Experts from 2CardsCollege Pro Poker Training continue to review the most interesting hands received from PocketFives users.

1) https://www.weaktight.com/h/55eea525d39043003d8b45d3

This hand converted incorrectly; Hero had JhJs. He had 55 hands on the villain with 16/11 image. The rest of the stats are not representative.

Let us picture the villain’s approximate range of calling a 3-bet:

Green marks the hands that the villain would either fold or 4-bet with 50/50 probability. Considering his stack’s depth, he would most likely call with TT and JJ.

He would also often call with QQ+ to extract value from the bluff portion of the range when there are no aggressive dynamics at the table. With such a deep stack, the villain would not often go all-in pre-flop since it would mean overplaying his hand and the best he can get is a slightly plus EV coin flip because Hero’s range of 5-bet push is quite narrow.

First, I would like to note the flop texture. I don’t like checking with a top set since the villain would often call our c-bet with straight draws, second and third pairs with backdoor draws.

In fact, many players would even call with big AX hands here, which would add up to 75% of hands in the villain’s calling range. Even though Hero blocks some of the villain’s calling hands with top set, the screenshot shows that the villain has hit this flop with almost all of the bottom of his range. If we check (which I consider the second best option), a lot of hands would take a free card and realize their equity for free, which is not what we want to happen.

I think the best textures for checking with top set are the following: rainbow flops like J84, J73, J92 etc., since the villain would semi-bluff bet after we checked. Besides, big AX hands would rarely try to make us fold and instead try to realize their mediocre or small showdown value. Thus, this structure is more suitable for a c-bet, especially since we do not know the opponent’s post-flop tendencies.

However, Hero checked and the villain checked behind. I guess the villain would always bet any set, two pairs, top pairs (maybe he would check J9 and JT), and most of his bluffs. I kept 20% probability of a check back with gutshots since the villain would most often bet those hands as well.

I don’t like the turn sizing because the turn significantly strengthened the villain’s range of checking behind and many hands would pay us. Thus, I would have bet 2,600 to 2,800 instead of 1,935.

The river is not so good for us, but a lot of hands would call Hero’s bet, since his line does not look strong. He would bet overpairs and top pairs from the flop, so his range looks like weakest top pairs and some overcards he did not want to bluff on a flop like that. From the villain’s point of view, there are mostly bluff combos in our range. It is much more important for us to bet/fold because:

1. The villain has almost no pure bluffs and busted draws in his range
2. The villain would not turn any of his pairs into a bluff

This is why it is a really bad idea to check the river against a range that mostly consists of bluff catchers. I also think that Hero could make a very good check/fold in this hand for the same reasons I stated above. High overcards (AQ+) would most often check the river, all hits would check, and the only busted hand is A9. This hand can be in the range since Hero made a small turn bet. Thus, only flushes and A9 would bet the river.

We don’t have enough equity for a check/call since there are too few bluffs in the villain’s range. Even if he bets top pair or tries to extract thin value with TT or 99, he would not bet so much, which looks like a value bet. It would be hard for me to check/fold the river if I found myself in a hand played out like this.

Conclusion: bet/bet/bet all streets. As played, Hero has a difficult check/fold on the river. This hand shows us how important it is to calculate combinations and possible outcomes for the villain’s various hand categories and, accordingly, his actions in order to make the best decision.

2) https://www.weaktight.com/h/55ef735fd3904322668b478a

This is a hand from €75 tournament on iPoker. The villain seems to be a tight regular; his image is 20/12 with a 3-bet of 4 and c-bet of 50, call open CO 17(12), BTN 36(20) over 238 hands. Another opponent is quite weak, playing 24/13 over 288 hands.

This example, like the previous one, shows how crucial it is to be able not to commit to your hand’s absolute strength and keep your head cool to make a correct decision.

First, I call a 3-bet to keep the villain’s range as wide as possible. If I 4-bet, all worse hands would fold and I don’t want to stack off against KK+. The 3-bet overcall from the weak opponent does not change my plan at all. Let’s define the villain’s 3-bet range:

I think it would be fair to assume the villain would sometimes bluff 3-bet A2s-A5s, giving it a 50/50 probability. The villain often calls pre-flop from late position, so I guess his range is polarized and mostly contains premium hands.

On a flop like this, the villain would only bet JJ, KK+ and KQ+; he simply would not bluff with A2s-A5s, AK or TT. The villain checks 62% of his hands:

When I played this hand, it did not occur to me that I should bet since I blocked a lot of villain’s value hands and he would check more often than he would bet. Besides, if I bet one-third of the pot, it would not look too strong. No one would think I could donk bet two pairs or a set; thus, I would extend the villain’s range. In addition, a weak player is still in the hand and I cannot allow myself to lose a street of value; actually, the weak player is now our primary target.

As played, I think I should have raised the villain’s turn bet since a lot of hands would pay me considering this line and the turn card. My call gave the pre-flop aggressor good odds to call with his gutshots for AK and flushes, while he would easily fold TX.

The gutshot gets there on the river and, once again, this is a situation where the villain just does not have enough bluffs to give my bluff catchers enough equity for a call even if he bets one-third or one-half of the pot.

He has no more than three low AXs combos that did not catch their flush. There are 16 AK

combos, which means he should bet really small to make my call at least slightly positive EV.

I spent almost the whole time bank and called knowing I would most likely lose this pot, but I just could not part with top set.

Conclusion: this fold is not as hard as the one from the previous hand. It is important to understand that in most hands like this, villains play this line honestly because they make their range transparent by checking. This hand is a no-brainer, but I wanted to show it to you because I’m sure it often happens to you too. I guess I’m not the only one who knew he was beaten but could not make a fold. I would like to remind you that correct analysis is your first priority. Trust yourself.

Do you want 2CardsCollege expert to analyze your hand? Just send it to mail@2cardscollege.com or post it in the training program thread.

In order to facilitate the process, please post your hands here in a converted format using сonverters like weaktight.com or similar. Links to the posted hands or screenshots from the hand viewer in Holdem Manager are okay too. We will accept your hands for review from today and our coaches will have the analysis ready for you within a week from the receipt.