In new hand analysis from 2CardsCollege, our coaches Yuri “iwantbearich” and Denis “Flat” analyze two interesting spots in major tournaments.

Hand #1

Denis’ hand from the $215 Sunday Second Chance on PokerStars.

We are opposed by the villain, whose stats are 20/12, SB 3-bet 8%, flop c-bet 82%, turn c-bet 31% (over 911 hands).

Denis: We make a default open-raise with this hand, get a 3-bet from the regular, who has leaks, and make a default call. We hit top pair and, I think, considering the villain’s c-bet, he would bet almost all of his range on this board texture, including medium pairs, so I have an easy call. On the turn, the villain checks a significant portion of his range and we have a value bet against him. However, the river is where things get complicated.

Yuri: How do you perceive the villain’s 3-bet range?

Denis: Apart from the value-range, the villain might 3-bet medium and low Ax hands, suited Broadway, and maybe hands like 77-99.

Yuri: Do you think the villain is the type of player who would barrel with a flush draw?

Denis: Judging by the statistics, the villain is inclined to barrel, although sometimes he should bet his flopped and turned draws. He would probably bet flush draws half of the time. I don’t know how often the villain would bet AK and whether he would check a set of aces on the flop, although we block the best hands pretty decently.

Yuri: I think the villain would most often multi-barrel with AK against your range. Nevertheless, he should take this line because you might pot-control medium Ax hands. Thus, for him it would be more +EV to play his value range aggressively, especially considering the fact that your possible floats are often calling the turn bet. Anyway, judging by his river play, he almost never has AK in his range.

Denis: I was confused by his river bet. In similar spots against opponents with no history who take an illogical line, I’m not inclined to fold strong hands on the river. Moreover, the villain might sometimes play unconventionally with medium hands. Also, what’s more important, I thought he should continue checking all of his value hands to induce a bluff bet from me. He should defend his check/calling line if he decided to check with all of his value range. Besides, he can induce bluffs with busted draws by checking.

Yuri: Would you bluff the river with busted draws?

Denis: Sometimes I would since I might make him fold hands like 99-KK. By the river, there are a lot of those hands in his range, which gives me an opportunity to make +EV bluffs. Anyway, I don’t have a lot of non-made hands by the river.

Yuri: I agree. Although his line confuses me, it is illogical from the point of how the villain should have played the value line, but at the same time I cannot think of a single hand that the villain would bluff with on the river like he did. So, we beat either some random bluff or a hand he turned into a bluff that is almost absent here.

Denis: His hand at the showdown surprised me. I guess the villain should not have a hand like this in his 3-bet range since it has a low post-flop playability. It is dominated and covers the board textures poorly.

Yuri: Yes, this is definitely a weird 3-bet with such a hand, especially in an early, pre-ante stage.

Hand #2

A hand from the regular $215 tournament. The villain is a creative regular, playing 17/14 over 418 hands, raise first 27%, the stats on his fold to 3-bet are non-representative.

Denis: An active, creative opponent opens from late position. I decide to 3-bet with the blocker since his stack is inconvenient for a bluff 4-bet and I would either play post-flop against a wide range or fold to a rare 4-bet push. Besides, the villain has never made a 4-bet at all and has often folded to a continuation bet.

Yuri: It is a pretty default pre-flop decision, especially since the villain often folds to a continuation bet.

Denis: I see no reason to bet more than one-third of the pot on a dry flop. I have a value bet on the flop. I guess he might call with a half of AA and KK pre-flop, but QQ, AQ, and AK would almost always 4-bet push. Yes, he has never made a 4-bet before, but there is a very small sample.

Yuri: What hands does the villain call the flop with?

Denis: Any Broadway cards with a gutshot, any ace, a straight, two pairs, and rarely slowplayed sets of aces and kings (but we have a blocker, so we should not really fear the latter). Thereafter, since I’m going to split the pot with weaker Ax hands on the river, I don’t have three streets of value with my hand and thus would prefer to hold off the aggression until the river. The plan was working until I got the check/shove. What do you think? What hands does his range include?

Yuri: Interesting development. I don’t see many nut hands in his range and you rarely have sets, two pairs, or a straight since you would most often bet the second barrel with them. I think a creative regular should understand this and his check/shove would contain not just value hands. He almost never has full houses, only a straight that only has four combos, and I don’t think the villain calls with an offsuit JT pre-flop.

Besides, his two pair KQ became worthless on the river, which he would not always 4-bet push, especially due to his tendency to call. He might turn this hand into a bluff since it has ideal blockers for your sets and two pairs. I also think the villain might sometimes turn an Ax hand into a bluff since your line represents a mediocre hand that he can make you fold and sometimes a creative opponent might bluff with a hand like KJ. Overall, it gives us enough equity for a call, so I think you made a correct decision against a creative opponent considering your line of play.

Denis: Bad luck.