5/10/20 Lost in the Merge

So I just saw this thread and didn’t get to post before results, but in my experience recently, when someone bets small after I have shown strength and then checked a street, they are trying to induce. I have jammed in spots like this and got snapped off by sets quite a bit. Obviously your villain didn’t have a set but he clearly did have something he was trying to induce with, if he snapped. He must have thought JTo was a slam dunk against your range that you get to that spot with.

I looked at this hand briefly in a solver last night and J7s was a pure call on the flop, with the parameters I used. Pretty much all Jx was pure calling flop, with the only exceptions being a sliver of check raises with KJ+. Even jacks with strong kickers were mostly calling. For the most part the solver was only check raising with 2 pair plus (and bluffs).

Flop seems like a pretty clear call, then check and evaluate on various run-outs. Your opponent will slow down a lot, and for example if turn checks through there will be blank rivers where a chunky value bet could be appropriate. The double check raise is just an overplay of a weak top pair.

Agreed that 87s specifically is maybe the one value hand that I could see a human using as a double check raise, but that's only 4 combos. I also agree that I've seen people do this with combo draws, but a hand like JT is ahead of those (I don't like the double check raise line with a combo draw either).

FWIW, the solver was betting most of their range on the turn after check raising flop, and a double check raise wasn't really a thing on this board. When the solver did occasionally check turn after check raising flop it was mostly give ups and it was using a sliver of J6s 2 pair as it's only real strong hands that checked turn.

For the most part the OOP player wants to be betting their strong hands on the turn after check raising flop. J7 just isn't anywhere near strong enough to go into the check raise value range.

Villain's play seems questionable. Not sure the open with JTo is good. OK in a tournament with tight play and antes. It would be easier for him to check back TPWK on the wet flop that favored the caller. Easy then for him to call down or bet if checked to. Also, don't like the 20% on the turn with a wet board. Interesting snap call to the shove.

Even if hero gets this specific hand to fold against other opponents, I don't like the play. This was the absolute bottom or villains range. When he cbets large and calls the x/r, he can have various strong hands. Don't like the flop x/r with villain showing strength on a wet board.

Agree both players overplayed and both could have controlled the pot with TPWK.

I was saying that if hero x/r'd flop with a combo draw and got there on the turn, I could see going for the double x/r, because it looks like hero raised flop with 2P or a set that absolutely hates the draw-completing turn card.

Like, if OOP x/r'd flop on a draw heavy board, repping 2P/sets, it would make sense to check on a scary turn card. It would make less sense to barrel. So we see a lot of OOP check-calling a big bet by the IP player, when OOP hopes to boat up, or IP just checking back trying to get to showdown with a hand that didn't improve but may be too strong to turn into a bluff on a draw completing turn.

It's just not that common for someone to x/r flop as a semi-bluff and NOT barrel turn when they get there. It's especially rare to see someone go for another x/r rather than slow-playing by check-calling turn.

The double x/r avoids OOP having to x/c turn and then donk river, which looks pretty face up as being exactly what it is - a flop semi-bluff that got there. The players who x/r the flop aren't often able to restrain themselves enough to check again on the river after check-calling turn, because IP really will be doing a ton of checking back.

Not defending the double x/r line. Simply observing that the flop x/r does lead OOP into spots where extracting value can get tricky on certain run-outs.

I think it's part of why we see some players flat flop and then donk brick turns. Many people seem to struggle with how to interpret that line. It's often a hand that could have x/r'd flop but didn't.

The small bet IP with thin value and snap call of hero's jam here is pretty wild. I have to wonder what sort of read V has on OP.

Hero doesn't have many sets in range, but we could certainly play them as a flop x/r.

It seems a lot less likely when hero checks turn. How often is OOP going to play sets like this, from pre through the turn, when the BDFD appears? It seems pretty unlikely.

Sure there are turns where the check raiser will want to slow down, but I don't think this is one of them. In this case 87s isn't enough of a concern to cause two pair + to want to slow down. Those hands can keep betting turn to play for stacks. Semibluffs will also mostly want to keep betting. You're attacking the countless combos of draws, Jx and over pairs whereas 87s is only four combos.

I think you've misunderstood me.

I wasn't saying V could have 87s and therefore hero has a reason to slow down on the turn after x/r'ing the flop with 2P or a set. I was saying hero is really only repping 87dd when we x/r flop and then go for another x/r on the turn.

Yes, V might conceivably also have 87s in range on the flop, but V isn't the one repping the nuts in this line. Hero is.

V can have 87s, but he can also have every set / 2P combo, every over-pair, every TP, every pair + draw combo, etc. It's not like the OOP player is going to be zoomed in on V having a range weighted towards 87s specifically when V bet-calls the flop x/r.

87dd is the one combo that could reasonably go for the double x/r here. Every other hand that was x/r'ing the flop for value would very likely check-call or keep betting on the turn. But hero's also supposed to have some x/r-bluffs on the flop that would check-fold turn.

So conceivably, if hero has flop x/r's that x/f turn, hero can also have some double-check-raises, though very few hands would fit the bill, and it would seem like very few players would find the double x/r line, even holding one of those hands, for the exact reasons you gave - so many hands to target for value in V's range.

Honestly, I don't really like x/r'ing flop on this board, in this configuration, because hero isn't repping much for value in a SRP when we flat call pre from the straddle.

We're unlikely to have JJ/99, so our value range is mostly just J9, 66, and slivers of J6s/96s. Our x/r range is likely to be pretty weak on this board texture, with too many draws and TPGK combos.

A capable opponent should see that a lot of hero's flop x/r range can't feel very comfortable when the flop x/r gets called, unless hero is in the habit of slow-playing 99+ from the blinds/straddle pre. If hero did x/r flop with 87, and got the gin card on the turn, I'd love the double x/r line, for that exact reason.

I agree that in theory, hero's semi-bluffs might want to keep betting, but...do they keep betting, in reality? How many high-equity draws on the flop pick up equity on the turn, but don't improve to a hand that beats TP? It's not many. Mostly just a couple OESD combos that picked up the BDFD.

How many human players are going to x/r the flop with a SD, and barrel the turn when they don't improve and don't pick up equity? I think most players are going to put those combos that don't pick up additional outs into their flop x/r, turn x/f range.

Find the flop semi-bluff combos that flat call pre, x/r flop, and go for the x/r again on the 5d turn. The only combos I can find are QTdd, T8dd and maybe KTdd or T7dd.

Not all players are going to find this line with KTs or T7s. They may x/r flop, but will either barrel or x/c turn when they pick up the BDFD. And anyone that aggro is likely to 3B pre with KTs or QTs at some frequency.

So this line looks like exactly 87dd for value, and T8dd as a bluff, unless hero is widening the double x/r range to include weird stuff like J7cc, which most players aren't doing. It's not often we see anyone put TPWK + a BDGSSD into a line like this.

That's why I think the double x/r is NOT really FOS. Every combo that x/r'd flop for value is likely to keep betting, or at least check-call. Most of the combos that x/r'd as a semi-bluff are likely to barrel when they pick up the BDFD or x/f when they don't. The double x/r is repping a super-narrow range of super-nutted value, or a super-high-equity combo draw, and not much else.

Now, if V has a read that hero is capable of being FOS in this line, that's different. But that doesn't make the line FOS.

I don't know why you wouldn't just keep betting turn with 87s. That was my point. Anyway heading back from tournament break so can't give a longer response now but value should really just keep betting and balance with bluffs.

See how you described V as a TAG pro? What does it mean to you that they are a pro playing in live games? Does that mean they will always fold to aggression or that they are good enough at people reading and ranging opponents that they make their living playing poker? How do they view you? Have they played enough with you or with others that have played you to believe you are tight or overly aggressive?

You're saying "you", as if I'm the one proposing to take this line here. I'm not. If you mean the hypothetical "you", okay, fair enough, and I'm willing to debate hypotheticals.

Why did my opponent x/r the flop with his SD, make his hand on the turn, and then go for another x/r? You'd have to ask him.

But if I had to guess, or tell you why I might do it, I'd say that when someone x/r's the flop on a draw-heavy board, they're mostly repping 2P / sets for value. Those hands x/r flop because it's a draw heavy board, and they'd hate seeing the draw come in. So it's not unusual to see someone x/r flop and then check turn.

If a competent player is able to put that together, they might x/r flop with a draw, make their hand on the turn, and then check rather than barrel, because opponents tend to start over-folding when an opponent x/r's flop and barrels turn, and checking turn after x/r'ing the flop looks like 2P or a set that hates seeing the draw come in.

Like, if you (the literal you, not the hypothetical you) want to x/r flop with a draw, and barrel turn, okay, you can do that. And maybe sometimes you'll get called by droolers holding TP, 2P, over-pairs, whatever. But if they're droolers, very often they'll just bet-3B the flop if they like their hand that much.

I actually have taken this line, sort of. I'll x/r flop with all sorts of draws, and check turn when I make my hand. Sometimes, my opponents just check back, which caps them. When I bet river for value, I'll size up, and bet more than I would have on the turn.

Very often, they'll call a big river bet because my x/r flop - check turn - bet river line looks FOS to them. I actually make more money in this line than when I just barrel the turn for a smaller size and they fold, or end up folding on the river.

They probably think the same thing you would: "why wouldn't you just barrel the turn if you were semi-bluffing on the flop and got there? I think you're FOS, and I don't believe you, so I'll hero call."

I don't think I've ever gone for a double x/r, but not because I'm always barreling turn after x/r'ing the flop. It's usually because I don't get the chance to x/r.

When I x/r the flop, they call, and then I check again on the turn, if they're going to bet, they tend to bomb it, very often jamming for 1.5x-2x pot. I'm just check-folding when I was bluffing and missed, or check-calling when I made my hand.

It's just so rare that anyone gets the chance to double x/r, because they do tend to barrel or the turn will check through, or the IP player over-bets, negating the need for OOP to raise.

I meant the hypothetical you, but you (actual you) are missing value by checking your strong hands on the turn after you check raise flop. That's assuming you're deep enough that you can't get all the money in smoothly with one pot-sized or less bet on the river.

Speaking about you specifically, the reason they never call when you keep betting turn after check raising flop is because you don't have enough bluffs in your range. Yes it's easy to overdo it with the bluffs, but you need bluffs in your range to give them a reason to pay off your strong hands.

I never said they they don't pay off turn bets.

This is what I was referring to, but also from your posting history it seems you don't bluff much and often look for reasons to fold very strong hands.

Focusing on getting value from strong hands and not bluffing when you're up against oblivious calling stations is a valid exploit, but it won't work well against better players.

According to poker theory, when you have a polarized range (very strong hand or bluff, such as after you check raise the flop), the way to maximize your EV is to play your hand in such a way as to wager all of your chips by the river. You want to be all in by the river when you have the nuts. As stack sizes get deeper, you can include more bluffs. Against a rational opponent who plays perfectly the goal is to balance your value range and bluffs so that they are indifferent between calling or folding, and again when you're polarized you typically want to play your hand so that you are all in by the river. Your opponent's incentive to call your big bets is really to stop you from stealing the existing pot with your bluffs.

I'm not describing this well, and the deeper poker theory goes beyond the scope of a forum post, but what I'm saying is this:

If your opponents are always folding to your turn and river bets when you have the nuts, the answer is not to check turn for deception to squeeze out a little more value on the river. You want to bluff more to punish their over folding and give them an incentive to pay off your all in bets.