Postflop Bullet Play

[DonkSlayer 1]

Let's go with Acid's reads on this hand as the basis for our plan.If I'm the hero in this hand, holding AxAh, and I'm facing a near-min check-raise from a decent LAG (not a lagTARD, which we can also just call a "maniac"), I have to put him on almost exactly the range that Acid said his range was for making the move that he did as the LAG. GIVEN THAT-We fold.If the LAG was testing the buttoon/hero or just being aggressive, he would've just led. He's clearly trying to get value here, and he must understand that at he has committed at least the hero to this pot if hero decides to continue. Therefore, like I think Acid said before, the range we must put him on does not leave us, overall, in good shape. We aren't much better than a coinflip if we're ahead, and there are many reasonable ways we could be behind. Our c/r plan has actually given us an excuse to fold: we only have $60 in a near $900 pot. With the exception of spiking an ace, we can find a reason to hate almost every card the peels off on the turn if we just flat-call.OR, simpler:We're hardly better than about 60% if we go allin and the LAG calls with a worse hand. We're often no better than 25% allin on the flop against the LAG calling with a better hand. The total not-your-money pot is not worth the price given the odds that you will prevail; fold.

[sabes99 0]

This is not good dude. You need to learn to recognize when AA is no good post flop without seeing a flop of JT9 or QJT with a flush draw. With this action, AA is often (not always) in very bad shape here. Blindly shoving your chips in against 2 players who have put money into the pot (when you have no fold equity) is a play with a lot of negative expectation.

i agree but i did say that it was read-based...aces are good often in this particular spot, they are obv not going to be good even half the time against average players, but i think they are good given the reads here...we know the button has a wide range that we can beat most of the time, and with the LAG raising, and considering we know that his range is possibly quite wide also, i think this is one spot where you go with the aces

[mtdesmoines 3]

The total not-your-money pot is not worth the price given the odds that you will prevail; fold.

The only way this is true is that we totally AND I MEAN TOTALLY F-ed up by not leading. You cannot plan to C-R with only one pair and a LAG in the hand. You have to lead.

[Acid_Knight 2]

The only way this is true is that we totally AND I MEAN TOTALLY F-ed up by not leading. You cannot plan to C-R with only one pair and a LAG in the hand. You have to lead.

C/R is a great move if the LAG acts after you and likes to prey on weakness. Once he checks and you only have 1 person behind, never check AA here.The end result of the hand is that the LAG raises to $500 (It might have been $550, but it doesn't really matter) after the button bet $200. The CO chooses now to shovel his chips in, the button folds and the LAG instacalls with T9o.

[Acid_Knight 2]

Oh, and someone who screws up a hand this badly is of course going to win. The turn is a 6 and the river is a 5.I posted this because I really wanted to see what people would've done with AA in that situation. Honestly, it felt like most of the responses to call didn't really give due credit to one player or another. While one player taking a stab at the pot isn't a big deal, when 2 players are willing to put in a considerable amount of chips, you just need to let go of a hand like AA here. I thought that it was a terrible play to basically call off all of your chips without thinking about the situation that you were likely in. This wasn't a board like Q73 where your opponent often has a set or nothing. This is a board where there are several draws that are about 50/50 with AA and there are still those set and 2 pair combos that have AA crushed. If you think about the range of hands you're against with AA here, it's a clear fold.

[mtdesmoines 3]

Oh, and someone who screws up a hand this badly is of course going to win. The turn is a 6 and the river is a 5.I posted this because I really wanted to see what people would've done with AA in that situation. Honestly, it felt like most of the responses to call didn't really give due credit to one player or another. While one player taking a stab at the pot isn't a big deal, when 2 players are willing to put in a considerable amount of chips, you just need to let go of a hand like AA here. I thought that it was a terrible play to basically call off all of your chips without thinking about the situation that you were likely in. This wasn't a board like Q73 where your opponent often has a set or nothing. This is a board where there are several draws that are about 50/50 with AA and there are still those set and 2 pair combos that have AA crushed. If you think about the range of hands you're against with AA here, it's a clear fold.

I really feel for you ... I can't tell you the number of times I've shoved ahead and finished behind this week. However, 2 pair is an incredibly vulnerable hand. Usually, I see running kings in this spot. And I'm not kidding. I see running kings like 60% of the time I have two pair and get some with overs to shove into me. It's always running kings.

[David_Nicoson 1]

My range for this checkraise, given what I thought they held, includes the following hands:55, 99, TT, T9, 5xhh, 67hh, 78hh, J8hh, QJhh, KQhh and likely nothing else. I am never making that raise with AT (nor would I ever appear OOP in a pot raised by a decent player with that hand) and if I held JJ and somehow decided not to raise preflop with it, I'd have led the flop. Any other naked draw I have, like a naked straight or naked flush draw would result in me flat calling on the flop most of the time and especially in this one given that I thought they both hand pairs. I really don't think that I show up in this pot with any hand but those listed.I am pretty sure that my narrow range alone here makes the CO a decent dog if he holds AA. Maybe someone can do a pokerstove on that.

Board: Th 9h 5cDead:  	equity 	win 	tie 		  pots won 	pots tied	Hand 0: 70.081%  70.08% 00.00% 			 17345 			0.00   { TT-99, 55, KhQh, QhJh, T9s, 8h7h, 7h6h, 7h5h, 6h5h, 5h4h, T9o }Hand 1: 29.919%  29.92% 00.00% 			  7405 			0.00   { AcAh }

[David_Nicoson 1]

Earlier, it was mentioned that we lose 40% of the time to a draw. 60% of the time, we win. Isn't that good enough?

Consider this well-known situation:UTG pushes for 100bb. His range is AK, KK, or AA. The field folds to you in the BB. You have 22. You're a favorite to his most likely hand (AKo), but a dog to his range. It's pretty easy to see in this situation; other times it's more subtle. I think we tend to credit ourselves mentally with Sklansky dollars for the whole pot any time when we get the money in as a favorite. After all, we "should have" won it, right? It's a fallacy, though.

[Kid DynOmite 0]

We can't put the LAG on a set; I think he'd raise UTG with a pair, trying to thin the herd and play heads up with a legit -MIDDLE PAIR - hand. He limps with his drawing hand, trying to trap the field with a gin flop, or, heads up with a raiser that he can close PF action on. Further, I think LAG would smooth call a set, trying to trap a raiser with overs. Lag can't really put you on hearts, raising $60. You've got overs, and he knows it. So I think LAG is drawing. A TAG button probably would dump almost any hand that directly connects with this flop after you raised. A TAG button might smooth call with QQ, hoping to push you out with a non-ace flop and going head to head with the LAG. That's my thinking, but it's (like) Monday.EDIT, oh, and I also thought about the implications of the heart in our hand. I think the interest in this flop tells us that a lot of hearts may lie in hands and we're relatively safe from LAG's heart-connected draw.

I wouldn't move on with this hand. I would think that AT BEST you're up against a straight/ heart draw. I would put one on 55 and the other on a hand like jqhh depending on your read of the two players... I mean, I mess around with all sorts of hands, but I am playing nowhere near 5-10 yet.

[whiterice714 0]

Acid Knight outted as LAG!!! Or is this old news.Sorry I used the term "lagtard". No offense.PS: I don't put you on a set. TP with a str8 draw.Results?

how's that possible? there's no pair & straight draw possibilities on that board... give the poor guy some credit - you're really putting him on 10 8 or J 10 or something??? after he check min raised the TAG who has position on him... just from his posts i know he's good enough not to stack off like that... hell, even I'M good enough not to stack off like that... check min raise w/ TPNK & a back door straight draw (that may not be good anyways if the heart comes)personally i thoroughly doubt that... if i'm wrong then hey, i guess i'm an idiot... but i dont see acid sitting w/ J 10 here...*EDIT*oops, i see you addressed this already acid...sorry to hear bout the donk sucking out, what can ya do... hope you got his $ later on in the session

[RhinestoneCowboy 2]

Board: Th 9h 5cDead:  	equity 	win 	tie 		  pots won 	pots tied	Hand 0: 70.081%  70.08% 00.00% 			 17345 			0.00   { TT-99, 55, KhQh, QhJh, T9s, 8h7h, 7h6h, 7h5h, 6h5h, 5h4h, T9o }Hand 1: 29.919%  29.92% 00.00% 			  7405 			0.00   { AcAh }

I just found it funny that AK's hand isn't in your range...

[David_Nicoson 1]

I just found it funny that AK's hand isn't in your range...

It's T9o, right? It's listed last.

[Snamuh 0]

Tough spot. Because of the LAG's open limp, he really could have anything. Is it possible he has a pocket pair like JJ-KK here? Generally he would have to be sure of a LAG behind him to pull off this move, so I think it's less likely. A smaller pocket pair or suited connectors is much more likely. I'm more interested to know the hero's image in this hand. A preflop raise and then a check is generally more suspicious. The button's overbet could be a steal but it's likely he has a real hand here, being a solid player. The LAG's check/raise certainly is scary, because he's saying he has a big hand, a bigger hand than the solid player. Like others have said, the Ah makes this less likely to be a NFD, and more likely a set or an OESFD. I think this is a difficult fold, despite the fact that the hero received wanted action induced by the check.

[Naismith 0]

I wish I would've seen this post right after you made it so I could've saved everyone time and said, "BBFIDTS".

[Acid_Knight 2]

I wish I would've seen this post right after you made it so I could've saved everyone time and said, "BBFIDTS".

You can't say BBFIDTS since I posted it from the AA perspective and they won. Suck it!

[rdtedm 0]

Hmm.. This reminds me somewhat of the thread where the drunk guy tried to make a fancy play with Q-4 or something OOP and steal the pot. Everyone said it was stupid, but when he posted it from villain's perpective on 2+2 the majority said they would dump AA to the guy's bets.

[rdtedm 0]

One question, Acid. Does TAG (in this case) mean he is not capable of raising from the CO with 55/99/1010? Second best position to raise from when people have only limped, with a hand likely to be the best PF.If this is the case, once Hero pushes his last $500 into a $~1400 pot and a set is now a part of his range, is this still an instacall with top two pair? Neglect this post if you were 100% sure he didn't have a set.

[Acid_Knight 2]

One question, Acid. Does TAG (in this case) mean he is not capable of raising from the CO with 55/99/1010? Second best position to raise from when people have only limped, with a hand likely to be the best PF.If this is the case, once Hero pushes his last $500 into a $~1400 pot and a set is now a part of his range, is this still an instacall with top two pair? Neglect this post if you were 100% sure he didn't have a set.

I was almost positive he had AA or KK

[rdtedm 0]

I was almost positive he had AA or KK

PF or post-flop? I can't see a good TAG player raising from the SB PF without a hand like QQ-AA, but what are your thoughts once he checks the flop? Raising PF with QQ-AA almost demands a continuation bet on this board, albeit vaguely coordinated. Doesn't this now seem more like a trap that's being set with a set? How can a TAG not lead this flop if he has an overpair, or is my line of thinking wrong?

[David_Nicoson 1]

PF or post-flop? I can't see a good TAG player raising from the SB PF without a hand like QQ-AA, but what are your thoughts once he checks the flop? Raising PF with QQ-AA almost demands a continuation bet on this board, albeit vaguely coordinated. Doesn't this now seem more like a trap that's being set with a set? How can a TAG not lead this flop if he has an overpair, or is my line of thinking wrong?

I'm completely lost. The SB folded preflop in this hand.

[rdtedm 0]

I'm completely lost. The SB folded preflop in this hand.

Misread the hand, thought hero was in the first position after the flop. I still think that if I were Acid here, and the TAG hero checks after raising PF, that it's some sort of huge hand. An overpair (especially played by TAG hero here) will bet this flop when checked to damn near 100% of the time. That being said, even if Acid thinks this is KK-AA PF, then Button makes a solid bet, acid makes it $500, and hero pushes, do we think that Hero is just stupid with AA-KK or do we now put him on a set?

[Acid_Knight 2]

Misread the hand, thought hero was in the first position after the flop. I still think that if I were Acid here, and the TAG hero checks after raising PF, that it's some sort of huge hand. An overpair (especially played by TAG hero here) will bet this flop when checked to damn near 100% of the time. That being said, even if Acid thinks this is KK-AA PF, then Button makes a solid bet, acid makes it $500, and hero pushes, do we think that Hero is just stupid with AA-KK or do we now put him on a set?

I really thought he had AA or KK preflop. When he checked the flop, I was kind of confused because I still had thought that he had that hand, but now I was doubting that for obvious reasons. I really didn't think he was the type to raise 55 preflop there and I discount TT and 99 for obvious reasons. In reality though, checking with a set there is about as dangerous as checking an overpair.When he shoved his chips in, it wasn't a confident move. I instacalled becuase once his chips went into the pot, I was sure it was a big pair, albeit a badly played one.

[David_Nicoson 1]

I still think that if I were Acid here, and the TAG hero checks after raising PF, that it's some sort of huge hand. An overpair (especially played by TAG hero here) will bet this flop when checked to damn near 100% of the time.

Acid describes the cut-off as having "fairly solid image". I don't think that's exactly the same as TAG.The hero/cut-off/PFR checking the flop with a set is pretty horrible play in my opinion. It's worse than checking the overpair. So I don't draw any specific conclusions about his hand if he check-raises here.

That being said, even if Acid thinks this is KK-AA PF, then Button makes a solid bet, acid makes it $500, and hero pushes, do we think that Hero is just stupid with AA-KK or do we now put him on a set?

Is he stupid with an overpair or stupid with a set? :shrug: If the button comes back over the top, I have something to think about with Acid's T9 (or 55 for that matter), but with this board there are a lot of hands the button can play aggressively that aren't sets.

[Acid_Knight 2]

Is he stupid with an overpair or stupid with a set?

That's what it all boils down to here.