Caught a bluff at NL25 but...
Yatahay Network - $0.25 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4
MP: 150.32 BB
Hero (CO): 100 BB
BTN: 114.6 BB
SB: 100 BB
BB: 247.56 BB
UTG: 58.32 BB
SB posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB
Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has A♥ K♥
fold, fold, Hero raises to 2.4 BB, fold, fold, BB raises to 8.8 BB, Hero calls 6.4 BB
Flop: (18 BB, 2 players) A♣ 4♦ 3♦
BB checks, Hero checks
Turn: (18 BB, 2 players) Q♥
BB bets 10.28 BB, Hero calls 10.28 BB
River: (38.56 BB, 2 players) 5♠
BB bets 228.48 BB and is all-in, Hero calls 80.92 BB and is all-in
Hero shows A♥ K♥ (One Pair, Aces)
(Pre 71%, Flop 93%, Turn 91%)
BB shows J♣ K♣ (High Card, Ace)
(Pre 29%, Flop 7%, Turn 9%)
Hero wins 190.4 BB
I mean I kinda have to call based on how the cards came out - did the 3bet player make a massive mistake, or was he correct to jam here?
8 Replies
From your perspective, I would have 4-bet pre. As played, I like the check back OTF, if villain had checked turn I would want to see a bet. OTR, I'd be hard pressed not to call. AA and QQ are four combos and I somehow would expect a smaller bet for value, closer to potsize bet.
From BB's perspective, I hate it. I'd for sure c-bet the flop, and c/f later streets if called.
Next time you post a hand, don't show results. I notice I got biased by seeing the bluff.
Would just betflop as BB. But as played, dont hate it.
We check way more Ax than I realised, does anyone know why? I normally value bet. Is it just a sweet trapping spot because we can bluffcatch extensively?
My very simple thinking is that BB checking Axx after 3-betting pre is either AA, pocket pairs 99-KK (maybe also lower) or missed broadway combos. And there is only one combo of AA, while a ton of the others. From the pocket pairs you might get two streets of value, but that is probably stretching it, from the missed broadway combos you'd only get value if they have a diamond draw, the others will fold directly. By checking we do allow diamonds to catch up, but when I think about it, diamonds probably bet this flop at some frequency, making the case for checking even stronger. By checking we might induce bluffs, and also make villain more likely to c/c their pocket pairs when we start betting turn, if checked to.
With all that being said, I don't hate betting flop. I have seen some players check with weaker suited aces in similar positions. But again, will they really c/c three streets?
Do you have any information on villains preflop stats?
Given the small BB 3bet sizing villain could very well be a bot, that’s one of the bigger tells for identifying WPN bots. They usually play something like 28/20/8
BB should be cbetting otf, but as played you massively underrepped your hand so BB is justified in trying to push you off your hand.
Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk
We check way more Ax than I realised, does anyone know why? I normally value bet. Is it just a sweet trapping spot because we can bluffcatch extensively?
On a dry A hi board (this board is sort of dry given that it's a 3-bet pot the straights are less of a factor) we need to balance our xb range or we don't have enough hands to protect vs probes. On wet boards where overcards are possible, we don't have to worry as much about checking back a weaker range, as long as a decent chunk of our check backs can improve on the turn.
Well played hand imo, although I would've preferred a 4-bet.
Thanks! makes sense
