Welcome.

Take a tour. Enjoy some free sample content.

How it works

Free Video: CLP Video No. 287: Home Game Bart Reviews His Splashy At $1-$3 Deep Part 2

Free Podcast: CLP Podcast No. 54: Time Warp And Turn Value
New to Crush Live Poker?

Double barrel spot

8c7c in HJ. EP limp, LJ ($500) $20, I 3b to $75, only LJ calls.
($157). Flop: 6d7hJd. V x, I bet $60 for V/P, V calls.
($277). Turn: 5s. V x, H?

Comments

  • neutron212neutron212 Posts: 23Subscriber
    With the front door straight draw coming in and the equity you have you could barrel something like 175-200. If the V is sticky with the J/fd anything less would give reason to see river.
  • Chase Posts: 182Subscriber
    edited December 2019
    Preflop with these stacks size the 3b! 3x (60-65). By making it 75 you just lower the SPR even more, reducing your positional advantage (and losing more when you are faced with a 4b! and have to fold).

    I would typically check back your hand.

    In live poker, the source of our profit is our opponents' mistakes. We are trying to figure out how to get a specific opponent to make a mistake. With this hand, the opponent is more likely to make a big mistake facing your flop check than your flop cbet. With the narrowed ranges of a 3b! pot, facing a cbet from your hand on this flop the opponent will rarely make a big calling error or folding error.

    Since you are the 3b! and have a range-advantage (the V's range is condensed), you can profitability bet your whole range for 0.33PSB, so your bet is OK, but that's not necessarily the most profitable play. It would also be reasonable (against most opponents) to have a condensed check-back range here by cbetting a range with hands you are looking to bet for three streets (sets, 76s, AJ, QQ+) and some semi-bluffs with robust equity but little showdown value (like 98s, T9s, KhQh, KdQd, QhTh, QdTd, etc), and checking back with your hands with moderate showdown value and your wiffs.

    Hands like 87s will play well as part of your check-back range. By not betting the flop, your pair will retain much of it's showdown value arriving to the turn as compared to narrowing the opponent's range by cbetting. You can call across many turns. You can't get blown off your equity facing a flop check-raise. In this 3b! pot, your hand isn't as vulnerable to being ourdrawn on the turn as it would be in a single-raised pot, because the opponent's range contains relatively few draws.

    Cbetting your hand doesn't accomplish much value (it will be rare for your opponent to check-call with a hand that you are a big equity favorite over), and doesn't accomplish much protection either (your hand isn't terribly vulnerable to being outdrawn on the turn, and the opponent will rarely make a big folding mistake, for example by folding hands like TT or AhQh.)

    Cbetting for a small sizing is a reasonable line (though unlikely max EV), but as played you dont really have sufficient stack depth to fire the turn and then still have significant fold equity for a river barrel, so im checking back the turn (against some opponents you might fire the turn large, planning to give up when your turn barrel is contested).

    Had you sized the 3b! 60, and your flop bet 0.33PSB, then you may have sufficient stack depth to fire three streets to try get him off something like 88-TT or JTs/QTs/KJs. You could take a line like cbet 45 into 130, then maybe 100 into 220 on the turn, finishing with 295 into 420 on the river.
  • Sugarman Posts: 38Subscriber
    3betting to 3x is very bad in live games where players overcall to 3bets. You want to go larger to maximise fold equity and to play larger pots against players we have an edge against. In any case, the difference between 65 and 75 is small and essentially a non-factor, I think. If you listen to Bart’s content you’ll notice any time someone 3bets to 3x pre he will usually call it too small. Also, there are plenty of hands we can gain protection from. AQ/AK/ATs/KQs all have at least 6 clean outs and make up a large portion of our opponents preflop calling range. Additionally, we get to realise our equity better by being able to check back a range of turns, given we don’t expect villain to xr this flop all that often. Can you check back the flop? Sure, but I disagree with you that we can just call across most turns. Any card 9+ or a diamond is a bad card for us and facing anything greater than a half pot size bet we will struggle to call against.
  • Superfly Posts: 590Subscriber
    I’d be more concerned about V having a J or PP than trying to deny him the opportunity to hit an overcard. So I like a check back on flop. I can see why you’d like to keep the initiative as the 3bettor. But by cbetting flop (and then continuing on turn) you’re essentially turning your hand into a bluff and just hoping that V doesn’t call you down with a better made hand.

    If checked to on turn, I think you could delay cbet with the added equity or check to try and realize your showdown equity cheaply.

    I’ll be interested to see if others prefer a more aggressive line here.
  • deadinaditchdeadinaditch Posts: 245Subscriber
    Yes he could have a Jack, but why do you think he does, because he called your Cbet? If you're going to call a raise OOP then you have to be prepared to float any flop that's not completely hopeless, and if you're going to 3! with hands like 78s you're going to have to Cbet a lot of missed flops and be prepared to let loose on the Turn as well. The 5s doesn't really help him all that much but it sure helped you. There's just a ton of hands he could have that will call one but fold to a 2nd barrel. Here's a list of bad things that can happen if you check it back.
    1) You lose to a pocket pair like 88,99,TT,
    2 You lose to a high card or Fush that get's there on the River,
    3) You get bluffed out on the River when he bet's cause he knows you can't have anything better than pocket Tens.
    Even when you do get called you're still in great shape against a flush draw. If you're not CBetting this Turn then when are you ever?

  • Steveo76 Posts: 159Subscriber
    Having built up this pot pre-flop I'm doing whatever is necessary to take it down post. I'm not going to take the chance of my hand not being good at showdown, so a flop check back is out of the question. I've started a story that I've got a premium hand and I'm sticking to it. If I had AA-QQ here I'd be betting around $100 on the flop to set up a near pot sized shove on the turn. So I think $60 is too small, but as played, I would definitely be betting again on the turn, $160-$200 which looks strong, leaving only about the same behind going to the river. If that gets called then I'm checking back unimproved or if an overcard to the jack doesn't come.

    Good rationale @deadinaditch.
  • dpbuckdpbuck Posts: 2,055Subscriber
    With the lower SPR and position we can go slightly smaller on our PF 3bet. I agree that exploitatively we can take a larger 3bet sizing than recommended in most spots, but only 100 bigs deep, this is not one of those spots.

    Flop continuation bet/sizing is great. When we take that sizing, we can use our range advantage and bet just about anything. The only time we need to worry about "protecting our checking range" is when we're taking a larger sizing and not betting 100%.

    Obviously the turn is the big decision point. What do we think villain did with his range to the 40% pot sizing on the flop? Did he pitch his overcards with no backdoors? Stick around with 88-TT? Slowplay his sets? Theoretically, I suspect villain should be checkraising 66/77 and the NFD, along with AhQh/KhQh and perhaps KQo with a diamond. Realistically, I'd expect he doesn't checkraise any of those, and also doesn't find the continues with non-diamond ace-highs that he should. 88-TT is definitely called, as well as 89 and 8x+pair. (OP doesn't give any reads of villain, so the best we can do is go with player pool tendencies.)

    So if he did that with his range, what does the 5x on the turn really do? He still has his flush draws, Jx, 88-TT, sets, and 8x+pairs, what exactly are we trying to do with a bet? FDs are literally the only hand we can get value from, so we can throw out another value/equity protection bet as a viable option. Any bet would certainly be a bluff.

    I wonder if we can have two sizings here: smaller with good value (QQ+, 89) and larger with our bluffs and nutted hands (66/77 and 89). But where does 78 fall in our bluffs? When we have a FD ourselves, we obviously block his FDs, which makes FDs really bad bluffs. 7c8c blocks his sets and straights while unblocking his FDs. All that is to say I think this is one of the better combos we have to double-barrel, but we need to make it large. With these awkward stack sizes, the only sizing that makes any sense to me is to jam. Checking with the plan to bluff-catch isn't a terrible idea, but I like blasting better. Whatever we do, don't dink and dunk it, as we'll be priced in on the river anyway.

    Now, this can all change depending on OP reads. @Sugarman, care to share what you perceive villain's flop check/call range to look like?
  • Arenzano Posts: 1,464Subscriber
    I would say we don't have RA on this board. It is closer to RN. Yes, we may be perceived to have all the over pairs, but we share JJ and the LJ will have 66, 77, and 76.

    This, to me, is a poor candidate to 3b given stacks at 100bb. We are creating a 3 SPR on the flop, which means almost any cbet brings us close to leverage on the turn, which has happened here. There is basically a pot sized bet left behind.

    87cc on this board is interesting in that Hero unblocks the Villain's FD, blocks middle set, and straight draws. Almost any flop bet the Hero makes will do little to deny the villain's equity, save for some non front/back door over cards. With that said, the path is either to check and play turns or bet/fold small to get to the turn. All this depends on your strategy.

    With the money left behind going into the turn, as played, the choices seem to be check to get to showdown (bluff catch) or turn your hand into a bluff with a big turn bet (over bet ), looking to fold some medium strength hands (88, 99, TT, better 7x) or hope the deck bails the Hero out since the 5s provides additional equity and is one of the best cards for Hero.
  • GarlandGarland Posts: 515Subscriber
    Pre-flop: Not in love with 3! at those villain's stack depths and no read on villain and prefer a flat. Certainly not in love with the sizing, and would go to $60-$65.

    Flop: I like a small bet for value/protection. As played $60-$65 should do it, you could get called by small pairs like 22-55 and big cards some of the time.

    Turn: I like a check-back. You have a marginal made hand with equity. Now the only hands that will fold that beat you are 88/99/TT. I think you want to see and play across various rivers.
  • Superfly Posts: 590Subscriber
    edited December 2019
    I thought this hand was very interesting and was unsure about the best way to play it so I asked Ki Lee what he thought. His analysis is below:

    Chris, I don't think that there is one clear answer here. I can see merits to both. CHecking the flop is reasonable because we have SDV, but betting can also be good for protection and thin value vs over cards like AK/AQ/KQ. I prefer betting, but I can get onboard with checking. As for the turn, much of the same. We can make cases for both - betting serves as a semi-bluff vs hands like TT/99/88 and also sets us up for a triple barrel where we can perhaps fold out JX.
    Triple barreling is fine, and also checking back the turn and getting to showdown is also fine. Once we do check the turn, we likely will lose to hands like 88-TT and JX by the river. Some players may get stubborn with a J, but its still hard to hold for 3 streets and we can get most people to fold 88-TT by the river. I think that these hands are a decent part of the villain's range. Some guys also call the flop with 2 over cards, so betting the turn achieves some protection/equity denial.

    I think we can take either action at partial frequencies. Check and bet the flop some of the times, and check and bet the turn at partial frequencies. I prefer betting all three streets. I may deviate based on the villain and/or live-reads.
  • Sugarman Posts: 38Subscriber
    dpbuck said:

    Now, this can all change depending on OP reads. @Sugarman, care to share what you perceive villain's flop check/call range to look like?
    Unfortunately V is a total unknown. Only played with him for around half an hour, didn’t really limp much, and only opened a couple hands.
  • Sugarman Posts: 38Subscriber
    Superfly said:
    I thought this hand was very interesting and was unsure about the best way to play it so I asked Ki Lee what he thought. His analysis is below:

    Chris, I don't think that there is one clear answer here. I can see merits to both. CHecking the flop is reasonable because we have SDV, but betting can also be good for protection and thin value vs over cards like AK/AQ/KQ. I prefer betting, but I can get onboard with checking. As for the turn, much of the same. We can make cases for both - betting serves as a semi-bluff vs hands like TT/99/88 and also sets us up for a triple barrel where we can perhaps fold out JX.
    Triple barreling is fine, and also checking back the turn and getting to showdown is also fine. Once we do check the turn, we likely will lose to hands like 88-TT and JX by the river. Some players may get stubborn with a J, but its still hard to hold for 3 streets and we can get most people to fold 88-TT by the river. I think that these hands are a decent part of the villain's range. Some guys also call the flop with 2 over cards, so betting the turn achieves some protection/equity denial.

    I think we can take either action at partial frequencies. Check and bet the flop some of the times, and check and bet the turn at partial frequencies. I prefer betting all three streets. I may deviate based on the villain and/or live-reads.
    Thanks for running this by Ki, @Superfly! Glad to see we shared similar thought processes. AP, Hero checked back turn, river was a 3d completing the FD, and V jammed. H folded, ofc.
Sign In or Register to comment.