Posts Tagged ‘semi-bluff’

Today’s question comes from a comment on last week’s “What’s Your Play?” The relevant details are that Hero is in the SB with AQs facing a raise from a loose-passive player in early position and a call from a possible scared money player in late position. It’s early in the PCA main event, and everyone is deep-stacked.

Q: I was wondering if you had considered 3b pre? You’re going to have the worst position in the hand going forward. You’ll also have the worst relative position since villain 1 isn’t going to lead the betting to often being passive. I think you get the button to fold a bunch and you get heads up, granted in a bloated pot, but vs a passive player where I’d think you get to show down easier with 1p hands.

A: The short answer is yes, I did consider it. Really, though, if you 3-bet, what are you hoping will happen? You’ll have to fold to a 4-bet, so that’s a bad outcome. Even if you’re called, you won’t be eager to play a big pot if you flop top pair. A passive player’s early position raising range is pretty strong, and it gets stronger once he calls a 3-bet. I think it’s safe to assume neither of these players continues with AJ or KQ, which means that your AQ won’t dominate anything in their calling ranges. If called, you’ll be hoping either to bluff or to flop some value and check it down, maybe squeeze out a value bet. It’s not a disaster, but it’s not a great outcome either.  Read the complete post...

The wait is over! I’m flattered by everyone who’s been asking about this. Part 1 of my PCA Trip Report is now appearing in 2+2 Magazine. Part 2 will be in next month’s magazine. Here’s a snippet from one of the more interesting hands I played:

Saskatchewan limped UTG again, Belgium limped behind, and I raised to 1,000 with A4o in the CO. This raise really blurs the line between “value” and “making a move”, since I do expect to win often with a continuation bet but I also think A4 is ahead of both of their ranges. Essentially I’ve got position and the best hand, so even though it might be tricky to play post-flop, I don’t see how raising can be bad. Saskatchewan joked about how “you internet guys don’t allow limping” and called, and Belgium called as well. They both checked a K83 rainbow, I bet 1,600, Saskatchewan folded, and Belgium quickly raised to 5,100. I was sure he was making a move, so I considered my options.

This trip report focuses almost exclusively on the poker. If you want to read about the rest of the trip, check out Hello, Goodbye, Team Online.

As always, please let me know what you think!

Today’s mailbag question comes from a comment on the What’s Your Plan? Flopped Pair and Draw: Results post. It was a good question that I felt warranted a thorough response.

Q: Though honestly I agree with what you wrote I just wonder since “Villain is a young online MTT wizard: highly ranked on Pocket Fives, tons of success” we know (and he might not know we know) that he knows he can bet anything and probably get a fold tons of the time because he can have AK and it is much harder for other people to (especially when they don’t check raise the flop). As soon as we call I think Villain needs to become super cautious. Against anyone else I insta fold k10. I actually thought this example was how to outplay a wizard but I was wrong. : -) I guess I leveled myself!

A: If I understand you correctly, you’re asking whether Villain couldn’t bluff this flop with a really wide range since he can represent nutted hands (not only AK but sets as well) more easily than we can. This would be more of a consideration in a heads up pot.  Read the complete post...

Judging from the number of comments, folks found this WYP less compelling than someone. That’s to your credit, because as many commenters advocated, I believe folding the flop is correct. Dangerhorse explains why:

I would probably fold although the pot odds are enticing and your hand (a pair and a draw) superficially seems very strong. This is a super wet board and a good player should not be leading into three opponents without something very substantial. I put him on KQ, AQ and stronger. If you raise all-in, I don’t think he folds much. I also don’t think you have the full 13 outs that a pair-and-an-OESD normally does.

Assuming you call, if your draw comes in, with an ace or a nine, it’s going to be a super-scary board, and it’s going to be tough to get paid off, especially being out of position. On top of that, your opponent will often also have a king, so you may well chop even if your draw comes in – or lose to AK.

Not all pair + draws are created equally. On a board like this, where so many draws are likely, it matters a lot that you have the worst pair and are drawing exclusively to non-nut hands. Out of position in a multi-way pot with action from a good player in early position, you can’t afford to treat this as a strong hand.  Read the complete post...

Edit: Fixed the suit of card (c) so it doesn’t match what’s in Hero’s hand. 

It’s Level 4 of the PCA. Hero is wearing his PokerStars Team Online patch, which in Villain’s eyes probably makes him a cash game grinder with minimal tournament experience. Villain is a young online MTT wizard: highly ranked on Pocket Fives, tons of success, modest live experience but certainly knows what he’s doing in any tournament situation. He’s new to the table in the last hour and neither he nor Hero has done anything remarkable in that time. With the exception of Villain and one other good but short-stacked player on Hero’s left, the table is reasonably soft, certainly above average for the field.

Blinds 100/200/25. Villain (13K) opens to 500 UTG+2. Two of the looser players (16K and 40K)  at the table call, and Hero (35K) calls Kc Ts in the BB.

Flop Qd Jd Th. Hero checks, Villain bets 1450 into pot of 2300, the other two fold, and the action is back on Hero. What’s your plan?

Just to focus the discussion a bit, let’s assume that if you raise, Villain will shove or fold. If you call, talk about how you’d proceed on each of the following turns:

a) 2s

b) Kh

c) Tc  Read the complete post...

I took plenty of notes for a full write-up, but for now I’ll just say that we started with 30K and I finished with 38.5K. I think the average is between 50 and 60, and blinds will be 500/1000/100 on Monday, so I’m in OK shape. I had two other PokerStars Team Online members at my table, first Bjorn Schneider on my left than Jorge Limon on my right. Other than Bjorn and a pretty good Dutch player my starting table was probably softer than average. By the end of the day we had Jorge and two other good high-stakes cash players, so it was pretty tough then.

I played a funny hand against one of them. Blinds were 400/800/100, and I opened to 2000 with K9s in the HJ. He called in the BB and check-called 2400 on a T55r flop. We both checked an 8 turn, then he bet 5600 on a T river. I wasn’t 100% sure he wouldn’t value bet an A, but I doubted it. I did think he was capable of floating out of position, and this was an ideal spot for it. So I called, and he showed A3 and seemed surprised to win the pot. “I was trying to bluff you off a chop” he told me. Lovely.  Read the complete post...

I was inundated with requests for reviews over the holidays, so I asked a friend if he’d be interested in taking one of them. Thus, the review for Nathan Williams’ Crushing the Micro-Stakes can be found on Gareth Chantler’s blog. If you read the comments here on Thinking Poker, you know that Gareth’s got a great poker mind and expresses himself well, so I think you’ll enjoy his review, and I assure you that you can trust his opinion.

While you’re there, check out some of Gareth’s other posts as well. Like mine, his blog is a nice mix of strategy content and anecdotes from his travels. Gareth, originally from Canada, is currently backpacking through South America while playing a mix of live and online poker. He’s got some fascinating and funny stories that are well worth the read.

To understand this week’s hand, you have to understand the psychology of a certain type of live player. I’m not the most experienced live player myself, but I do think I’m quite good at understanding what and how my opponents think, and I’ve encountered more than a few of these guys in my time.

They don’t appreciate the variance in poker, and their first goal is to not lose, even if it means a lower overall win rate (not that they think about it in exactly those terms). They hate losing big pots and assume that if they do they must have done something wrong. Usually that something was, in their minds, either overvaluing or failing to protect a good hand. They’ll attribute both of these supposed mistakes to “getting greedy”.

The objective of these players is really to make big hands more than induce to mistakes, balance their play, or anything like that. Some commenters  question whether Villain would limp-call 87s. This may be questionable strategically, but I think you will see it quite a bit from live nits, especially when deep. They aren’t going to raise with it because they want to see the flop cheaply, but they don’t consider it a trouble hand the way they might ATo or KJo or something.  Read the complete post...