PAHWM - ATo blind vs blind (1 Viewer)

Gratuitous tanking including counting of chips and re-checking of hole cards, followed by a heart-achingly slow fold.

Edit: forgot this was online. But you do have audio, so announce "Your 74 is good" and fold.
 
CO 21.52
Btn 131.90
SB (villain) 42.25
BB (hero) 66.28

CO and Btn folds and villain opens to 0.60

Hero has :as::td:
hero?

I think I prefer a call to a 3-bet, but it's close. I tend not to escalate pots with maniacs, I am just trying to see flops cheap with stronger or more mediocre hands where I can easily exploit aggression later in the hand, or just lose the minimum if I miss. If I do 3 bet, I am going for a pretty stiff sizing of 4-5x over the raise amount. (So 2.50- 3), then I stand to win some pots where I would otherwise be only a 60-40 favorite or less if villian is going to give up a hunk of his steal openings.

Looks like a mix of sometimes calling and sometimes 3-betting is the way to go here. I agree and because of current game flow I decided to 3-bet to 1.80 Villain makes a speech saying something like ”well, then I’ll take my 74 and 4-bet it” (we have video/audio) and 4-bets to 4.80

Hero?
I don't love the sizing, but I think villain undersized his 4-bet as well. It's now 3 to call to win almost 7. It's a disaster if villian happens to have AA or a better Ax, but even against KK and pairs downward, the price is still decent.

Seems no one wants to disagree with @Changster that ATo is a fold vs the 4-bet. Hero agrees, but folding is no fun and I thought there was an above average chance villain could be bluffing. Hence, hero calls the 4.80 and we take a flop :wtf:

:ah::3s::9d: (9.60)

villain c-bets 3.20
Hero?

Now you have to make the decision for the whole hand. If you call here, you are playing this hand to station it all the way. Which is valid if you think villain has too many bluffs on this line. Otherwise fold now and question why you held on to ATo facing a 4-bet if not to act on this flop.

Personally, if I am playing AT against a maniac here and catch this flop, I am 100% check raising it, and folding to a 3-bet. I want that extra data point that he has a better ace before I give the hand up. I am going to make it like 13-15 here and if villain finds the shove button, he earns it. (I would much rather make this play in a smaller pot however, because it is a risky spot if we are way behind.)

If you play this to station, it's going to cost you more to get to showdown if villain bets 3 streets.
 
[...]

Personally, if I am playing AT against a maniac here and catch this flop, I am 100% check raising it, and folding to a 3-bet. I want that extra data point that he has a better ace before I give the hand up. I am going to make it like 13-15 here and if villain finds the shove button, he earns it. (I would much rather make this play in a smaller pot however, because it is a risky spot if we are way behind.)

If you play this to station, it's going to cost you more to get to showdown if villain bets 3 streets.
I'm not a fan of the raise to see where I'm at play. This is very 2006 and on a board as dry as this you're either telegraphing your hand and opening yourself up to get bluff jammed or you're folding out all of villains bluffs which you could call down in position here.
I agree though that the flop is the point where you have to make the decision if you put villain on a bluff or not.
If you do, go for it, but let him bluff it off.
 
I'm not a fan of the raise to see where I'm at play. This is very 2006 and on a board as dry as this you're either telegraphing your hand and opening yourself up to get bluff jammed or you're folding out all of villains bluffs which you could call down in position here.
I agree though that the flop is the point where you have to make the decision if you put villain on a bluff or not.
If you do, go for it, but let him bluff it off.
I agree, raising seems like a mistake. It will eliminate any hand that we beat from villain’s range.
 
Well mr. Inconsistency found a fold on the turn, which I hate in retrospect. I called pre and on the flop because I thought I will likely be ahead enough of the time. On the turn though he had me convinced he held a bigger ace. I just figured it’s unlikely he thinks I will fold an ace but I realize he probably put me on something like jacks.

Anyway, the bastard @OfficerLovejoy showed me T7o. You got me, nh :love:
 
I'm not a fan of the raise to see where I'm at play. This is very 2006 and on a board as dry as this you're either telegraphing your hand and opening yourself up to get bluff jammed or you're folding out all of villains bluffs which you could call down in position here.
I do see what you are saying, and in fairness, I would not have gone for the 3 bet pre so the decision between the check raise or playing to station wouldn't be so high leverage.

If you do, go for it, but let him bluff it off.
Agreed, but then you have to have the stomach to call 3 barrels. If you have any doubt about that, you have to pass now (which makes calling the 4-bet a pretty big mistake, but that's okay if you decide to stop compounding here) or the plan is to get a raise in with a favorable flop, which this should be.
 
@Eriks , since you seem to have a database of the hands, please post the three "tragic" ones, when four-handed.:D
From anybody's viewpoint.
 
I do see what you are saying, and in fairness, I would not have gone for the 3 bet pre so the decision between the check raise or playing to station wouldn't be so high leverage.


Agreed, but then you have to have the stomach to call 3 barrels. If you have any doubt about that, you have to pass now (which makes calling the 4-bet a pretty big mistake, but that's okay if you decide to stop compounding here) or the plan is to get a raise in with a favorable flop, which this should be.
I agree the biggest mistake was probably calling the 4-bet pre
 
I agree the biggest mistake was probably calling the 4-bet pre
Initially, I was okay with it because the price was attractive because the 4-bet size was small. But the more I think about it, there are two good reasons to fold.

1) I think better Ax plus AA is going to make up enough of villain's range here, especially if we have second thoughts about how to continue on a dry A-hi flop.
2) I assume ATo is probably about the weakest hand we would 3-bet pre from this spot (maybe KQ?) so it makes sense that if we are constructing a 3-bet fold range, ATo is a good candidate, we will be here with AK and AQ as well, hands we can defend with far less worry (and hands we can go for value more aggressively on an A hi flop)

Personally I like flatting pre, but my basic strategy is for a very wide calling range in the blinds so having stronger calling hands in range helps me when I am defending with (far) weaker hands as well.
 
@Eriks , since you seem to have a database of the hands, please post the three "tragic" ones, when four-handed.:D
From anybody's viewpoint.
Sorry Niko, it’s too much work. The hand history does not lend itself to copy paste, it’s messy and reads bottom to top. The table is still there if you follow the link
 
Initially, I was okay with it because the price was attractive because the 4-bet size was small. But the more I think about it, there are two good reasons to fold.

1) I think better Ax plus AA is going to make up enough of villain's range here, especially if we have second thoughts about how to continue on a dry A-hi flop.
2) I assume ATo is probably about the weakest hand we would 3-bet pre from this spot (maybe KQ?) so it makes sense that if we are constructing a 3-bet fold range, ATo is a good candidate, we will be here with AK and AQ as well, hands we can defend with far less worry (and hands we can go for value more aggressively on an A hi flop)

Personally I like flatting pre, but my basic strategy is for a very wide calling range in the blinds so having stronger calling hands in range helps me when I am defending with (far) weaker hands as well.
I think this makes a lot of sense, I like it
 
Well mr. Inconsistency found a fold on the turn, which I hate in retrospect. I called pre and on the flop because I thought I will likely be ahead enough of the time. On the turn though he had me convinced he held a bigger ace. I just figured it’s unlikely he thinks I will fold an ace but I realize he probably put me on something like jacks.

Anyway, the bastard @OfficerLovejoy showed me T7o. You got me, nh :love:

Lolz,

I don't know if folding to the K on the turn makes you "mr. inconsistency," the K is a key card on the turn because now KK has you beat and was surely in villain's range, not to mention if you had 3 outs of equity before, now you are drawing stone dead to ace-king.

But yes, I think 3 betting aggressive players with deep stacks is a troublesome, overused play with good-but-not-great starting hands, especially out of position. If you flatted pre, playing to station the hand is a less swingy proposition. Bloating the pot and having doubts when you get the flop you should attack proves the mistake.
 
I am calling this down all the way based on history. I don't like the flop check raise play with AT because you fold out everything you beat and you keep in everything that beats you (does A9 call a check raise here? Maybe I guess). By flatting, it lets V continue with bluffs here.

I dislike the turn fold. I think you have a great opportunity to let V stack off if he is capable. 4 handed, I am not afraid of monsters. You say KK now beats you, but KQ and the likes now have a reason to go all the way with you. This is also why I am probably much more suited to play LHE than NLHE...."mistakes" like this are less expensive.

I am calling any river bet as well....and the bigger the better (more likely to be a bluff). If he checks river, I don't know if we can get "value" with AT from worse....check back.
 
I am calling this down all the way based on history. I don't like the flop check raise play with AT because you fold out everything you beat and you keep in everything that beats you (does A9 call a check raise here? Maybe I guess). By flatting, it lets V continue with bluffs here.

Yeah, I guess in my mind, check raising the flop here is to try and take down what's out there and not risk getting blown off the best hand later. I'm going to make villain decide if he wants to rip it now or not.

That said, you seem to have the conviction you are going to station this to the end, so check-calling now makes sense so long as you will not waiver from that resolve. Otherwise, you are better off cutting out now.

I think I would prefer to reduce the risk of getting bluffed later (which is what happened in the actual hand) by raising flop now, even if it isn't for "value." (But then again when you really think about it, how may flops really let you play AT hard for value, it's really just aces-up, trips, and broadways, right? Also given the villain, we aren't playing for "value" aggro guy is going to put us to the test no matter what. Which is why I question the merit of the 3-bet pre, even if we are usually "ahead" of villain's range here, that's not the whole story.)
 
Yeah, I guess in my mind, check raising the flop here is to try and take down what's out there and not risk getting blown off the best hand later. I'm going to make villain decide if he wants to rip it now or not.

That said, you seem to have the conviction you are going to station this to the end, so check-calling now makes sense so long as you will not waiver from that resolve. Otherwise, you are better off cutting out now.

I think I would prefer to reduce the risk of getting bluffed later (which is what happened in the actual hand) by raising flop now, even if it isn't for "value." (But then again when you really think about it, how may flops really let you play AT hard for value, it's really just aces-up, trips, and broadways, right? Also given the villain, we aren't playing for "value" aggro guy is going to put us to the test no matter what. Which is why I question the merit of the 3-bet pre, even if we are usually "ahead" of villain's range here, that's not the whole story.)
I respect where you are coming from, but look at that board! Is there a better spot to let an aggro guy blast off on you? There's no reasonable 2 pairs or draws. If he has a better Ax, then we are in trouble. But for most of an aggro range, we are groovy.
 
I respect where you are coming from, but look at that board! Is there a better spot to let an aggro guy blast off on you? There's no reasonable 2 pairs or draws. If he has a better Ax, then we are in trouble. But for most of an aggro range, we are groovy.
That's a tough point to debate, and to be honest, if I had flatted pre and kept the pot small, I would probably take that line 100%. Maybe go for a sneaky raise on the river too if I am feeling some FPS, just on the off chance I can get a crying call from a Kx.

But when the pot gets big, it's worth raising for even if you don't expect to get called by worse in my mind if it prevents a mistake later.
 
Alrighty, this is the first hand I've had discussed in a public forum where I'm the villain so I feel obligated to share the thoughts I had while playing the hand against @Eriks .

I might be desperately grasping for straws to justify me spazzing out, but here goes:

I've played with Erik for about 16 hours over 4 sessions and I see him as a smart thinking player, positionally aware, and I've seen him make some great laydowns where he correctly found the fold on later streets.
He's also made some great calls especially against players that proved to be on the bluffier side (so yeah, mostly me). So he is definitely not a prime target to pick on but when you're down to 4 handed choices become slim.
I've also perceived him as the tightest player in our fun little game as he correctly assessed in his opening post.

All this led me to decide to run a big bluff against him when the opportunity came and the board came out favorably.

My hand was definately not a great hand to go to war with since I would've liked to block his stronger holdings with an ace or king but when we got heads-up in a blind battle I figured to go with my plan.

When he 3 bet my raise I 4 bet to fold to a 5 bet (obviously) or to continue the hand as the aggressor when we go to a flop.

When @Eriks just calls my 4 bet I immediatly range him below AA KK and AK. As far as I can tell, he has not yet slowplayed any of the aformentioned hands preflop and would've 5 bet any of them (this does not have to be true, but it was what I believed to be true at this point).
I ranged him on A2- A5s, any pocket pair below QQ, AQ, AJ, AT and random high suited connectors like KQs, JTs ect.

When the flop came a very dry A93 rainbow this was actually perfect for me to keep the bluff going. I'd be up against underpairs and small Aces a lot all of which I have a range advantage against as the 4 bettor.
I bet small, about 1/3 pot as I'd do with pretty much all of my range on a dry A high flop as the aggressor and fired again on the K to fold out any underpairs and small aces that just cannot call if he does not put me on a pure bluff.

Since there was no flush or straight draw on the board I could be sure that he would not raise me on a semibluff AND that he knows I could not be betting a draw here and decide to get sticky with a small Ace.

Once in a while he'll show up with AQ, 99 or A3s that he'll not fold but there are a ton more hands that I beat with my perceived 4 bet range and that'll just fold on the turn or on the river.

So this was my thought process.
 
Alrighty, this is the first hand I've had discussed in a public forum where I'm the villain so I feel obligated to share the thoughts I had while playing the hand against @Eriks .

I might be desperately grasping for straws to justify me spazzing out, but here goes:

I've played with Erik for about 16 hours over 4 sessions and I see him as a smart thinking player, positionally aware, and I've seen him make some great laydowns where he correctly found the fold on later streets.
He's also made some great calls especially against players that proved to be on the bluffier side (so yeah, mostly me). So he is definitely not a prime target to pick on but when you're down to 4 handed choices become slim.
I've also perceived him as the tightest player in our fun little game as he correctly assessed in his opening post.

All this led me to decide to run a big bluff against him when the opportunity came and the board came out favorably.

My hand was definately not a great hand to go to war with since I would've liked to block his stronger holdings with an ace or king but when we got heads-up in a blind battle I figured to go with my plan.

When he 3 bet my raise I 4 bet to fold to a 5 bet (obviously) or to continue the hand as the aggressor when we go to a flop.

When @Eriks just calls my 4 bet I immediatly range him below AA KK and AK. As far as I can tell, he has not yet slowplayed any of the aformentioned hands preflop and would've 5 bet any of them (this does not have to be true, but it was what I believed to be true at this point).
I ranged him on A2- A5s, any pocket pair below QQ, AQ, AJ, AT and random high suited connectors like KQs, JTs ect.

When the flop came a very dry A93 rainbow this was actually perfect for me to keep the bluff going. I'd be up against underpairs and small Aces a lot all of which I have a range advantage against as the 4 bettor.
I bet small, about 1/3 pot as I'd do with pretty much all of my range on a dry A high flop as the aggressor and fired again on the K to fold out any underpairs and small aces that just cannot call if he does not put me on a pure bluff.

Since there was no flush or straight draw on the board I could be sure that he would not raise me on a semibluff AND that he knows I could not be betting a draw here and decide to get sticky with a small Ace.

Once in a while he'll show up with AQ, 99 or A3s that he'll not fold but there are a ton more hands that I beat with my perceived 4 bet range and that'll just fold on the turn or on the river.

So this was my thought process.
Thank you for sharing! I like how you played it, bet sizing and all. You are tough to play against and it’s a fun challenge. I look forward to getting into some more battles next time. I may have to get a little bit more sticky, we’ll see ;)
 
Thank you for sharing! I like how you played it, bet sizing and all. You are tough to play against and it’s a fun challenge. I look forward to getting into some more battles next time. I may have to get a little bit more sticky, we’ll see ;)
Always a pleasure to play against you. I like a challenge as well. Until we meet again next time... maybe with me in position for once. ;)
 
Alrighty, this is the first hand I've had discussed in a public forum where I'm the villain so I feel obligated to share the thoughts I had while playing the hand against @Eriks .

I might be desperately grasping for straws to justify me spazzing out, but here goes:

I've played with Erik for about 16 hours over 4 sessions and I see him as a smart thinking player, positionally aware, and I've seen him make some great laydowns where he correctly found the fold on later streets.
He's also made some great calls especially against players that proved to be on the bluffier side (so yeah, mostly me). So he is definitely not a prime target to pick on but when you're down to 4 handed choices become slim.
I've also perceived him as the tightest player in our fun little game as he correctly assessed in his opening post.

All this led me to decide to run a big bluff against him when the opportunity came and the board came out favorably.

My hand was definately not a great hand to go to war with since I would've liked to block his stronger holdings with an ace or king but when we got heads-up in a blind battle I figured to go with my plan.

When he 3 bet my raise I 4 bet to fold to a 5 bet (obviously) or to continue the hand as the aggressor when we go to a flop.

When @Eriks just calls my 4 bet I immediatly range him below AA KK and AK. As far as I can tell, he has not yet slowplayed any of the aformentioned hands preflop and would've 5 bet any of them (this does not have to be true, but it was what I believed to be true at this point).
I ranged him on A2- A5s, any pocket pair below QQ, AQ, AJ, AT and random high suited connectors like KQs, JTs ect.

When the flop came a very dry A93 rainbow this was actually perfect for me to keep the bluff going. I'd be up against underpairs and small Aces a lot all of which I have a range advantage against as the 4 bettor.
I bet small, about 1/3 pot as I'd do with pretty much all of my range on a dry A high flop as the aggressor and fired again on the K to fold out any underpairs and small aces that just cannot call if he does not put me on a pure bluff.

Since there was no flush or straight draw on the board I could be sure that he would not raise me on a semibluff AND that he knows I could not be betting a draw here and decide to get sticky with a small Ace.

Once in a while he'll show up with AQ, 99 or A3s that he'll not fold but there are a ton more hands that I beat with my perceived 4 bet range and that'll just fold on the turn or on the river.

So this was my thought process.
So I win?
 
All this led me to decide to run a big bluff against him when the opportunity came and the board came out favorably.

My hand was definately not a great hand to go to war with since I would've liked to block his stronger holdings with an ace or king but when we got heads-up in a blind battle I figured to go with my plan.
You can do a lot worse than T7o for a hand to attack the blinds with. It's important to attack the blinds if they aren't defending. The 4 bet was enterprising to say the least, but I do think the 3-bet was undersized, and I do think going for the reraise accomplished your mission of projecting a stronger range, which will pay off on more flops. But there is a downside of not blocking any monster hands either as you said.

When the flop came a very dry A93 rainbow this was actually perfect for me to keep the bluff going. I'd be up against underpairs and small Aces a lot all of which I have a range advantage against as the 4 bettor.

I think you read the situation perfectly that the rare sets and only the strongest aces would continue. I am curious if you would have pulled the third barrel if @Eriks called the turn. Or if getting called twice makes you shut it down.

But in any event, I think you played this one well.
 
You can do a lot worse than T7o for a hand to attack the blinds with. It's important to attack the blinds if they aren't defending. The 4 bet was enterprising to say the least, but I do think the 3-bet was undersized, and I do think going for the reraise accomplished your mission of projecting a stronger range, which will pay off on more flops. But there is a downside of not blocking any monster hands either as you said.

I think you read the situation perfectly that the rare sets and only the strongest aces would continue. I am curious if you would have pulled the third barrel if @Eriks called the turn. Or if getting called twice makes you shut it down.
Yeah, I've been thinking about that as well.
If I'm not misstaken, the pot is €35,20 if hero calls the turn and villain has about €24 left for the final river barrel.
I'd rather have more of a potsize bet for the final barrel, but I think I would've shoved any non Ace on the river.
I think it's a big enough size to give hero one last big decision to actually go with his gut feeling or finding the fold.
 
Yeah, I've been thinking about that as well.
If I'm not misstaken, the pot is €35,20 if hero calls the turn and villain has about €24 left for the final river barrel.
I'd rather have more of a potsize bet for the final barrel, but I think I would've shoved any non Ace on the river.
I think it's a big enough size to give hero one last big decision to actually go with his gut feeling or finding the fold.
It’s easy to say now when I’ve seen the hand of course, but I would like to think I call river too if I make the turn call
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom