Snapper's gonna snap

[mporter123]

Online MTT - $10+1 APAT Brighton Sat

Fairly early in the tournament, only a few eliminations, 3 seats guranteed, 40 ish runners.

Blinds are 50/100, no ante.

Hero stack - 4,653.

Opponent stack - 20,231 and chip leader

Hero has been playing tight, c betting regularly and seen to give up and check fold turn at least 3 times.

Opponent (DaSnapper) has been very aggressive pre and post flop. 3 and 4 betting light pre and taking aggressive lines post. Not noted as being caught bluffing post flop at showdown.

Hero is in the cutoff and raises to 250 with  
Villain calls from the small blind.
Big blind also calls.

Flop  

Villain checks, BB checks, Hero bets 345

Villain calls, BB folds

Turn  

Villain checks, Hero bets 615

SB calls

River    

Villain bets 899. Hero

Also particularly interested in thoughts on flop and turn bet sizing.

[TheSnapper]

Opponent (DaSnapper) has been very aggressive pre and post flop. 3 and 4 betting light pre and taking aggressive lines post. Not noted as being caught bluffing post flop at showdown.

If that is your read........

How can you possibly fold a hand as strong and under repped as KK getting ~4/1 on a super dry board.

[mporter123]

check call, check call, lead is strong on any board and I give it even more credance on a dry board like that.

Bet sizing. Hadnt seen you bet that small all tournament - looked like a random 5x hand looking for value.

Pretty much the only thing I beat that you might value bet are wierd two pair type hands. Also thought you could be trying to get showdown cheap with AJ, KJ, QJ type hands but reasoned you 3 bet these pre.

Usually just sigh call these.

[SirPercival]

Did you know who "villain" was at the time?

If so, did this change your thinking?

[TheSnapper]

Opponent (DaSnapper) has been very aggressive pre and post flop. 3 and 4 betting light pre and taking aggressive lines post. Not noted as being caught bluffing post flop at showdown.

This is a classic case of statistical inference, we have played very few hands thus far and I have not yet 3b, I have 4b twice, the first 4b was versus a super tight players 3b when I had 3x open raised utg with AA , the second 4b was a 4b bluff in a cut-off versus BB spot where I am likely to be 3b light so my min+  4b finds a fold often.

Pretty much the only thing I beat that you might value bet are wierd two pair type hands. Also thought you could be trying to get showdown cheap with AJ, KJ, QJ type hands but reasoned you 3 bet these pre.

See above, not a good read imho.

[mporter123]

Did you know who "villain" was at the time?

If so, did this change your thinking?

I did not know personally but recognised name from the forum so assumed a certain level of competency given postings on PHA board.

I think that some of the hands after this influenced my OP re the 3 bets. Perhaps was a little less active at this point then initially thought. I call in this spot 9/10 times as there are enough Jx hands to make it easily profitable. Found enough reasons to fold in this case - perhaps based on a misread.

[dwh103]

Betting 345 into 750 and then 615 into 1440 is far too small imo. I"d be firing 550 minimum on the flop, and then setting up for a 1300-1500 turn bet and then perhaps a river shove.

Obv it"s a pretty standard spot, raise pre and then c-bet when checked to. This is a decent board to be c-betting - I would be 100% of the time. However by betting this board your range is reasonably polarised. Am going by your description of yourself, but the majority of your range is either top pair or better, or nothing.

You should be betting a little bigger than normal if your range is polarised. If you have nothing, you"re making it harder for hands beating you to call (not necessarily here, but on the turn also). If you have a hand, then you want to get more value - when I see the flop I"m looking at this hand as a double-up hand.

As played, getting 3:1 on the river I snap call. You cannot pass this hand on this board without a serious read (and your description of the Villain is not nitty!), especially given you still beat everything aside from a handful of hands.

I would agree with DaSnapper"s that your analysis of his 3-bet range is incorrect. Also, your c-bet strategy (if you always give up after one bullet), that could be a leak - a good player should crush you. If firing one bullet is going to be your standard, then you need to balance your range by checking turn in situations like this hand, before bluff-catching or value betting river.

Having said that, it is $10 APAT level, so you wouldn"t want to overthink these things too much or you"ll just level yourself bigtime

[deanp27]

Well the answer doesn"t include folding. Also not sure I"ve seen any APAT player 4betting light etc by the 50/100 level.

If you aren"t sure just call

[dwh103]

Well the answer doesn"t include folding. Also not sure I"ve seen any APAT player 4betting light etc by the 50/100 level.

If you aren"t sure just call

This made me LOL

Wish everyone followed this all the time!

[mporter123]

Also, your c-bet strategy (if you always give up after one bullet), that could be a leak - a good player should crush you. If firing one bullet is going to be your standard, then you need to balance your range by checking turn in situations like this hand, before bluff-catching or value betting river.

Mis-interpreted my OP here. Firing only one bullet is far from my standard line. It just so happened that I got in a few spots here where I thought that firing a second bullet here was not the correct play against certain players. I knew it had given me a weak table image at the time.

I am not sure I completely agree with the "reasonably polarised range" bit either - also not sure I completely understand it! My range is far from top pair or better or nothing - as you said I will be C betting this type of board 100% of the time.
I C bet all my middle pairs, suited connector type hands that can improve, Ax type hands etc etc

I like C betting smaller when I open button / cut off / hi jack with all of my range on these type of boards. Not sure how to phrase the arguement for it being good though tbh.

[AceOnTheRiver]

Call him, he"s a fish!!

That"s how he got the nickname "Snapper"  

Was he Playing the bonus?

[duke3016]

It's Brendan, I am shoving. Why?  If he folds I get the bragging rights at airport lounges and APAT events for at least 12 months. If he calls I will get the usual "Ah but it was Ger"

Win Win

[dwh103]

Also, your c-bet strategy (if you always give up after one bullet), that could be a leak - a good player should crush you. If firing one bullet is going to be your standard, then you need to balance your range by checking turn in situations like this hand, before bluff-catching or value betting river.

Mis-interpreted my OP here. Firing only one bullet is far from my standard line. It just so happened that I got in a few spots here where I thought that firing a second bullet here was not the correct play against certain players. I knew it had given me a weak table image at the time.

I am not sure I completely agree with the "reasonably polarised range" bit either - also not sure I completely understand it! My range is far from top pair or better or nothing - as you said I will be C betting this type of board 100% of the time.
I C bet all my middle pairs, suited connector type hands that can improve, Ax type hands etc etc

I like C betting smaller when I open button / cut off / hi jack with all of my range on these type of boards. Not sure how to phrase the arguement for it being good though tbh.

Fair enough - you"re not going to be far wrong just firing one bullet anyway in a $10 tournament.

In respect of your range - do you think your opponent feels this? You described yourself as tight, so including all Ax, suited connectors etc isn"t really that tight - key here not being what you would actually do, but what your opponent thinks you"ll do - do you have any HUD stats from the game?

As a result of your apparent tightness, Villain should be peeling wide and 3-betting very narrow. If you"re playing a tight range (~20%, 55+, A7+, KT+, QT+, JT), there"s not much in the way of hands with medium-strength showdown value and no draws. You pretty much have a J or better - or nothing.

This will mean Villain will probably call you pretty light on one street at least. KK is over 70% against a reasonable calling range (set, 56, 78, 77-TT and J9+). After Villain calls the flop, what range do you give him?

If Villain has nothing, little difference, but a check-raise bluff costs him more if you bet bigger. If he has something, then you"ll get more value from your hand with a bigger bet. You also give his hands that are behind less implied odds. I don"t think that his calling range changes drastically if you bet half pot or near full pot - so might as well go for the max.

Over the long run you"d need to balance this by doing the same with your AK"s that miss etc - the bigger bets makes it far harder for the draws, mid pairs and smaller Jacks to carry on in the knowledge they"ll face escalating bets. Plus it"s quite fun bludgeoning people off hands

[TheSnapper]

In respect of your range - do you think your opponent feels this? You described yourself as tight,

Yes Mark"s image was tight playing 13/9 but with slightly wider ranges from LP. Versus tighter ranges we can and should play lots of implied odds type hands. His tight range preflop makes hand reading postflop a much simpler task and we are much more likely to get paid when we flop big.

You pretty much have a J or better - or nothing.

This will mean Villain will probably call you pretty light on one street at least. KK is over 70% against a reasonable calling range (set, 56, 78, 77-TT and J9+).

That really can be said of any range on that flop tbh but I suspect you mean that the flop doesn"t connect with his range that well?

If Villain has nothing, little difference, but a check-raise bluff costs him more if you bet bigger. If he has something, then you"ll get more value from your hand with a bigger bet. You also give his hands that are behind less implied odds. I don"t think that his calling range changes drastically if you bet half pot or near full pot - so might as well go for the max.

This is where I start to disagree with you"re reasoning. Sizing your flop bet to discourage a checkraise? actually Mark"s read at the time was that I was playing uber aggressive and encouraging that type of player to check raise has to be a decent option in this spot. Betting bigger may extract more value but not because it discourages a check raise, more likely its because the check raise is less likely than say the villain having a hand that can call a decent sized flop bet.

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.

Over the long run you"d need to balance this by doing the same with your AK"s that miss etc - the bigger bets makes it far harder for the draws, mid pairs and smaller Jacks to carry on in the knowledge they"ll face escalating bets. Plus it"s quite fun bludgeoning people off hands

Its a decent point but with the caveat, you only need to be balanced against players who will notice and exploit your sizing ( may be construed as contradictory to my last point )

And finally, again your reasoning for bigger bets is flawed imho. You lose lots of value when you bludgeon people off hands that will call a smaller bet so long as you deny them the correct odds to call.

[dwh103]

Now quoting has got too difficult for me:

- 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.

- 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. 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.

- Yes, bigger bets may lose you a bit of value in the instances where someone might call two small barrels with 77-TT as opposed to two big barrels. IMO, this is negligible as the calling range does not change a whole lot if the bet sizing changes from 50% to 80% pot. And far outweighed by the increased value when called down.

- The last bit was added for balance. Obviously you"d need to do similar with air or you"d be too transparent as you say. Have already said though that it"s a $10 tournament and overthinking = levelling.

- At a simpler level, it"s a $10 tournament. If someone"s going to call, they"re generally going to call, regardless of if it"s 50% or 80% of pot. Where my equity is good, I"m betting bigger