scary turn card! 6max

[Bubba83 0]

Ultimate Bet 2/4 Hold'em (5 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cxPreflop: Hero is MP with J:club:, 9:club:. 1 fold, Button calls, SB calls, BB calls.Flop: (8 SB) 3:diamond:, 9:heart:, J:spade: (4 players)SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets, Button calls, SB folds, BB calls.Turn: (5.50 BB) 8:spade: (3 players)BB checks, Hero bets, Hero calls, Button calls.River: (11.50 BB) A:diamond: (3 players)BB bets, Hero calls, Button calls.Final Pot: 14.50 BBYeah, it's a loose preflop raise, but table is passive and i've been picking up blinds frequently enough. This is BB's first hand at the table and I've never seen him before. Button is loose passivish. The turn made me quiver, as my gut told me that one of them had Q 10. Still, I need to bet with two spades and easy straight draws out. The fact that BB check raises us both makes me really worried. Even though I feel I am beat here more often than not I have 4 outs for a full house. It's not enough outs to call if I knew for sure one of them had a straight, but I felt like if a safe river card came my hand had some showdown value. I just want to make sure I shouldn't be folding the turn. Once I decide to call and the semi-safe card comes on the river, I think I need to definitely call. Would anyone have 3 bet the turn against an unknown?

[allinbluff35 0]

as my gut told me that one of them had Q 10

was it your gut or the results that did that?

[Abbaddabba 0]

You call _that_ a scary turn card?

[screech 0]

I'm raising that hand from CO all day.You should have 3-bet that turn.

[Bubba83 0]

was it your gut or the results that did that?

I wouldn't have said it if I didn't feel that one of them had Q 10 at the time that card fell. This gut feeling was the moment the turn card hit and is completely independent of results.Screech, when you say you're raising from CO with this hand all day long, do you mean preflop?

[screech 0]

Screech, when you say you're raising from CO with this hand all day long, do you mean preflop?

Yeah.

[BigDMcGee 3,354]

I am proably three betting. But check raises on the turn in multiway pots are scary things, so I don't think calling is that bad.

[rwood 0]

if you 3 bet here you have to be willing to fold to a cap IMO...but i def. like a 3-bet, as you will get value if ahead, and info to fold if behind...

[screech 0]

Calling this turn is pretty bad. We have top 2 and another player in the pot. We only have to be good 33% of the time to raise for value. I'd estimate we're good here close to 70%.If we 3-bet and it gets capped, we have to call. The pot will be offering us at least 13.5:1 and we're only 10.5:1 to make a full house. If it gets capped on the turn, I'm still calling the river.

[Sysvr4 0]

I am proably three betting. But check raises on the turn in multiway pots are scary things, so I don't think calling is that bad.

Yep. I play it the same, including the PF raise.Jeff

[Sysvr4 0]

Calling this turn is pretty bad. We have top 2 and another player in the pot. We only have to be good 33% of the time to raise for value.

No, you have to win 33% of the time. The times you're good and lose still count against you for equity raises. If villain doesn't check raise a multi-way pot with bottom two pair on worse, 3-betting here is spewing. That, of course, it read dependent.I think calling on this particular board in a multiway pot is an acceptable play. Jeff

[screech 0]

Calling this turn is pretty bad. We have top 2 and another player in the pot. We only have to be good 33% of the time to raise for value.

No, you have to win 33% of the time. The times you're good and lose still count against you for equity raises. If villain doesn't check raise a multi-way pot with bottom two pair on worse, 3-betting here is spewing. That, of course, it read dependent.I think calling on this particular board in a multiway pot is an acceptable play. Jeff

Bah.Now you're just nitpicking. I should have made myself more clear with regards to the whole 33% at showdown thing.Most opponents are check/raising this turn with a worse hand often enough to make 3-betting profitabe. Obviously you aren't going to 3-bet here against a passive mouse type player.I think calling this turn without a specific read that villian is passive is not optimal.

[rwood 0]

i like 3 betting the turn still, also screech, we have to remember that there is a 3rd player in this potthis means that we not only have to beat the aggressor 1/3 of the time to turn a profit, but also the other player...(the basic principle of overcalling)

[Sysvr4 0]

Now you're just nitpicking.

Yeah, I do that

Most opponents are check/raising this turn with a worse hand often enough to make 3-betting profitabe. Obviously you aren't going to 3-bet here against a passive mouse type player.

I dunno. We're beat by 33, 99, JJ, 88, T7, and QT and we're ahead of 89 and J8. I think those are the only reasonable raising hands in this pot, other than J9 for a split. So we're mostly behind wouldn't you say?Jeff

[screech 0]

I don't think so.If you think BB would play 33/99/JJ/88 this way, you have to add more two pair combos like J3, 93, and 83.So 12 combos for a set16 combos for the QT16 combos for the unlikely gutshot T744 combos for the hands that beat us. That means there only has to be 22 combos that we're ahead of (assuming we are ahead of button), to make raising valuable. 12 combos of J3/9312 combos of J8/989 combos of 8333 combos total.

[Sysvr4 0]

If you think BB would play 33/99/JJ/88 this way, you have to add more two pair combos like J3, 93, and 83.

I tend to think they're more willing to want to "see a flop" with 88-JJ than they are to play J3, 93, 83. I've lost a lot of BB recently to folks who are playing QQ etc too passively. You certainly can't assume they're playing J3o etc as your calc does. That means even in the unlikely event they're playing these crap hands, you have to reduce your numbers to:83s - 2 combos93s - 2 combosJ3s - 2 combosSo total that's what... 6 + 12 = 18 < 22 == bad 3-bet :)Jeff

[screech 0]

Alright. I messed up my combo thread (assumed 3 for JJ). Basically what I was saying is that if you're going to include hands like 88, you have to include J3, etc. What I meant was you have to reduce the likelyhood of a set given how the hand played out.So here's my new and improved numbers. Feel free to disagree with the discounts :-) :Set: 10 real - discount to 6 (JJ/99 sometimes raises pf/flop, 88 doesn't always see the turn)QT: 16T7: 16 real - discount to 8 (even donkeys don't always draw to gutshots)Total: 30 combosJ3/93: 12 combos - discount to 6J8/98: 12 combos - discount to 1083: 9 combos - discount to 2Total: 1818/48 = 37.5%So based on combos it's close. Given these values, it leans towards a raise, especially since we will outdraw all of these hands except 1 (JJ) ~ 8% of the time.Of course the discounted combo values really depend on reads. I adjusted them for what I consider an average opponent to do.

[greatwhite 0]

That's not what I call spooky. 3-bet it.

[Briguy 0]

Man, I gotta start playing on Pacific if people are calling raises in the BB with J3 or 93.

[Sysvr4 0]

So based on combos it's close. ... I adjusted them for what I consider an average opponent to do.

Well, we at least agree it's close now. I think the remaining difference lies in what we think the average opponent is more likely to do based on our respective experiences. So I guess we agree to disagree, but it's made for good discussion on the hand :)Jeff

[screech 0]

So based on combos it's close. ... I adjusted them for what I consider an average opponent to do.

Well, we at least agree it's close now. I think the remaining difference lies in what we think the average opponent is more likely to do based on our respective experiences. So I guess we agree to disagree, but it's made for good discussion on the hand :)Jeff

Yeah.The more I post/think about hands, the more I realize how most close poker decisions are completely read dependent.

[Guest Bubba83-atschool]

Good analysis, Villain ended up having J 10, the other guy had a pocket pair of 5s. I guess picking up an open ended on the turn was good enough to check raise 2 players with his top pair 10 kicker. 3-bet would have been better if we look at results, but I enjoyed reading the controversy between flat calling and 3 betting. The 3rd player in the hand definitely makes a difference in the hand, and I think I am convinced 3-betting is a little better.