Small Stakes No-Limit Hold'em

Post edited 5:56 pm – July 13, 2009 by Hitman

Hey all, since this forum is filled with cash game players I thought I'd put this up here for discussion and feedback.  Would appreciate thoughts from everyone, and would love to hear thoughts from the authors!

I'll give you the play by play first, then my reasoning second… please read my reasoning before ripping on how bad I play.

The situation:  Live $2-$5/$500 cap NL, 10 handed.  Typical weak live game lineup.  One solid TAG on my left, one decent playing LAG 2 seats to my right (I was in the 2 hole, he was in the 9… he is the villain for this hand).  The rest of the lineup was fairly typical bad live players… 3 weak-tights, 2 semi-loose passives, and a couple real droolers.  I'm playing a stack of $1375.  The LAG covers me, he's got roughly $900 in redbirds and a stack of 8 black chips on top of them, so he's about $1700 or so deep.  Everyone else is in the $300-$900 range. 

The action: Preflop, a loose passive and drooler limp, and the LAG raises to $25.  I flat on the button with Ac5c.  The blinds fold and both limpers call.  Pot = $101 (after rake, which is $6 in this game).

Flop:  Qs Tc 5h

Limpers check, and surprisingly the LAG checks.  I bet $65.  Both limpers fold, but the LAG calls.  Pot = $231.

Turn:  Ad

LAG checks, I check it back.

River: 8d

LAG now grabs a handful of the black chips off the top of his stack, and tosses $500 in.  I tank, do a little talking to him, and eventually fold.

My thoughts:  Preflop, the raise to $25 was pretty standard for the LAG even with a couple limpers.  His range to make this raise was wide, he was doing this quite a bit vs. the weak limpers in postion.  I think because of this 3 betting in my spot is a valid option (agree/disagree?).  I chose not to for sevaral reasons:  I was looking to play pots in postiion vs. the LAG with how deep we are, and this hand has good implied value.  The LAG is not one to fold to a 3 bet, he's capable of coming back over me with hands as weak as AT and 88, and he's also calling the 3 bet with most of his range and not necessarily fitting or folding if you know what I mean, which could lead to some very difficult post flop decisions playing 275 BB's deep if he doesn't go away easily.  And, playing this hand for implied value in position has the additional benefit of allowing the weak limpers to call along (which they will)… The loose passive guy will give action with top pair and the drooler would stack off with it, and they were both very readable.  So at any rate, I think 3b or flat are both valid options here, not folding (agree/disagree?).  If I were OOP I have no problem folding A5s but on the button playing deep I think folding leaves money on the table. 

On the flop:  The LAG's check did surprise me a bit, but he had check-folded flops before after being the preflop raiser in multi-way pots.  I bet 2/3rds pot, which was a fairly standard bet sizing for me, expecting to take it down often enough to show a profit.   This may be debatable in a 4 handed pot, but if I check back most turns will be bad for me and I won't really be able to continue if anyone bets, I'll essentially have to forfeit my equity in the pot.  I also had some success with taking orphan pots in position, I didn't build up to 275 BB's by getting lucky or winning a big double throughs (although I did stack a couple shortish players during the night).  The LAG I think knew I was capable of betting this light.  Whether or not he thought I would do this with him involved in a 4 way pot I'm not sure.  The droolers I'm sure didn't notice, they were just playing their cards. 

On the turn:  I expect to hear a lot of “how could you not bet this”.  Well, my reason was I didn't feel committed to getting all in with top and bottom at this point, this deep.  I still wasn't sure what the LAG's check-call on the flop meant exactly… he might have flopped a set and checked thinking I would stab.  He might have KJ (yes this was in his preflop raising range) and be drawing…  Maybe he peeled with AK/AJ, all of these were plausible for him.  He also might have AQ and check-called me (not for pot control, but for deception).  So the flop check-call made me a bit uneasy.  Also, and this is key… I felt he was capable of check-raising me on the turn with a draw, with AK/AJ, or even with air.  And of course with sets, 2 pair, and KJ.  For this reason if I bet this turn and he check-raises, I'll throw up.  That means betting is probably not a good idea.  I will add to that this thought:  If it were ANYONE ELSE at the table, I would much prefer a line of bet/fold the turn rather than managing the pot and giving a free card.  The other players would call me with a wide range of worse hands and draws, but ONLY check-raise if I was beat, making bet/fold optimal imo.  Against the LAG though, he was capable of trying to blow me off my hand with worse holdings, so bet/folding seems very painful vs. him.

So my plan, right or wrong, was to check back and call the expected river bet, or bet for value myself if he checks again.

On the river:  Well the bet comes, but it is not what I expected.  I was thinking (actually expecting this as the most likely action) that he would come out with $150-$200, which I was going to snap call and see who wins.  But he overbets 2x+ the size of the pot tossing 5 black chips out there.  Bluff?  He was smart enough to know that if a bluff was going to work $150 would have been enough to get the job done.  No, this really felt like a value bet.  The tougher question to me was would he think he was “value betting” a hand like AK in this spot?  The way I played my hand, he might.  Ultimately he displayed 3 high confidence tells while I was tanking, so I felt confident in the fold. 

But beyond tells, let's say we have none… what do you make of the betting pattern and should you stick to your plan of calling the “bluff” you induced by checking back the turn, or re-evaluate?  BTW, I should add that while he had been caught bluffing a couple times and showed a couple bluffs that were successful, he had never made a large river overbet before (either bluffing or value betting).  His big pots that he showed down big hands were bet on all 3 streets, which was not hard since no one at the table but the TAG and I understood pot control.  To me in the moment, this really felt like he was trying to make up for lost value on a failed turn check-raise. 

Appreciate any and all thoughts, thanks all!

*First time I read it, I thought you had a flush draw on the flop, picked up TP on the turn (e.g. QT6cc, A turn) In that case, I thought you played it very well.

I still didn't think you'd played it that badly (I definitely see what you are talking about here, being a bit scared of what LAG has). But… if you are going to play a speculative hand (in POS)… while not an ideal board… don't you have to get value, when you hit aces up? That's my only thing.

This is a terrible board though (KJ, AQ, AA, AT, QQ, TT, 55) all squash you; (AK, QT) you are very healthy against… but also bring up the LAG overplaying his hand, leaving you very scared if he CR's.

Sh0e said:

don't you have to get value, when you hit aces up?

---

Well, kind of sort of.  I'm totally with what you're saying, but I think phrasing it in an ultimatum way like this can lead to bad decisions.

His range is still pretty wide on the turn imo, with a bunch of hands I'm beating and several that are beating me.  What my real goal is here, is to get value from the  worse hands, while not giving value (or minimizing that value) to the ones that have me crushed.  

That's the bottom line for me behind checking the turn, it's my effort to achieve that dual goal the best I thought I could.  I felt like if I bet the turn, most of the range I was beating would fold, I was really only going to get value from AK/AJ if he peeled with those, or QT if he "slow played" the flop.  I was going to be giving value to KJ, QQ, TT, AQ, AT.  And, I felt like he was capable of throwing some bluff hands into the mix, enough to where I would not be really comfortable bet/folding aces up.  I also thought he might CR a hand like AK, he was not one to manage the pot when he thought he "got there" with what others might consider a get it to showdown kind of made hand.  Maybe I put too much weight on that end as Matt suggests.

By checking back the turn, I'm still trying to get value for my aces up, while at the same time avoid if possible getting blown off my hand (that worked so well huh LOL ).  I thought I'd be giving less value to the hands beating me as I expected a value bet of $150-$200 out of him on the end.  I would still get value from AK/AJ/QT since they'll bet the river too.  And I expected him to bet some of his bluff hands, which I've kept active in his range with the turn check back.  I get value from all those hands still.  Plus, I thought there were some hands in his "peel the flop to see what happens" range, like JJ, QJ, JT type hands for instance, that he would check-call the river with to avoid being bluffed himself.  Which is why I still intended to value bet if checked to again on the end. 

So it's important to think about what range of hands he would check-call the flop with, and still call a solid turn bet with, that I'm beating.  It's also important to note again that I felt like it would not be profitable to commit on the turn.  I just didn't see this guy putting in 275 BB's with much that I was beating in a bet/raise/shove or bet/raise/call, shove scenario.  Which brings me back to Matt's thought that bet/folding the turn perhaps isn't as distasteful against this player as I felt in the moment.  But if I thought getting all in would be profitable, and thus were committed, I'm absolutely barreling all 3 streets and would welcome getting raised since it would help me achieve that EV.  

Checking this turn is against my religion, barring a very strong tell.

I think river, as played, is an easy fold. You are being overbet for value here a ton.

I don't put him on TT+ or AKs/o here because of the opening raise to pot+.  He's betting 25 to win 17 and he has some nice cards that will flop some nice hands if he gets a caller.  I don't think he thinks you're going to play.  He wants to play with the 2 limpers in position.  You surprise him and I think that is where the check comes from on the flop.

Have you squeezed this guy before?  Is that something He'd expect from you?  If so that might bring the Big Pocket Pairs back in play but I think he's raising a smaller amount if he has those hands.

If he has Top Pair/Top Kicker he's probably chekcing the flop.  He can't like that you entered the pot.  His call of the $65 makes me think he has AQo, ATo.  He may even have the same hand as you with the 5.

I don't like the check on the Turn.  That A changes a ton of things for him.  I think he lays down a number of hands where he has you beat if you bet close to the pot.  he's going to lay down AQ and AT at least 50% of the time to a bet that big.  

I think you have to decide on the turn to take the pot now or get out.  Bet $200 and walk away if he raises or bets the river.  My guess is that if he calls you get a free showdown on the river and Two pair with As is hardly bereft of showdown equity.

How many buttons have you played?  Most?  Is he someone who would pay attention to that?  If he's not that observant your play certainly reps a set and he doesn't have one.  If he know you love playing the button with any two even in raised pots then the check may be best hoping to just check it down.  In that case though what were you hoping for when you bet $65 on the Flop?  A Fold or your done?  In that case you're done and you played correctly.

I think a $200 bet on the turn loses you $200 when he raises or calls/bets way less than it wins you $263 if he folds or $463 if he calls/checks.  You've also got the two 5s in the deck that may help you double up.

The check isn't terrible, but I think it is easy to talk yourself out of a ton of fold equity that you have in this spot.