll get paid off huge, but how often will that happen compared to the regrettable number of times we are forced to play into our own image and bluff?
This wouldn’t be much of a thread if Hero did fold, so I imagine there’s going to be a flat here and a float to take advantage of villain’s c-betting tendencies and predictable play from out of position. But I just don’t get a justification for getting more money into this pot with 74s in a cash game. Make this a tournament where we need to accumulate chips more quickly, and yeah — we have position, a deep stack, and a predictable opponent. Sure, go ahead and flat or 3-bet. But in this situation, with an image that hurts our chances to bluff successfully, I like a fold.
I recommend a fold. While we aren’t playing fit-or-fold poker, how many flops are we actually happy with here? The flop is (more than likely) only going to turn a marginal hand into an ugly one with overcards (likely) or worse. In addition, there’s just aren’t enough odds out there to be playing a gapper like this – calling $40 into $55 just isn’t great. Finally, with two players left to act, theres just too many unknowns regardless of how we continue (ie call or raise).
Fold – there will be better spots in the future.
I fold too – because I am not good enough at poker! – and wait for a better situation. The description leads me to believe that the blinds will come along if I call, which makes indicates much better odds for our call (should what I expect to happen happens). We would have position against 2 weak players in the blinds, and position against a predictable player in the hijack who we can probably exploit on later streets. If I was a little more confident in my game – or a lot more confident – I would call. I would not raise because I would want the loose, passive blinds in the hand.
Fold. HJ’s straight forward TAGish play pre suggests he will be ahead of 74s. We would have to think our positional and skill advantage exceeds the disadvantage of this weak opening hand. As this game is called “What’s Your Play,” and not “What’s My Play,” I’d have to say my skill advantage isn’t going to overcome the weakness of this hand.
That said, if this game were “What’s Andrew’s Play,” I’d consider a raise to isolate. There is too strong of a chance the blinds will come along if I just call the $40 and if I think we will have more opportunity to apply a skill and positional advantage head’s up. The deepness of the effective stacks suggests I will be able to apply some good pressure in position. The HJ open from the HJ TAG player suggests I should be able to semi-bluff draws on a diamond or mid-range flop and bluff dryer board (such as high-low-low rainbow). In both cases, noting HJ’s passive turn play tendencies, I’d plan to float to the HJ’s flop c-bet and bet facing a turn check or even raise if facing a weakish turn bet.
It’s worth noting that I am NOT expecting to play a very big pot with my draws, because with 74s, my flushes will be exposed to higher and many of my straights will also be exposed to high (although I’d have to think about that some more considering HJ’s opening range).
So, as NOTAM, I fold. As Andrew I raise.
I like 3betting to 100. The blinds are described as weak players who tighten up as the size of the pot grows. As I see it, vs a 3bet, they will fold most of their range and if they do call we have a hand that plays easily post flop against a bad player with a fairly narrow, strong range that they may be prone to overplaying, giving us great implied odds as we are deep. On top of that we also have position; what’s not to like!? Should both blinds fold, as they likely will a lot of the time, there is a good chance the TAG HJ may fold too, as he will not continue with too wide a range in a 3bet pot out of position, in which case we pick up the blinds and his bet, which means we win 55 bucks with the worst hand a lot of the time, and that’s a good thing. Also, risking 100 to win 55 outright doesn’t have to be successful so outrageously often to be profitable.
Now if we end up in a heads up pot, I think we can take it down by a 1/2 pot sized cbet on the flop a lot, because the blinds are conscious of the absolute bet size and the HJ is a TAG. If we can’t we will at least be checked to on the turn often and can take a free river if we flopped some sort of draw.
If we end up in a multiway pot I think we basically just play straightforward. In this case it may often get checked through (I would check behind a lot), giving us a free turn and possibly even river.
Of course the information given on the HJ is mostly relevant to his tendencies when he has the initiative, so I reckon that Andrew called.
I think this is a good time to unleash the three-bet, as long as we haven’t three-bet excessively in recent orbits. We could try flatting the 40 and then work on exploiting the straight-forward HJ post flop, but good point by Notam that the blinds will likely come along if you flat, but as per the profile the blinds do pay attention to bet sizes as they get bigger, and are highly likely to fold when you re-raise. I like a size to 120 since a standard, well-sized three bet like 120 sends a powerful message about your hand to these rec players. Lots of times you will just take down the money pre-flop. If there is a flop, at least the three-bet makes it likely you’d be trying to exploit one player, instead of three, which would be much tougher and make the hand mostly dependent on who flops best, instead of who plays best.
After the flop, assuming its just the HJ, you should have a decent chance to exploit him and win hands you don’t deserve given his straight-forward nature, and there is a low likelihood he would four-bet you light. Assuming this, your cards really don’t matter that much especially if you haven’t been that active recently. But at least 74s gives you some hope to be bailed out in some situations, although you are mostly going to be shooting for a fold by barelling using your good judgment. And if one of the blinds calls your three-bet cold, change plans and hope for a miracle.
I would raise to isolate the TAG-ish player. You’re obviously behind his opening range, but you have a good read on him, you have position, you’re very deep, and his pot-control tendencies suggest that he won’t want to play a 250BB pot without a big hand. Your hand is unlikely to flop the best hand, but it has a good chance of flopping a draw that you can use to leverage your significant fold equity.
Raising also keeps your range uncapped while at the same time capping HJ’s range, assuming that he just calls. This will make it easier to play future streets. I’d feel differently about the three-bet if HJ were likely to four-bet light (or even appropriately). But the player that you described likely four-bets less often than he should against your button raises this deep.
With low suited cards and call-happy blinds, I’d also be worried about getting called by hands like Kd5d or Qd8d, which have the potential to lose us a big pot when we are overflushed. Heads up we’re usually drawing to the best hand; four ways we’re often not. For the same reason, I’d prefer calling here with my suited aces.
I like a call here. Given how confident we are in our read on opponent we have reason to believe we can outplay villain post flop (on turns and rivers in particular), I would rather keep stacks as deep as possible.
I dislike 3betting for a number of reasons:
(1) We don’t have blockers, hands such as suited Aces make for better candidates to 3bet light.
(2) We are defenseless against a 4-bet, we cannot 5bet with a hand so weak, nor can we call and try to outplay post flop because we have reduced the SPR. 3betting to say $120 (as others have advocated) means we are risking $120 to win $55 which doesn’t sound all that great.
(3) 3betting forces villain to only continue with the strongest portion of his range. This, in turn, will make it HARDER for us to get villain to fold later on. By calling, we force villain to play all his marginal hands. Given how weak our hand is, we ought to keep villain’s range wide. Let’s force villain to play deep and out of position against an aggressive opponent
As for the blinds, we don’t even mind if the blinds call. The description above says they are loose, passive recreational players and we have position. Perhaps I am assuming too much, but nothing in the description made me believe the blinds were squeeze happy (which would make me want to fold more).
We have a read on the opponent that we will be using to exploit him later on in the hand on turns and rivers. Let’s not waste the fact that we are deep and in position by 3betting. Let’s call.
I will analyze each option independently
Folding.
Pros: our hand has little chance of flopping 2pair+ or huge draws at the same of villain’s range connecting too. As villain is described I do not see how we can extract enough value when we do connect. As other people are mentioning, there will be better spots in this game.
Cons: We may become too predictable if our calling or 3b range are perfectly defined. adding this hand to our calling/3b ranges might be beneficial for the meta game and we have position!
Calling.
Could not find a lot of good arguments for just calling see below.
Besides having the button, I do not see other advantages by calling since there is a significant chance the blinds will come along as described. What is missing in the original post is how they play post flop. Do they never fold top pair? are their stacks 2500 too? At any rate, if we call and they come along we are forced to play fit or fold most likely and our hand seldom flops very well.
raising.
Pros: we are in position. we will most likely isolate the HJ. If we are called our hand is very disguised. By adding this hand to our 3b in position range we will leave our opponents guessing. as described HJ plays straightforward so he won’t try to bluff us post flop which is an added bonus. Obviously though we fold to a 4b.
Cons: As described, HJ hand selects pre and we are deep so we have close to 0 FE pf. Haven’t I already mentioned how trashy the hand value is? so in order to win the pot we have to rely on the pressure we apply to the villain to fold on later streets. we need to read his range well to be able to profitably barrel here.
With the above said I would fold 80% of the time and 3b/f to 155-ish 20% of the time.
if we raise and get called i would cbet any A – Q high board any draws (including gutshots and bdfd) and any pair as a semi-bluff.
A three bet is pretty monkeyish here. The HJ isn’t opening exploitably light, and given our image he isn’t going to give us a lot of credit when we three bet on the button. More importantly, we have so many better hands to three bet light with that we will be three betting way too often (which won’t be difficult to figure out for anyone who’s paying the slightest amount of attention) if we three bet here. HJ’s biggest weakness is that he will announce the strength of his hand on the turn, and so we’ll be able to play very well against him and force many errors. Our ability to do this is hamstrung by shortening stacks by three betting. We also don’t mind the blinds coming along because they will realize so little of their equity.
I think this is a call, because HJ is probably going to call way too often or fold way too often after the flop, and if he his going to get stubborn against us with one pair, we’ll felt him when we make two pair or better, and if he folds marginal hands too often then we’ll put a lot of pressure on him when he tells us he doesn’t have the nuts. It might be the case that he’s opening wide enough here and c-betting so often that floating the flop, and betting the turn when checked to is profitable with any two so long as he doesn’t start getting sticky with A-high and K-high hands.
The description of villain immediately had me thinking “Call, float flop, take it on the turn” will happen often enough to make getting involved more profitable than folding. I don’t see a lot of merit to 3-betting here; the post-flop flaws we’ve identified will tend to be reduced when we tighten a TAGs preflop range and become the aggressor. So I’m calling with a mind toward winning without showdown on the turn a fair amount of the time. Short of that, hopefully we’ll flop gin.
Matt nailed my initial thought. The opener has a very exploitable leak. You can float him all day with any hands that flop decent pairs and draws.
Nevertheless, I fold 74s pre. This hand doesn’t flop enough equity to make floating very viable. It’s probably only just outside my range though. Suited one-gappers like 86s and 75s are probably just about breakeven as calls. With better SCs, 3-betting seems like a decent option too.
I call. No point in raising to isolate as we don’t expect a light squeeze often from the blinds as described. It’s the type of hand you want to call IP with almost 60x the amount of the call left behind. You’ll have a wide range here and be able to use your position to your advantage.
Just read the other comments, and the question I have for those advocating a 3-bet is this: If you are 3-betting this hand, what percentage of hands will you then be 3-betting overall? I would have to guess that you must be in the 20% range at this point, in this given scenario.
I just don’t see making the SPR shallower pre-flop helping you against this villain. I think you need more money behind to be able to win more often without showdown.
I will agree that it caps your range by calling, but I think you should have a wider calling range than your 3b range in this spot. So, even though you have a cap on the top of your range, the middle is still wide enough that all the flops with only 1 card J and above are going to be problematic for your opponent, as they should hit you more often than they hit him.
As for allowing the blinds in cheap, that will hurt HJ more than it will hurt you, because he will be forced to play his hand more straightforwardly in a multiway pot, giving you more reliable information when he acts.
I don’t necessarily disagree with those saying to fold. However, as Matt perfectly states, this opponent has such an exploitative leak that we should be looking for spots to take advantage of that. Suited cards like this are good hands to do it with, or at least the hands that I would prefer to try it with.
i fold. other option is to call. 3 betting would be really spewey imo, since guy is a TAG and is opening up hijack => a very strong range, and he knows we’re bluffy.
I think several others have made good cases as to why, given Villain description, a call is probably best. But one thing I’m wondering is what kind of information we have on the blinds. They’re apparently loose, especially so through the flop, and given the description I think we can probably assume they don’t have much interest in squeezing. But do they also have $2500 behind? And how tight will they get when the pot gets large? Are they the standard live 2/5 level player of Ed Miller’s description, the ones who play too loose preflop and on the flop and fold all their junk on the turn? If so, that could arguably make a call with a plan to float lots of flops even more profitable. But if they still rate as stubborn overall on later streets, that can put a real wrench in our plans because they will have relative position on us, often forcing us to bluff multi way pots on the turn and/or river. So while I think call is likely best solely based on the description of the preflop raiser, I think even one of these players in the blinds being somewhat stubborn on later streets probably turns this into a fold.
Call. Stacks deep enough, SPR > 10 on the flop if the blinds come along, sounds like they will (your read).
Expect the blinds to check and TAG to bet flop. Fold if the flop has one or more high cards and he bets a confident, and you have no flush draw or other equity.
If the flop is low and you have any piece of it (made, draws, backdoors), which you probably will, then raise the TAG’s Cbet. Blinds should fold or you can check it down. TAG should fold much more than 50%. Your wider range should be ahead on a raggedy flop so you are getting called by overpairs and maybe some AK.
Evaluate the turn texture and villain action.
If they check, bet 2/3 pot and expect to take it. If you hit the turn, bet even larger to make it look bluffy. They probably can’t lay down an overpair to your image.
If they bet, call with a stronger than overpair hand or draws to beat it. Otherwise the turn card is probably a high card, not of your suit, that improves with their range and you can fold.
If you get to the river and beat a likely overpair, pot it an get paid
This is about 3 orders of magnitude above my buy-in level but here goes.
I would want reads on what a 4x pre-flop raise means from this player but assuming it is standard from him then calling is definitely better than folding. Villain plays predictably post-flop and we have great implied odds if he hits a second best hand to our 74s. We clearly like playing this hand very deep in position 4-way if the blinds come along as our read suggests they might.
The more interesting question is whether raising is better than calling. TAG isn’t really enough for us to know much about how he plays when 3-bet by someone with position on him. It isn’t explicitly stated but from the number of recreational players in the hand I assume this is live not online. Based on player or venue/level reads we might get some ideas but generally people aren’t exactly playing GTO ranges to 3-bets live. He may be folding exploitably too much either pre-flop or doing the classic thing of flatting and playing fit-or-fold on the flop. Again even after a three bet to maybe 100 we are still pretty deep with our implied odds hand if we both hit it.
Thanks for the comments, Richard. Something to think about: you say, “we have great implied odds if he hits a second best hand to our 74s”. What would be a concrete example of this? Like, what would the board need to look like and what would Villain need to hold? How often do you anticipate these situations arising, and how much do you think they are worth when they do arise?
Long-time lurker, first time poster here. I prefer a flat call here. We are in position with a playable hand, and getting pretty favorable odds if you expect the blinds to overcall a lot. If the blinds call, they will have a weak range a lot, and our read suggests they are prone to folding when the bets gets huge, and our stacks are such that we have room for the bets to get huge.
I also call almost any flop (depending on whether one or both of the blinds have called pre and expressed interest somehow in the pot), knowing the raiser cbets too much and folds often when he checks to us on the turn. In fact, that’s the reason I like calling better than 3-betting–we have an excellent read on how the raiser will play in a single-raised pot, but the same read may not be as applicable in a 3bet pot. If we know he gives off too much information in certain situations, we should prefer to get into those situations so we can play perfectly against him, rather than getting into new situations where we don’t profit as much by the information asymmetry he gives us.
Call. No need to 3-bet since the blinds arent likely to squeeze or play well post and villain isn’t likely to believe a 3-bet any way.
Post flop, the plan is to float any sort of decent equity, bet turn big if checked to, and then evaluate river.
In game, I’m almost positive I’d fold.
I have to say I’m intrigued by a call, though. You are in position and you may get heads up with a person whose range you have fairly well identified and should be able to have a reasonable idea whether the flop is good for his range.
Or one or both of the blinds come along. You’re still in position only now the pot has grown much larger, your odds will be better, and it sounds like those opponents like to splash it around a bit but would probably go away to substantial aggression. This is assuming one or both of the blinds call. If they 3bet and HJ flats, I’m probably getting out of the way. But if they just call they should have pretty weak, speculative ranges that are looking for very particular types of flops. So I think a call strategy can lend itself to either having a decent shot of taking down a large pot or getting out of the way and just losing $40.
I don’t really like raise unless the blinds were tougher. Then it would seem more valuable to isolate the HJ. Plus a raise will only get called by an even stronger part of all villains ranges and it would see much less likely they will go away easily.
Is there anyway to quantify the difference in value between a 2-gaper (4-7) and connector (4-5)? I understand a 2-gaper can only make a straight two ways and a connector can make it four ways … do you just cut the various probabilities in half?
Personally I don’t feel like I have a very crisp sense of the difference in value between 45s and 47s.