pokerstars Game #59544475005: Tournament #412020020, $200+$15 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level XXII (4000/8000) - 2011/03/21 1:01:03 ET
Table '412020020 65' 9-max Seat #4 is the button
Seat 1: GCWV (750460 in chips)
Seat 4: tuck you up (408010 in chips)
Seat 6: LISTILLO (251976 in chips)
Seat 7: zwuerbs (396292 in chips)
Seat 8: Aduobe4 (183420 in chips)
Seat 9: lukro8 (155053 in chips)
GCWV: posts the ante 800
tuck you up: posts the ante 800
LISTILLO: posts the ante 800
zwuerbs: posts the ante 800
Aduobe4: posts the ante 800
lukro8: posts the ante 800
LISTILLO: posts small blind 4000
zwuerbs: posts big blind 8000
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to tuck you up [Ac 9c]
Aduobe4: folds
lukro8: folds
GCWV: raises 10800 to 18800
tuck you up: raises 19970 to 38770
LISTILLO: folds
zwuerbs: folds
GCWV: calls 19970
*** FLOP *** [Js 5c 8c]
GCWV: checks
tuck you up: bets 38200
GCWV: raises 98200 to 136400

GCWV has flatted my 3 bets and ch/folded and has ch called me, but only ch/raised once to my knowledge...

I am snap jamming and hoping he doesn't hit one of his 6 outs.

 

Originally Posted by Frank1The1Tank

I would 3b a little bigger pre, you guys are 50 bb deep so it would be a mistake with any hand imo, you barely 2x'd his open. On flop I'd cbet a little bigger on this drawy of a board. MTTers often make the mistake of betting really small every single time in 3b pots but they don't really know why they do it. They just see other people doing it and follow the crowd. Your bet size should vary based on board texture and stack sizes. I'd cbet somewhere around 48k. As played I'm definitely not folding, you have a bunch of his draws crushed so it's a standard jam.

I kinda understand where you are coming from with the cbet size... but in this case I would like a smaller cbet so that your opponent can have a larger check/raise bluffing range
Still not folding as played

I think the preflop sizing is fine, I know some really, really good players who 3-bet that size. I think the average villain might actually 4-bet tighter over the small 3-bet, as he is more likely to hood flat the 3bet with 89s than to 4b/f. We have position and the initiative in this hand, so I think preflop is fine.

Still not doing anything but jamming this flop tho, our hand is just too big.

tru ty, i ended up folding b/c i didnt see this guy playing a draw like this (the large sized raise) thought he had it and knew if i folded i still had enough to play. ended up comin in 6th, this pot prolly woulda locked up a higher spot :p

 

Originally Posted by Pghfan987

We need 39.7% equity when we jam if villain calls EVERY SINGLE TIME. We have 41.5% against sets, 6c7c, and all club royal flush drawing hands preflop (KcQc, etc.) Folding is undoubtedly wrong.

This exactly, folding isnt even an option if your 3betting this hand in this spot. Tucks my old roommate and I always play to win, surprised by this honestly. I do see your reasoning but its purely mathematically correct to wager the remaining amounts of your chips.

In regards to Frank and his comments about cbeting size I do agree about people going with the crowd and on certain boards you should be betting differently. However in this spot I actually like betting a lil smaller with the effective stacks to give room for fold equity when c/r and im planning to 3b all in with a hand like Tucks.

 

Originally Posted by Frank1The1Tank

I would 3b a little bigger pre, you guys are 50 bb deep so it would be a mistake with any hand imo, you barely 2x'd his open. On flop I'd cbet a little bigger on this drawy of a board. MTTers often make the mistake of betting really small every single time in 3b pots but they don't really know why they do it. They just see other people doing it and follow the crowd. Your bet size should vary based on board texture and stack sizes. I'd cbet somewhere around 48k. As played I'm definitely not folding, you have a bunch of his draws crushed so it's a standard jam.

I disagree 2 of franks points in this thread.
First, I think saying that a 2x sized 3 bet with any hand is a mistake on the button 50 bbs deep needs to be backed up with evidence - I bet I can show a profit 2xing a wide range of hands OTB in this spot. I vary my 3 bet sizes alot based on what I want accomplished, my opponent, and how I expect them to react to a small 3 bet vs a large 3 bet. The arguments I would anticipate against a tiny 3 bet in this spot would be that our opponent is a.) going to call more pre-flop and b.) sizing might induce a light 4 bet. I think, for instance, AQ would be a great hand to make a tiny 3 bet with here since hands like QJ, QK, AJ, AT etc are always calling pre-flop and stacks are perfect to 3 bet to 5 bet. If we know our opponent doesn't 4 bet very aggressive I don't see anything wrong with gaining a cheap initiative in the hand with A9s. Although, tbh I think I stick to 2.4-2.7x in this spot more often in this particular situation. That being said, I think a mistake alot of regs make is sticking to static rules about how we should play in each situation rather than think and about what our plays are actually accomplishing.

Which leads me to the flop bet sizing. Yes, board texture should be a consideration with bet sizing and I always think its pretty silly when regs bet 1/3 pot 200 bbs deep on QJ8dd but in this specific instance I see nothing wrong with a small bet as it probably induces bluff-raises and it sets up stack perfectly to bet/3bet (btw in this hand I think there is no other option other than going all-in). I would like to know your argument against betting small in a re-raised pot. I suppose you're saying that we can't effectively rep a big hand when we bet smallish since big hands would try to "protect" against draws? There's some merit to that argument, but since we can easily get all in by river and have position I would still probably be betting smallish with my overpairs and sets.

Basically, I get what you're saying overall, and I kind of agree but not in this spot. I think you are misapplying good concepts in regard to your opinions about this hand. Sure, betting a little bigger on draw heavy boards and smaller on dry boards is a good concept to be aware of but, uniformly applying it in your game without thinking about what it actually accomplishes is probably a mistake.

 

Originally Posted by SJUHawks18

I kinda understand where you are coming from with the cbet size... but in this case I would like a smaller cbet so that your opponent can have a larger check/raise bluffing range
Still not folding as played

completely agree. as played im happily getting it in because i c-bet this small for exactly this

flashdisastr, that sums up what I was saying a bit but is also far too simplistic for actual use. You can't really just bet big when you want an opponent to c/s or bet small when you want to b/3b jam on a super drawy board or etc vs good players. These bets are too transparent and a good hand reader will pretty much know exactly what you are trying to do if you adjust your bets based on your hand strength. That's not to say balance is all that necessary vs weak opponents (its not at all in fact) but even decent players can catch on to bet sizing and obviously very good ones will look very deeply into it. It is a bit of a leveling war sometimes but tbh board textures and ranges due to the nature of mtts force you to make bets according to that rather than just min betting or potting or 1/3 potting on every type of board. Hope that made sense.