4-20 spread limit holdem hand.

[Heywood]

Oh - you said that the guy has probably seen you check raise before. Is that something you do often? (I usually play PL or NL, and I very rarely check raise - admittedly it is more viable in limit and spread limit games.). Reason I ask is this - when I note someone is overusing the check raise, I'll make a point to 3 bet over them more often, even with air. I wouldn't want that to happen in this spot with a hand that has marginal showdown value.

Depends on the spot. Last night I was playing. On my immediate left is an off duty dealer who I would think is very familiar with my play. When ever I raised preflop, he would make it three bets. He has seen me fold quite a few times after raising and getting three bet. Of course with him I adjust by tightening up my raising range and open up my three bet calling range. He and I saw a lot of heads up flops. In virtually every one he would continuation bet. I know what he is doing, he is trying to take advantage of my propensity to fold to a continuation bet. Too counter that, I start check raising him with any draw and any made hand.

Check raise is a useful play in poker, and like any other play in poker you want to have a purpose before implementing it. In the above example I am check raising for value with made hands and as a semi bluff on speculative hands. Some sessions I don't check raise at all.....but my sessions are only a 2-3 hours long.

[Jackalope]

Depends on the spot. Last night I was playing. On my immediate left is an off duty dealer who I would think is very familiar with my play. When ever I raised preflop, he would make it three bets. He has seen me fold quite a few times after raising and getting three bet. Of course with him I adjust by tightening up my raising range and open up my three bet calling range.

Depending on how often you open raise, and how often he three bets you, I'd be considering 4 betting him on occasion as well.

Or, perhaps finding a different table. :p

He and I saw a lot of heads up flops. In virtually every one he would continuation bet. I know what he is doing, he is trying to take advantage of my propensity to fold to a continuation bet. Too counter that, I start check raising him with any draw and any made hand.

Yep, were I in his shoes, I would probably do the same thing (continuation bet a lot of hands when you check). (I'd also be coming over the top of your check raises more frequently than I ordinarily would.) Obviously, you don't want this guy, who has a fair read on your style, to manipulate your game - personally, I don't want someone like that on my left, ever - I want 'em on my right.

Consider mixing it up with 4-bets preflop and leading out on the flop yourself, occasionally at least - he'll catch on to your checkraises and start 3 betting you back. I would.

Check raise is a useful play in poker, and like any other play in poker you want to have a purpose before implementing it. In the above example I am check raising for value with made hands and as a semi bluff on speculative hands. Some sessions I don't check raise at all.....but my sessions are only a 2-3 hours long.

I agree it's a useful play, particularly in fixed/spread limit. It has utility in PL/NL as well, just less so - as it's easier to just size bets accordingly to get the results you want, while still exercising pot control. Risking giving a free card in PL/NL is something I would rather avoid. Hell, playing out of position is something I avoid like the plague - that probably factors a *lot* into my c/r frequency.

In limit, It's a good play to make with, as you say, made hands (and I'd amend that to read *strong* made hands [strong being relative to your opponent's c-bet range]), as well as draws, and I'd throw in some complete air there as well for metagame - in other words, there should be some mix of strong hand, semi-bluff, and bluff, otherwise you're easier to read. I don't want to c/r hands that have modest showdown value - I think turning those hands into bluffs has far less utility than using them as bluff catchers (such as the hand from the OP, I'd probably never c/r there, certainly less often than I'd call down [which itself would not be often, except heads up against a very loose-aggressive player]).

[Heywood]

Depends on the spot. Last night I was playing. On my immediate left is an off duty dealer who I would think is very familiar with my play. When ever I raised preflop, he would make it three bets. He has seen me fold quite a few times after raising and getting three bet. Of course with him I adjust by tightening up my raising range and open up my three bet calling range.

Depending on how often you open raise, and how often he three bets you, I'd be considering 4 betting him on occasion as well.

Or, perhaps finding a different table. :p

I should have just asked for a seat change button and gotten him to my right. I used to ask for a seat change button the minute I sit down at a table. If a better seat opened up, I'd move to it. I've gotten lax and need to get back into that habit.

Anyways here is a hand from tonight's session that I picked to do my off table work. 2-10 spread. Table is 8 handed. Suits don't matter in this hand. UTG("under the gun"/first to act) limps. I make it 12. Young kid on button calls. UTG makes it 22.

I have AQo and I call, kid calls.

No reads on the young kid. UTG....some gal who I don't think likes me very much because every time I enter a pot, its been for 12 and she has had to muck after limping in for 2. She was a little mad that I didn't chop with her earlier(I don't chop....ever). I have seen her play before...I note that she calls way too much but can be aggressive and tricky.

Flop: J T 9, UTG bets($10), I call, kid calls.
Turn: a brick, UTG checks, I bet($10), kid calls.
River: a brick, UTG checks.......

Pot is about $126

The pot is big, but I whiffed it. I have feeling UTG whiffed it too. Its the kid I am worried about the most. I bet it hoping they both fold. At the time I figure if they both fold 10% of the time, the bluff breaks even. If they both fold more than 10% of the time, the bluff makes money. Off table I figured the bluff bet breaks even if it works 7.3% of the time. The break even formula for a bluff(if anyone is interested) is: Bet/(Bet + Pot).

Anyways kid folds, UTG calls. I turn over AQo making a comment "If you can call me you have me beat"....and she mucks! I'm shocked as the pot gets pushed too me. The kid realizes he folded the best hand...but takes it pretty well.

What hand(s) do you think she mucked?

My guess:

---

A8s or A8o

---

My 3 bet/over the top range with this gal got a lot wider.

[Jackalope]

Her limp reraise UTG was terribad in this situation. I'm putting her on Qx or 8x, more likely A8 but I've seen people show up with 86 or some shit before.

The kid on the button is pretty bad - no, make that really bad. If he had anything with showdown value, he should be calling you there, like every time - given the pot odds. Cold calling both raises was super idiotic. He probable had A9 or AT, or some other 2nd/3rd pair hand, perhaps an underpair.

Absent a read on UTG, I don't like calling a limp reraise with AQo, but I assume your reason was sound, so ignore me on that minor critique. Other than that, I like how you played it. You can't not stab at it on both the turn and the river when she checks to you. I don't expect both to fold very often, though (course, they don't have to).

[Heywood]

Absent a read on UTG, I don't like calling a limp reraise with AQo, but I assume your reason was sound, so ignore me on that minor critique.

Her limp check raise didn't scare me like it would if it came from another player....But at the time I am still putting her in the premium hand range in my head. This is the hand I have chosen to do some off table work.....so let lets do some. I use equilab to do a lot of my off table work. If you don't know what equilab is watch this:





UTG's Assumed Range: JJ+,AKs,AKo
My Range: AQo
Kid's Assumed Range: JJ-22,AQs-A2s,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,76s,65s,54s,AQo-A2o,K9o+,Q9o+,J9o+,T9o

Plug those ranges into Equilab and it tells us:
UTG wins: 56.43%
I wins: 23.13%
Kid wins: 20.43%

When I am faced with the limp check raise I figure the kid will call behind me and close the action. Because I assume the kid will call behind me, I can figure I am getting 5.6 to 1 on the call. With those pot odds I need to win 15.15% of the time to break even. Since I win 23.13% of the time, it is a good call. If the kid folds, I am getting 4.6 to 1 on the call and need to win 17.86% of the time to break even and according to equilab I win 28.15% of the time if he folds......still a good call.

The problem with this analysis is equilab assumes we always go to a showdown. In real life poker that is very often not the case. Still with the kid in the pot, I think I am more than okay calling the limp check raise.

[Jackalope]

Absent a read on UTG, I don't like calling a limp reraise with AQo, but I assume your reason was sound, so ignore me on that minor critique.

Her limp check raise didn't scare me like it would if it came from another player....But at the time I am still putting her in the premium hand range in my head.

In big bet games in particular, this play screams "I have aces!!111!!!" - or at least they want you to think so. In limit, yeah, it usually means "I have a big hand and want to build a big pot.", in retrospect, clearly not the case here.

Be that as it may, I get thet the UTG player was sick of your shit, and was using this to play back at you, probably with something significantly less than aces.

This is the hand I have chosen to do some off table work.....so let lets do some. I use equilab to do a lot of my off table work. If you don't know what equilab is watch this:

I'm not familiar with equilab in particular, but I am well versed in equity calculations in general

UTG's Assumed Range: JJ+,AKs,AKo
My Range: AQo
Kid's Assumed Range: JJ-22,AQs-A2s,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,76s,65s,54s,AQo-A2o,K9o+,Q9o+,J9o+,T9o

I think your range on the kid might be greatly optimistic, unless you've got a read on him that he's going to cold call any reasonably playable hand (twice!, with a player left to act the first time). (By "reasonably playable", I of course do *not* mean "reasonably playable by a clued player". I mean "reasonably playable under some imagined circumstance other than this one.").

Meh. I agree he's probably got a wide range here nonetheless, and it probably doesn't skew the equity calc too much.

UTG's Assumed Range: Plug those ranges into Equilab and it tells us:
UTG wins: 56.43%
I wins: 23.13%
Kid wins: 20.43%

When I am faced with the limp check raise I figure the kid will call behind me and close the action. Because I assume the kid will call behind me, I can figure I am getting 5.6 to 1 on the call. With those pot odds I need to win 15.15% of the time to break even. Since I win 23.13% of the time, it is a good call. If the kid folds, I am getting 4.6 to 1 on the call and need to win 17.86% of the time to break even and according to equilab I win 28.15% of the time if he folds still a good call.

The problem with this analysis is equilab assumes we always go to a showdown. In real life poker that is very often not the case.

True, equity calcs don't account for fold equity, but of course you're factoring the small amount of fold equity you have here when you bet the turn and river.

You've definitely got equity for a preflop call here, by the numbers, there's no disputing that, and I don't have a great deal of criticism for the hand as played.... Except for one thing...

If you're assuming UTG's preflop range for the limp-reraise is JJ+/AK (and that the kid on the button is essentially dead money), I'm not quite sure what kind of flop you're hoping to come here. You hit only an ace, you're killed by over half of UTG's range (AA, AK). You hit top pair with a queen, you're crushed by AA,KK,QQ and beat JJ/AK, provided no jack also hits. If you miss, you're crushed against that range. Your odds of hitting two pair are pretty terrible.

Not arguing against the way you played it, I don't really see a fold anywhere in the hand *at all* - but if you had a different textured flop, you probably would have (e.g. one that doesn't give you a made hand or halfway decent draw). My analysis above is more for readers who aren't well versed.

(I also am fully aware that my background is in NL/PL, where these sorts of spots also have significant reverse implied odds to factor in, which is less of a concern in limit.)