Enlightenment on a Greyhound Bus
I spend a lot of time when I’m not playing thinking about playing. I concentrate on certain situations that I find myself in often and wonder what other plays may be made rather than the ones I usually make.
For instance, I had to take a 2 hour bus ride yesterday, and despite being the only one forced to sit directly beside someone else – I hate that – I think it was a positive experience as I got a lot of thinking done. I pondered the situation of being in the BB and having called a raise from an aggressive player who may or may not be stealing. I imagined having a hand like KJ or 99 or something that is vulnerable and can get you in trouble. When the flop hits you hard, it’s usually pretty clear what the right move is, but obviously, the flop misses you a lot. So if you have 99 and the flop brings J85, there are basically two moves you can do here. You can lead out a probe bet, about 1/2 the pot and if he raises you, you can assume you are beat by an overpair or a jack and throw the hand away. You can also just assume you have the best hand and check raise him, knowing that he will bet everytime you check to him and will throw his hand away if you do have him. Both of these moves have their individual strengths, but I’ve always used the first approach here. I always figured that you can’t assume you have him beat, since he can easily have you as well – and by probe betting him you can find out for sure. As well it’s a cheaper alternative than check raising for information. So I generally probe bet there. But, on the bus home last night, I started thinking a little abstractly. I know that against a special type of aggressive player, that my probe bet into him after he raised preflop will be interpreted as exactly what it is, an information bet, basically asking him if he has an overpair/jack. He knows that if I really did have a strong hand, a check raise would be coming his way. So he can easily reraise my probe bet with basically any 2 cards here, and I will generally lay the hand down. Even I have made this reraise before when I am pretty sure my opponent is probing with a weak holding after I took the lead preflop, with much success, so I know that really aggressive players will make this play as well, probably every time.
So now what? I’m stuck between a rock and a hard place. But really, if I wanted easy decisions, I wouldn’t be calling raises out of position with 99. But I know 99 is way ahead of his range here, so folding is out of the question. So I came up with this conclusion. Against that type of aggressive player, where they will reraise any probe bet I make with any 2 cards, I will check raise them. This way, I gain control of the hand by gaining the betting lead, as well I give him the opportunity to bet with nothing and take the pot down when he can’t call my raise. Additionally, if he indeed does call my check raise or raises me further, I can be very confident I am beat. It takes a very special aggressive player to triple raise the flop with nothing, so if he can make that play good luck to him, but most of the time this will work.
Ultimately, while I learn the most about the true strength of my opponent’s hand, it costs me more than a simple probe bet would. To illustrate the difference I’ll make up an example real quick.
I have KJ in the BB and am faced with a button raise late in a tournament from a very aggressive opponent. Blinds are 1000/2000 and he makes it 6000 to go. Let’s just say we both have over 20bb at this point. I call and the flop comes QJ5 rainbow, and I’m first to act. The pot is 13,000. Ok, now let’s examine the possibilities.
a) Bet 6000, opponent raises to 18,000. Total invested in the hand 12,000.
b) Check to your opponent who bets 10,000, you raise to 25,000. Total invested in the hand 31,000.
Ok, so on the surface option A seems best. And I realize I’m being a little repetitive here in my analysis, but I feel it is necessary for even my own understanding of this concept. Now, lets go over that scenario again while being able to see my opponents possible hands.
1. He has A5. By doing option A, we will probably end up folding the best hand. Total lost 12,000. By choosing option B we will most likely take this pot down and winning 23,000.
2. He has QT. By doing option A, we will end up folding the worse hand and losing only 12,000. By choosing option B we will most likely end up having to either fold to another reraise or fold when he calls our check raise. Either way we know we aren’t putting any more money in this pot and we will lose 31,000.
I’m using “A5” and “QT” as general examples as hands that we have beat, and hands that beat us. Substitute any hand like 77 or KK in there, you’ll get the same result. Now, since we know this opponent is aggressive, and can raise with pretty much any 2 cards on the button here, we know that scenario one – having “A5” – is more than likely to occur. Let’s put a number on it; assume that we have him beat 3 out of 4 times. This is actually probably a conservative estimate, but it will still illustrate my point.
If we choose option A every time out of 4 we will end up losing 48,000. If we choose option B every time out of 4 we will end up winning 38,000 (3 wins of 23,000 and 1 loss of 31,000). Now this is also assuming that a probe bet is a guaranteed loss, which probably isn’t true since some times your opponent may fold to it, but it is quite unlikely due to the nature of this specific opponent.
Also there are some additional advantages of the check raise compared to the probe bet. Since your aggressive opponent is more likely to read a check raise as strength than a probe bet, he is more likely to fold, and may even fold the winning hand. If he did have a hand like top pair with a weak kicker, it’s a possibility. You also gain the advantage of seeing one more card if your check raise is merely called. That card may make you 2 pair or trips (10% chance) and create the winning hand. So even though you will be done with the hand usually if your check raise is called, you will still usually have outs.
Overall, I think that the check raise in this situation is the strongest play. And as shown, given my assumptions, it is the mathematically correct play. As is the norm in poker, usually the best play is the scariest and riskiest, and I think this move speaks that truth well, and explains why that is true.
I’ll have to take the bus more often.
For instance, I had to take a 2 hour bus ride yesterday, and despite being the only one forced to sit directly beside someone else – I hate that – I think it was a positive experience as I got a lot of thinking done. I pondered the situation of being in the BB and having called a raise from an aggressive player who may or may not be stealing. I imagined having a hand like KJ or 99 or something that is vulnerable and can get you in trouble. When the flop hits you hard, it’s usually pretty clear what the right move is, but obviously, the flop misses you a lot. So if you have 99 and the flop brings J85, there are basically two moves you can do here. You can lead out a probe bet, about 1/2 the pot and if he raises you, you can assume you are beat by an overpair or a jack and throw the hand away. You can also just assume you have the best hand and check raise him, knowing that he will bet everytime you check to him and will throw his hand away if you do have him. Both of these moves have their individual strengths, but I’ve always used the first approach here. I always figured that you can’t assume you have him beat, since he can easily have you as well – and by probe betting him you can find out for sure. As well it’s a cheaper alternative than check raising for information. So I generally probe bet there. But, on the bus home last night, I started thinking a little abstractly. I know that against a special type of aggressive player, that my probe bet into him after he raised preflop will be interpreted as exactly what it is, an information bet, basically asking him if he has an overpair/jack. He knows that if I really did have a strong hand, a check raise would be coming his way. So he can easily reraise my probe bet with basically any 2 cards here, and I will generally lay the hand down. Even I have made this reraise before when I am pretty sure my opponent is probing with a weak holding after I took the lead preflop, with much success, so I know that really aggressive players will make this play as well, probably every time.
So now what? I’m stuck between a rock and a hard place. But really, if I wanted easy decisions, I wouldn’t be calling raises out of position with 99. But I know 99 is way ahead of his range here, so folding is out of the question. So I came up with this conclusion. Against that type of aggressive player, where they will reraise any probe bet I make with any 2 cards, I will check raise them. This way, I gain control of the hand by gaining the betting lead, as well I give him the opportunity to bet with nothing and take the pot down when he can’t call my raise. Additionally, if he indeed does call my check raise or raises me further, I can be very confident I am beat. It takes a very special aggressive player to triple raise the flop with nothing, so if he can make that play good luck to him, but most of the time this will work.
Ultimately, while I learn the most about the true strength of my opponent’s hand, it costs me more than a simple probe bet would. To illustrate the difference I’ll make up an example real quick.
I have KJ in the BB and am faced with a button raise late in a tournament from a very aggressive opponent. Blinds are 1000/2000 and he makes it 6000 to go. Let’s just say we both have over 20bb at this point. I call and the flop comes QJ5 rainbow, and I’m first to act. The pot is 13,000. Ok, now let’s examine the possibilities.
a) Bet 6000, opponent raises to 18,000. Total invested in the hand 12,000.
b) Check to your opponent who bets 10,000, you raise to 25,000. Total invested in the hand 31,000.
Ok, so on the surface option A seems best. And I realize I’m being a little repetitive here in my analysis, but I feel it is necessary for even my own understanding of this concept. Now, lets go over that scenario again while being able to see my opponents possible hands.
1. He has A5. By doing option A, we will probably end up folding the best hand. Total lost 12,000. By choosing option B we will most likely take this pot down and winning 23,000.
2. He has QT. By doing option A, we will end up folding the worse hand and losing only 12,000. By choosing option B we will most likely end up having to either fold to another reraise or fold when he calls our check raise. Either way we know we aren’t putting any more money in this pot and we will lose 31,000.
I’m using “A5” and “QT” as general examples as hands that we have beat, and hands that beat us. Substitute any hand like 77 or KK in there, you’ll get the same result. Now, since we know this opponent is aggressive, and can raise with pretty much any 2 cards on the button here, we know that scenario one – having “A5” – is more than likely to occur. Let’s put a number on it; assume that we have him beat 3 out of 4 times. This is actually probably a conservative estimate, but it will still illustrate my point.
If we choose option A every time out of 4 we will end up losing 48,000. If we choose option B every time out of 4 we will end up winning 38,000 (3 wins of 23,000 and 1 loss of 31,000). Now this is also assuming that a probe bet is a guaranteed loss, which probably isn’t true since some times your opponent may fold to it, but it is quite unlikely due to the nature of this specific opponent.
Also there are some additional advantages of the check raise compared to the probe bet. Since your aggressive opponent is more likely to read a check raise as strength than a probe bet, he is more likely to fold, and may even fold the winning hand. If he did have a hand like top pair with a weak kicker, it’s a possibility. You also gain the advantage of seeing one more card if your check raise is merely called. That card may make you 2 pair or trips (10% chance) and create the winning hand. So even though you will be done with the hand usually if your check raise is called, you will still usually have outs.
Overall, I think that the check raise in this situation is the strongest play. And as shown, given my assumptions, it is the mathematically correct play. As is the norm in poker, usually the best play is the scariest and riskiest, and I think this move speaks that truth well, and explains why that is true.
I’ll have to take the bus more often.
posted by RikkiDee at 3:14 PM
3 Comments:
What do you think about pot size bets??? I attack probe bets like crazy. It's to weak and the chance of him folding is too good to not re raise.
I ran into a similar situation last night. A player was raising preflop often and protecting the pots too often. He raised UTG while I was holding AQo in the BB. I was the only called. The flop came QT9. The straight possibility was a little worrying but not much. I bet half the pot. I like the half pot bet both when I hit and don't hit. If I'm worried about a draw and want them to fold I'll bet 2x the pot just to make it clear that the draw odds are bad. Anyway, he reraised my half pot bet and I called. The turn was a 2. I bet half the pot again and he called. The river was a J. I checked. He bet about 1/3 of the pot. I called. He showed KQo to make the straight.
But that's poker and it could have very easily gone the other way.
I think the problem with pot size bets is that they waste too much money when they already have you beat. Additionally, against somewhat typical opponents, a 1/2 pot size bet is called more often than pot size bets. Now while this is good when we are bluffing, when we have the best hand we lose value in times when they would call a smaller bet.
One last thing, I personally will 1/2 bet with a very strong hand as well, not just as an information bet. So anyone who is making a move on my probe bet better be sure I'm not doing it this time with trips.
Alan, that is a pretty good example there since you would assume that and UTG raiser would have at least AQ if not a high PP, all which devistate you. So against a typical opponent your 1/2 pot bet is probabbly the best way to go. Now since he just called, I would put him on one of 2 hands. Trapping with trips or a draw. For some reason I just don't see an overpair or even AQ/KQ just calling that flop, but people play hands all types of ways. Either way, personally if it was the type of tournament that was quick and the blinds were rising fast I would push the turn, and if he trapped you, well done, but if you have him, which should be about half the time, you would take it down / make him pay for that draw.
You can be more sure that you have him if he is the type of aggressive player I was talking about in my post, as they would reraise pretty much any 2 cards here, and a call is a pretty strong indicator of weakness against a very aggressive player.
All depends on your opponent obviously.
Post a Comment
<< Home