Monday, July 20, 2009

Waiting till the turn

In this hand, the results would have been the same whether I got it all in on the flop or on the turn. But by waiting until the turn, I get the money in as a 73 percent favorite rather than a 54 percent favorite.

Full Tilt Poker $5/$10 No Limit Hold'em - 8 players - View hand 191939

The Official Hand History Converter

Hero (BB): $1015.00
UTG+1: $1202.00

Pre Flop: ($15.00) Hero is BB with KK of hearts AA of spades

1 fold, UTG+1 raises to $35, 5 folds, Hero calls $25

I flatted here because the UTG+1 player was tight, I had a good idea of his range and a 3-bet would fold out all worse hands and induce a 4-bet from all better hands.

Flop: ($75.00) AA of clubs 55 of diamonds TT of diamonds (2 players)

Hero checks, UTG+1 bets $50, Hero raises to $150, UTG+1 raises to $370, Hero requests TIME, Hero calls $220

Waiting for the non-diamond turn before I shove...

Turn: ($815.00) 22 of hearts (2 players)

Hero bets $610 all in, UTG+1 calls $610

River: ($2035.00) 55 of clubs (2 players - 1 is all in)

Final Pot: $2035.00

Hero shows KK of hearts AA of spades (two pair, Aces and Fives)

UTG+1 shows JJ of diamonds AA of diamonds (two pair, Aces and Fives)

Hero wins $2032.00

(Rake: $3.00)



WillWonka said...

Would you have folded to a turn bet if diamond came? What if he checked the turn and bet the river?

Because of his tightness, it may be an easy fold on turn? These are always the things I struggle with. The old "don't fear the monster" syndrome.

Gnome said...

I would have check-folded the turn if a diamond fell.
I thought villain's most likely hands were AK, AT, TT, AQd and AJd. So either I was flipping/chopping, or I was behind. If a diamond had fallen on the turn, I would have been behind almost everything. When a non-diamond falls, I crush parts of villain's range that I would have been flipping with.
So this play is made easier because my opponent has a limited range from early position.
When he puts in the third bet on the flop, I know he has a strong hand of some sort, and I can gain equity against the flush draw part of that range by waiting until the turn.

spritpot said...

Fade 'N Go classic, rike it.

The Poker Meister said...

See now, couldn't he just as easily have TT? Much less 55 in the UTG+1. For whatever reason, I am running into set after set in these types of situations. What is the tell tale sign that he doesn't have a set? The 3 bet flop?

Gnome said...

Sure, he could have a set, but he probably doesn't.
The likelihood of a set is less than the rest of his range (please excuse possible counting errors):
AA: 1 combo
AK: 6
AQ: 8
AJs: 2
ATs: 2
TT: 3
55: 3
So he has a set 7 combos and other hands 18 combos, which means it's more than twice as likely that he holds something other than a set.

The Poker Meister said...

Maybe the way I've been running, I'm check / calling this one down because sets have become all too frequent against me. I guess it's getting to my head.