Author Topic: Snapper's gonna snap  (Read 9882 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TheSnapper

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1061
Re: Snapper's gonna snap
« Reply #15 on: December 15, 2011, 14:53:21 PM »

- Saying it"s J or better, or nothing vs not hitting his range that hard = same thing. But yes, that"s basically what I"m getting at.


True but I'm pedant. :-[

Say Mark raises a tight range of..

AA-99,AKo-ATo,KQo,AKs-ATs,KQs-KJs,QJs

He has Ace hi more than 40% of time on that flop. The problem though is with the Jack hi flop, the J is probably the ideal over/under card for his range.

Take out KJs and QJs and his misses increase from 40 to 45%, include all broadway cards and he only misses 27%

All that said, my thoughts at the time agreed with your assessment that Mark's range missed that flop a decent amount. So check raising was not a viable option.


Quote from: dwh103

- Not discouraging at check-raise here at all, quite the opposite (What do you think I am, a nit?! ;)). What I"m saying is that IF you (or the other blind) have totally missed, the only way Hero wins any more chips after being checked to is if either of you check-raise bluff.


It's a very dry board and your ip with a really strong hand versus what you perceive as an aggro player. Is checking back an option?

Lets villain catch something of value, weakens your range. We never really know for sure how villains will react ( feels weird calling myself villan  ;D) so it may be a moot point but check raise bluffs are rare enough occurrences. You dont lose any value either since its most likely you will only get 2 streets of value from this spot. As a nice bonus checking back these spots can help keep your cbets at an unexploitable frequency.


Quote from: dwh103

If the c-bet is bigger, the CR is bigger => bigger pot for the Hero. Hell, a bigger c-bet may even encourage a check-raise, as the reward is bigger.


Betting bigger to induce! Seems counterintuitive to me, has it been successful for you? My experience is that smaller bets are more likely to be perceived as weak and hence more likely to induce a raise.


"Being wrong is erroneously associated with failure, when, in fact, to be proven wrong should be celebrated, for it elevates someone to a new level of understanding."

dwh103

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1110
  • @dwh103
Re: Snapper's gonna snap
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2011, 23:14:45 PM »
Yeah, definitely not check-raising this flop. I"m going to guess that as you didn"t check-raise the turn (which I think you have to do vs a second barrel from Mark if you have KK beat) and led river that you had something like AJ/KJ and were blocking river?

For me, I"m normally not checking back this kind of flop vs two players. This will obviously be opponent and situation dependent, but it"s such an easy board to c-bet I think not c-betting will raise some flags - a few cards could pop off to kill your action too. I"m more likely to check back turn to rep weakness and overs in the attempt to bluff catch or value bet river. If I have a similar history to Mark in this tournament of not firing a second bullet, I probably do check back turn vs a thinking player.

Obviously, long term you want to be checking behind with this kind of hand on the odd occasion etc etc - guess I"m saying it"s likely to be a fair way away from my default play at this stage of the tournament. More likely to do so in this particular situation if the stacks are shallower and I don"t need 3 streets to get my stack in.

Betting bigger to induce - TBH, getting a CR bluff is such a low % occurrence I"m not specifically doing this to induce a CR. I"m preferring to bet bigger for value, the tiny % of times I win a little extra from the CR bluff is just a bonus.

I"ve had a fair bit of success vs thinking players in at fairly decent levels by trying to pretend I"ve watched Tom Dwan a bit too much. By looking like I"m not trying to get value I"ve ended up getting paid far more than I should"ve been. You do need very good hand reading skills to make it work, but as well as the chips I win, I get a great table image and opponents clam up if they know I"m capable of firing 3 big barrels.

As soon as you step away from "the norm" you sow a seed of doubt and that can be invaluable :)
TEAM GOTHAM (Batman)

http://twitter.com/dwh103

Won some stuff too long ago for it to stay on a signature.

mporter123

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Snapper's gonna snap
« Reply #17 on: December 19, 2011, 16:53:07 PM »


The problem for Mark here is that ( I suspect ) slightly less than half pot is his default cbet size so when he increases that size it can be very very transparent.



My default C bet size on this type of board is indeed slightly less than half pot. I have been experimenting with C betting slightly less in MTT"s and think it has worked quite well. Obviously need to adapt against different players but overall - think the strategy is fine. Also I had C bet this size a couple of times earlier in the game so to suddenly bet 80% pot would have been fairly obvious. I would play my airballs, draws and big pairs this way on this board and think its fine.

In hindsight, I like checking back the turn and calling rivers.

Assuming you had me crushed on the flop and hero fold was good?

TheSnapper

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1061
Re: Snapper's gonna snap
« Reply #18 on: December 19, 2011, 17:35:43 PM »

Assuming you had me crushed on the flop and hero fold was good?


Irrespective of my holding, folding a super strong under-repped hand getting 4/1 and with no more bets to come, is unlikely to be profitable and super exploitable.

Put it this way, if I know that you will fold overpairs in this spot it therefore also means you only call with a full house or quad 5"s, I should then bet the river 100% and expect to profit.
"Being wrong is erroneously associated with failure, when, in fact, to be proven wrong should be celebrated, for it elevates someone to a new level of understanding."

mporter123

  • Staker Licensed Player
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1050
Re: Snapper's gonna snap
« Reply #19 on: December 20, 2011, 11:42:29 AM »
Yea, agree. I call in this spot pretty much all the time. Based on a dodgy read and stubborness forced a fold this time.

That was a fun table, you were a nightmare on my left all night, felt like you 3bet every time I opened. I am not used to playing against people who are actually looking to exploit.