1/2 (6 Max) 99 Utg+1

[Merby 3]

Villian is standard TAG: 13/10/2.6 through 500 hands. I have played against him a number of times and he sees me around 28/16/1.5.Today, however, I have had a *sick* run of nice hands that haven't made it to showdown, so I appear to be playing more like a maniac: 35/25/2.5 -ish.My plan was to not c-bet any flop unless I actually hit (I had bet most of the flops when I was the PFR. My opponents *don't* know that it is because I was hitting like 65% of the flops or something ridiculous like that).The board, however, dictates a pretty standard play: protect on the flop, and pot control after that.Would anyone argue for taking a different approach?PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)Button ($186)SB ($212.65)BB ($273.20)UTG ($198)Hero ($277.10)CO ($111.10)Preflop: Hero is MP with 9, 9. 1 fold, Hero raises to $6, CO calls $6, Button calls $6, 2 folds.Flop: ($21) 6, 8, 2(3 players)Hero bets $12, CO folds, Button calls $12.Turn: ($45) 2(2 players)Hero checks, Button bets $22, Hero calls $22.River: ($89) 5(2 players)Hero checks, Button checks.Final Pot: $89

[fopkins 0]

That's the line I take.

[Snamuh 0]

While check/calling seems weak, it's the line I take here.

[Merby 3]

While check/calling seems weak, it's the line I take here.

Meh, when he has a post flop AF of 2.5, I definitely think it's +EV in the long run to take the check/call approach.

[TB17 0]

Depending on how fast the button calls I will fire twice. A quick call usually signals draw, in which case u can safely bet the turn and make him fold for the right price (assuming its a decent player)Im surprised we havent played together yet since we both play 1/2...or have we.

[Mercury69 3]

Check calling? Meh...Sorry, but I just don't like it. I have no idea about the table dynamic, but I'm probably raising the turn and betting the river. Villain never check raised, never raised and can you really put him on trip deuces when he called a 6$ preflop raise? Highly unlikely, sir.

[TB17 0]

Check calling? Meh...Sorry, but I just don't like it. I have no idea about the table dynamic, but I'm probably raising the turn and betting the river. Villain never check raised, never raised and can you really put him on trip deuces when he called a 6$ preflop raise? Highly unlikely, sir.

Raising the turn is really really really really really bad. You aren't going to get called by a hand that you beat.Betting the river is really really bad too. For the same reason as betting the turn.PS. It's impossible to check raise when you are the button.It's not about what you have, it's what you can beat. On this board, you aren't going to get paid off by a hand you beat (unless its a super draw), in which case, check/call is best, followed by a lead out on the turn. Check raising on the turn is horrific as the only time you get action is when you are beat.

[Merby 3]

Im surprised we havent played together yet since we both play 1/2...or have we.

I have been away from online poker for the better part of a year (other than donking around in a few tournaments). In that time, I played a *lot* of live 1/2 and 3/6 NLHE. But after the New Challenge (Old Challenge) thread got going, I was inspired to play online again (also it's been difficult finding the time to play live during the week lately, but it's always easy to fit some online poker into my schedule)I imagine it's only a matter of time before we run into each other.

[sierradave 0]

Raising the turn is really really really really really bad. You aren't going to get called by a hand that you beat.Betting the river is really really bad too. For the same reason as betting the turn.PS. It's impossible to check raise when you are the button.It's not about what you have, it's what you can beat. On this board, you aren't going to get paid off by a hand you beat (unless its a super draw), in which case, check/call is best, followed by a lead out on the turn. Check raising on the turn is horrific as the only time you get action is when you are beat.

[first to clarify, hero is in early position, villain is button...]I take this line about 30% of the time, lead out the other 70%. Problem is that our 9s are still very vulnerable to overcards. If opponent has a flush draw, it likely has between 12 and 15 outs. The deuce is very unlikely to hit our opponent, and given our image, I can see him holding tight with A8.I never check-raise this, but think that's a real hole in my game. We want to be able to c-bet these boards, and the major challenge there is a smart opponent who starts floating the flop to steal on the turn. The check-raise here probably doesn't get called, but it lets opponents know that checking the turn doesn't mean we've shut down. I think check-raising with the overpair 30% of the time would be an important balancing activity. The deuce was non-threatening, unless the opponent flopped a set or smooth-called with a bigger pair, we're ahead, but we aren't way ahead, because every river card except the 9 or 2 is potentially dangerous.Actually, the more I talk about it, the more enamored I'm becoming with a check-raise here. I'm tempted to say that, with your image, the choice should be between bet-out and check-raise, rather than check-call. If I'm in the button's shoes, I *really* don't want to fold A8 to a check-raise against a player with this image. And if the hand gets shown down, I keep it in mind with TPTK, floats, and flush/str8 draws from there on out.Really interesting topic, thanks for posting it.

[TB17 0]

[first to clarify, hero is in early position, villain is button...]I take this line about 30% of the time, lead out the other 70%. Problem is that our 9s are still very vulnerable to overcards. If opponent has a flush draw, it likely has between 12 and 15 outs. The deuce is very unlikely to hit our opponent, and given our image, I can see him holding tight with A8.I never check-raise this, but think that's a real hole in my game. We want to be able to c-bet these boards, and the major challenge there is a smart opponent who starts floating the flop to steal on the turn. The check-raise here probably doesn't get called, but it lets opponents know that checking the turn doesn't mean we've shut down. I think check-raising with the overpair 30% of the time would be an important balancing activity. The deuce was non-threatening, unless the opponent flopped a set or smooth-called with a bigger pair, we're ahead, but we aren't way ahead, because every river card except the 9 or 2 is potentially dangerous.Actually, the more I talk about it, the more enamored I'm becoming with a check-raise here. I'm tempted to say that, with your image, the choice should be between bet-out and check-raise, rather than check-call. If I'm in the button's shoes, I *really* don't want to fold A8 to a check-raise against a player with this image. And if the hand gets shown down, I keep it in mind with TPTK, floats, and flush/str8 draws from there on out.Really interesting topic, thanks for posting it.

I think you need to take a lesson in pot control sir.For you, and anyone else who thinks check raising is a good play, YOU. ARE. NOT. GETTING. CALLED. BY. A. WORSE. HAND. This means, you get NO VALUE when you are ahead. I hate to break it to you people, but most people at 1/2 (especially on stars, are GOOD PLAYERS). They do NOT stack off with A8, they do NOT call your check raise with anything you beat, they WILL fold 97d or 108d given the price. Which means a check raise has NO value other than getting a hand like TT or JJ to fold.You people are arguing for a check raise for the wrong reasons. The only reason why you should be check raising here is to bluff and this is only if you put someone on a better hand. Since its very likely you have the best hand, a check raise is the worst possible option. You WANT people to bet at you with flush draws, and when they hit you can fold, but when they miss (which is like 2 to 1 or worse), they might bet and you get value from the best hand, where as leading the turn strong, or check raising, or betting the river, gets you ZERO value.NL isn't about taking down pots, its about making money when you have the best hand. Betting at any street after the flop gets you no money when you have the best hand.

[mtdesmoines 3]

Villian is standard TAG: 13/10/2.6 through 500 hands. I have played against him a number of times and he sees me around 28/16/1.5.Today, however, I have had a *sick* run of nice hands that haven't made it to showdown, so I appear to be playing more like a maniac: 35/25/2.5 -ish.My plan was to not c-bet any flop unless I actually hit (I had bet most of the flops when I was the PFR. My opponents *don't* know that it is because I was hitting like 65% of the flops or something ridiculous like that).The board, however, dictates a pretty standard play: protect on the flop, and pot control after that.Would anyone argue for taking a different approach?PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)Button ($186)SB ($212.65)BB ($273.20)UTG ($198)Hero ($277.10)CO ($111.10)Preflop: Hero is MP with 9, 9. 1 fold, Hero raises to $6, CO calls $6, Button calls $6, 2 folds.Flop: ($21) 6, 8, 2(3 players)Hero bets $12, CO folds, Button calls $12.Turn: ($45) 2(2 players)Hero checks, Button bets $22, Hero calls $22.River: ($89) 5(2 players)Hero checks, Button checks.Final Pot: $89

I don't mind this line when we're either WA/WB in the hand.

[whiterice714 0]

I think you need to take a lesson in pot control sir.For you, and anyone else who thinks check raising is a good play, YOU. ARE. NOT. GETTING. CALLED. BY. A. WORSE. HAND. This means, you get NO VALUE when you are ahead. I hate to break it to you people, but most people at 1/2 (especially on stars, are GOOD PLAYERS). They do NOT stack off with A8, they do NOT call your check raise with anything you beat, they WILL fold 97d or 108d given the price. Which means a check raise has NO value other than getting a hand like TT or JJ to fold.You people are arguing for a check raise for the wrong reasons. The only reason why you should be check raising here is to bluff and this is only if you put someone on a better hand. Since its very likely you have the best hand, a check raise is the worst possible option. You WANT people to bet at you with flush draws, and when they hit you can fold, but when they miss (which is like 2 to 1 or worse), they might bet and you get value from the best hand, where as leading the turn strong, or check raising, or betting the river, gets you ZERO value.NL isn't about taking down pots, its about making money when you have the best hand. Betting at any street after the flop gets you no money when you have the best hand.

+1agree 100%i play this just as merby did about 90+% of the time

[rdtedm 0]

This is also the line I take when I have these smallish pairs. However, it really seems like at these stakes, this is the line villain takes with a hand like AJ-AK. Raise to see if hero is buying, shut down when a raise is called. Still no value in raising or betting, only opening the door to get bluffed by a weaker hand, or raised by a stronger. Weak, but standard. I never know how to play small overpairs effectively.

[trystero 0]

TB17's 100% right - you play poker to induce calls from weaker hands and folds from stronger hands. When you make a move that never gets called by a weaker hand then you are bluffing - and you need to ask yourself if it's a bluff you're willing to sell. In this spot I don't think so. In any event you'll just frighten TPTK away.

[Merby 3]

Results: Hero shows 9 9 (two pair, Nines and deuces)Button mucks 9 8 (two pair, Eights and deuces)I am sure I would have lost him the second I check-raised the turn. If I bet the river, I may get a call (he has top pair and I checked the turn) but then I am losing money from the busted flush and straight draws who would bluff bet the river if I check to them.A classic case of WA/WB and pot control.

[fopkins 0]

The real question is.. do you call his $45 bet on the river?

[Jordan 1]

ya 13/10/2 whatever isn't tag. that's a nit.- Jordan

[sierradave 0]

You people are arguing for a check raise for the wrong reasons. The only reason why you should be check raising here is to bluff and this is only if you put someone on a better hand.

I see your point and raise you. I was in a live ring $1-2 game this weekend in Atlantic City. An utterly standard hand came up where I raised preflop with AQ, got called behind in one spot by an older guy who had mostly been folding. The flop came J-high, I c-bet, he called. Turn was a brick, I check-folded to his $50 bet. A minute later, they called his name for the $2-5 game and I said jokingly, "If I knew you were a 2-5 player, I would've check-raised that turn." He replied, "it would've worked" and sure seemed to be serious. That fits exactly the point you make above: the only reason for a check-raise in that spot is to bluff a better hand.The thing is, I never check-raise with an overpair here. I either bet out or check-call. And if I'm only check-raising this spot with a bluff, then a thinking opponent (the type who won't stack off with a8 or overplay the str8 and flush draw) ought to be able to play back at me. There's no balance to the strategy, because the check-raise is only being used to fold someone off of a decently strong hand.In the play of this individual hand, you're absolutely right. The check-raise shuts down the action and probably forces the opponent to fold. Notice, however, that as the hand played out, Merby would have made exactly as much money by check-raising the turn as he did by check-raising the turn and check-calling the river. As fopkins asked, if the nit bets the river, do we call? What if the river card had been the j of clubs and he bet? But if we're playing at this table for long enough, I think there's a lot of value in the check-raise here because of how it affects the play of later hands. You win a relatively small pot here (the same size pot that you won in reality), but four orbits from now, you're much more likely to get a free card out of position that could turn a loss into a win. If we're only check-raising here with a bluff (and really, it's not like we'd be check-raising with a boat on this draw-heavy board), then that play is just pleading to be exploited by a call or a reraise. And we still don't have position on the river, meaning there's a huge information deficit in our opponent's favor. If we're also check-raising with an overpair, that frees us up to check-raise as a bluff in later hands.And yeah, obviously I've been grappling with Bill Chen's "Mathematics of Poker" recently. If y'all think I'm butchering the game theory here, I'd greatly appreciate the criticism. The game theory we use in my professional field is a lot clunkier than what Chen is using, maybe I'm butchering it. But money isn't made in poker by "making money when you have the best hand." It's made by forcing your opponent to make bigger mistakes than you make. The turn check-raise lets your opponent make a correct fold on the turn (still giving up pot equity of up to 32% if they have two overcard diamonds), but discourages them from floating the flop and/or charging you on the turn in future hands. If the only hands we check-raise this turn with are bluffs, that seems like a big hole in the overall strategy.Let the flaming commence...

[DonkSlayer 1]

Betting the river is really really bad too. For the same reason as betting the turn.

I disagree. A worse hand than, except maaaaaybe A8, checks behind us on the river when we c/c the turn.I don't mind the Hero's line, but I think we can bet/fold the river and get a lot of value there as well. Our c/c on the turn will confuse a lot of villains enough to give us a river call with any pair.

[mln_falcon 0]

I see your point and raise you. I was in a live ring $1-2 game this weekend in Atlantic City. An utterly standard hand came up where I raised preflop with AQ, got called behind in one spot by an older guy who had mostly been folding. The flop came J-high, I c-bet, he called. Turn was a brick, I check-folded to his $50 bet. A minute later, they called his name for the $2-5 game and I said jokingly, "If I knew you were a 2-5 player, I would've check-raised that turn." He replied, "it would've worked" and sure seemed to be serious. That fits exactly the point you make above: the only reason for a check-raise in that spot is to bluff a better hand.The thing is, I never check-raise with an overpair here. I either bet out or check-call. And if I'm only check-raising this spot with a bluff, then a thinking opponent (the type who won't stack off with a8 or overplay the str8 and flush draw) ought to be able to play back at me. There's no balance to the strategy, because the check-raise is only being used to fold someone off of a decently strong hand.In the play of this individual hand, you're absolutely right. The check-raise shuts down the action and probably forces the opponent to fold. Notice, however, that as the hand played out, Merby would have made exactly as much money by check-raising the turn as he did by check-raising the turn and check-calling the river. As fopkins asked, if the nit bets the river, do we call? What if the river card had been the j of clubs and he bet? But if we're playing at this table for long enough, I think there's a lot of value in the check-raise here because of how it affects the play of later hands. You win a relatively small pot here (the same size pot that you won in reality), but four orbits from now, you're much more likely to get a free card out of position that could turn a loss into a win. If we're only check-raising here with a bluff (and really, it's not like we'd be check-raising with a boat on this draw-heavy board), then that play is just pleading to be exploited by a call or a reraise. And we still don't have position on the river, meaning there's a huge information deficit in our opponent's favor. If we're also check-raising with an overpair, that frees us up to check-raise as a bluff in later hands.And yeah, obviously I've been grappling with Bill Chen's "Mathematics of Poker" recently. If y'all think I'm butchering the game theory here, I'd greatly appreciate the criticism. The game theory we use in my professional field is a lot clunkier than what Chen is using, maybe I'm butchering it. But money isn't made in poker by "making money when you have the best hand." It's made by forcing your opponent to make bigger mistakes than you make. The turn check-raise lets your opponent make a correct fold on the turn (still giving up pot equity of up to 32% if they have two overcard diamonds), but discourages them from floating the flop and/or charging you on the turn in future hands. If the only hands we check-raise this turn with are bluffs, that seems like a big hole in the overall strategy.Let the flaming commence...

no flame, but you can check raise the turn with a strong hand, two pair or a set. OP's overpair is exactly like TP/TK, there is nothing playing back with him that he beats. Pot control is the second biggest skill in NL Poker (BR management is the most important IMO).

[Merby 3]

no flame, but you can check raise the turn with a strong hand, two pair or a set. OP's overpair is exactly like TP/TK, there is nothing playing back with him that he beats. Pot control is the second biggest skill in NL Poker (BR management is the most important IMO).

So true.