So I sit down at a table this morning and who do I happen to be sitting across from but Kid[Red]. While this hand didn't include him, after the hand had happened, Mr. Red commented that I should have bet more on the flop.

I disagree. I've gotten my opponent to call a bet that is laying him less than 3 to 1 when he is a 5 to 1 dog and then a bet that is laying him around 2 to 1 when he is a 3 to 1 dog.

What do you think? Did I give my opponent the right price to call with his 2nd pair or did my opponent donk his way to a $60 pot?

(It's also worth noting that a couple of hands before this one, the same villain had called me all the way down to the river with 55 on a board of A6432 giving him runner-runner for the straight. :mad: )



PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (7 handed)

Hero ($54.40)
CO ($77.20)
Button ($163.55)
SB ($37.70)
BB ($174.75)
UTG ($109.60)
MP1 ($86.50)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with , .
2 folds, Hero raises to $3, CO calls $3, 3 folds.

Flop: ($7.50) , , (2 players)
Hero bets $4, CO calls $4.

Turn: ($15.50) (2 players)
Hero bets $12, CO calls $12.

River: ($39.50) (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $10, Hero calls $10.

Final Pot: $59.50

Results in white below:
Hero has 6s Ah (two pair, aces and sixes).
CO has 7h 9h (flush, nine high).
Outcome: CO wins $59.50.

I wouldn't have called that bet...but I would want this donk to call all the way down...it's just bad luck that the deck drew out on you

__________________

did kid try to raise your $25 bet to $27 ever?

I still don't understand that.. you can totally bet less twice.. I don't understand it..

__________________
KiD[ReD]
PokerForums.org
Latest deal: 38.8% SunPoker Rakeback with a $1000 deposit bonus. More info.

The flop bet's great. It looks more like a continuation bet than a value bet. Your flop works because you put him to a test that made him really take the bad side of a propostion on 4th.

Nothing you could do on the river.

__________________

thats a shitty flop, and u have a really weak 2pair.. so yea, i'd bet more on this flop.. id bet this flop as if i had AK here, so id bet like 7$, and take it from there.

your half pot bet on a flop like that is giving ur opponent huge implied odds to bust you on the turn with a 58s, 89s, 45s, etc..or a club draw..

if the flop was less dangerous, like maybe a A26 rainbow.. then a half pot bet would be good.

i pot the flop or close to it. if he has AQ/AJ/AK i want to commit as many chips as possible. (hes not folding these hands just yet)

preflop i fold. i dont like playing unsuited weak aces. imo they just dont flop well. i play nl200 6max right now. folded to me in the CO i would much much much rather raise with a hand like 46s or w/e than A6o

and a note: folded to me in the co, my raising range is pretty wide. however i do not like playing unsited aces. i will raise with like a6o on the button folded to me. maybe a8o+ in the CO

Yeah but those implied odds only exist against weak players.

If you make a pot-sized bet on the flop, you essentially give him better implied odds, since you commit yourself to the pot. On the river the pot would be $50 or so, how can we get away from that hand then...

__________________
ICM / EV Calculator and other free poker software

yea, but i didnt mean it in a sense that Mr.Mcj is gonna get stacked on the turn or the river cuz hes not gonna be able to fold 2pair..

What I was refering to when i mentioned implied odds, was the ratio of $$ he puts in ahead in this hand to the money he puts in behind (that is if he gets outdrawn on turn) in respect the potsizes on the flop and the turn. And by betting less on the flop, your giving your opponent a better ratio of "money put in behind on the flop: money put in ahead on the turn". So basically your giving him a better ratio to extract money out of you if he hits, in comparison to the amount of money he spends seeing the next card.

What i mean here by implied odds is that by betting so small on the flop, followed by betting harder on the turn (e.g for this case, it was betting 53% of the pot on the flop, followed by betting 77% of the pot on the turn), your gonna be putting in less money while ahead and more money while behind (in a ratio perspective). Therefore, it would work towards your benefit if you tried to reverse those numbers so that ur betting more while ahead and less while behind (e.g betting maybe 90% potsize on flop, and 75% potsize on turn).

Please, allow me to explain further. If I apply this to the hand that was played out above.

Say, in this example that your opponent had 58s (a OESD), and therefore hit his draw on the turn. Because of the way the hand played out, by betting first on the turn, your only going to get called or raised if your opponent hit his draw a majority of the time. If your opponent didnt hit, hes most likely dropping his hand to ur turn bet. Obviously, there are a ton of donkeys out there and this doesnt apply all the time, hence McJ getting called on the flop by someone holding only MP.

So assuming your opponent was calling the flop bet on a draw, either a OESD or a club flush draw (which is most likely what villian would hold here due to the way the flop was played out). And will only call/raise the turn if he had 58 and completed his straight.


Mr.McJ bets 4$ while ahead (53% potsize on flop)
And 12$ while behind (77%potsize on turn)

Therefore he puts in 12$ while behind, and 4$ while ahead in the hand. Thats a ratio of 3:1.. or 3$ put in behind for every 1$ put in ahead.

Now, on the other hand:

Say Mr.McJ bets 7$ on that flop (93% of the potsize on the flop)
and then bets 16.5$ while behind on the turn (77% potsize on turn <- the same % bet that McJ put on the previous)

Therefore he puts in 16.5$ while behind, and 7$ while ahead in the hand. Thats a ratio of 2.35:1... or 2.35$ put in behind for every 1$ put in ahead.

The latter is a much better ratio of $$ put in ahead: $$ put in behind.
And that is the reason why I advocate betting harder on the flop.

In any case, there is no crime in betting smaller on the flop. There are many ways to play the hand, and I am sure u gain some ev by 1/2 potting those flops, which u would have otherwised lost by betting 4/5 potsize. For example, your oppponent calling your 1/2 pot flop bet with only MP despite the fact that their was an Ace on the board <-- im sure that if u bet 90% of the potsize on that flop your opponent is probably folding his MP.

He was in the CO-1 folded to him. I'd raise or fold in his spot, probably fold about 80% of the time playing full ring, but he smashed the flop and made a normal continuation bet. No re-raise/isolation from the CO before the flop cuts down on the CO's calling range to bets around the pot with an Ace on the board.

AK-AQ: Just not very likely at all, IMO.
A9-AJ: He'll make a raise on the flop to the $4 bet to $10'ish to protect against a flush because he'll see monsters under the bed. Against a pot-size bet, he'll just call the $6-$7.
A8, A5-A2: He'll just call anything around the pot. But maybe raise anything under $5 to that $10 range.

88-TT: He'll fold to a PS bet and call or raise a smaller bet.
77-66: He'll raise any bet.
55-22 and random Broadways with or w/o a club draw: He'll fold to any bet, but more likely to take a stab at the pot to bet under $5 with a large raise in the $12-$15 range.

I like the flop bet because he's committed his opponent to take the worst of it on any turn and more than 35% of turns will be good for you as are river cards. I think Mc.J made the maximum effort to build the pot on the flop, but if it didn't work, he's getting called a lot (by someone taking the worst of it) and his opponent will feel committed to see the river whether he's mathematically committed or not.

__________________