Yet another spewy Ignition hand (1 Viewer)

[boltonguy]

25NL 6-max anonymous fast fold. No reads, no HUDs.
Hero in UTG holds . Not much debate here as this is in my opening range so Hero opens for $0.75 (standard open).
Folds to Villain in BN who is effective stack with $40.08. Villain 3 bets to $2.25.
Folds back to Hero.

Hero?

 

[Legend5555]

3 bet vs UTG from BT should generally be a strong range. No sense in 4 betting here. With deep stacks and implied odds, pretty easy call and set mine.

 

[BGinGA]

Fold. Or re-raise to $6. Or call. In that order.

Actually, I'm never folding a pocket pair in any NLHE game to a buck-fifty button raise. Sue me.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Call to set-mine. You're getting decent odds with $40 effective. Not much sense in making any other move with this, given 6-handed game and no reads.

 

[boltonguy]

25NL 6-max anonymous fast fold. No reads, no HUDs.
Hero in UTG holds . Not much debate here as this is in my opening range so Hero opens for $0.75 (standard open).
Folds to Villain in BN who is effective stack with $40.08. Villain 3 bets to $2.25.
Folds back to Hero who calls. Pot is $4.85.

Flop is . Hero?

 

[BGinGA]

Check-call.

 

[grebe]

I agree with the call, and I will check back 100 percent of range here.

V has super strong range seeing you are opening UTG and they 3 bet you. You are looking at 1010+ and probably AQ+. Expect a Cbet. I think check/fold is the right play here, even though you might be good. I really think the only hand you are beating is AK.

My range might be too tight here, but fast fold, you really have less of an incentive to 3bet light to UTG raiser.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Check with the intention of folding if Villain bets. This is strictly a set-mining flop.

If Villain checks back and the turn card is favorable (8 or less, or a Q), bet out on the next round. Otherwise it's another check.

 

[boltonguy]

25NL 6-max anonymous fast fold. No reads, no HUDs.
Hero in UTG holds . Not much debate here as this is in my opening range so Hero opens for $0.75 (standard open).
Folds to Villain in BN who is effective stack with $40.08. Villain 3 bets to $2.25.
Folds back to Hero who calls. Pot is $4.85.

One thing to add - this hand was played Saturday night at 10:30pm EST and 3 bet frequencies were very high so I think V's range is wider than "normal" for this game.

Flop is . Hero checks to check/call. Villain bets $1.20 or about 1/4 pot.

Hero?

 

[grebe]

25NL 6-max anonymous fast fold. No reads, no HUDs.
Hero in UTG holds . Not much debate here as this is in my opening range so Hero opens for $0.75 (standard open).
Folds to Villain in BN who is effective stack with $40.08. Villain 3 bets to $2.25.
Folds back to Hero who calls. Pot is $4.85.

One thing to add - this hand was played Saturday night at 10:30pm EST and 3 bet frequencies were very high so I think V's range is wider than "normal" for this game.

Flop is . Hero checks to check/call. Villain bets $1.20 or about 1/4 pot.

Hero?

I think fold is the right play here. In game, I am SURE I would call for that good of a price.

X/R would be a sexy play though targeting JJ and 1010....maybe AK. Shut down on anything other than a fold from V. Make it about $4.....then immediately top up to $25 for next hand.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Weird bet from Villain. Still not really expecting to be ahead here. Even with the very small bet, absent player-specific information, I see no justification for making an aggressive play.

Paid $2-ish to set-mine, failed to hit a set, time to move on. Hate letting Villain take it down with a smaller bet than the preflop raise, but 88 just doesn't have enough strength or potential to continue here (notably, out of position).

 

[JustinInMN]

I think it's raise or fold for sure. If you are in the lead, villain certainly has six outs here, if you are behind, there are "better" hands that can fold that are also scared of the queen.

The only way I could justify a call is if you are going to go for a check raise on a "safe" turn, but I think it's best just to go for that now if at all.

So that's my instinct. In a normal game, this would be so read dependent. Is villain continuing too much? Which hands is villain continuing that he will give up?

Laying down is probably the right play here, I am assuming 88 is near the bottom of hero's preflop opening and flat range, though that matters less in an anonymous game other than considering Hero can surely have better hands here to defend. AQ, KQ, 99, TT.

It is tempting because to go for a check raise because I think villain's range is possibly wide enough to be evenly split between good value and low value and misses. Yes AQ, KQ, AA, KK, QQ are squarely in villain's range, but so are AK, AJ, as well as 99, TT, JJ. And possibly more if villain is 3-betting the button widely. (But again, tough to determine with no reads.)

So without reads, I think it's a fold. It feels like any justification to do anything else really depends on knowledge of the villain we don't have. Give him credit on this one, punish the next guy when you are in this spot with KQ.

 

[grebe]

Weird bet from Villain. Still not really expecting to be ahead here. Even with the very small bet, absent player-specific information, I see no justification for making an aggressive play.

Paid $2-ish to set-mine, failed to hit a set, time to move on. Hate letting Villain take it down with a smaller bet than the preflop raise, but 88 just doesn't have enough strength or potential to continue here (notably, out of position).

This is a common GTO line popping up these days. Small bet with 100% of holdings post flop. If continuing turn/river, 2/3 pot.

 

[Jimulacrum]

This is a common GTO line popping up these days. Small bet with 100% of holdings post flop. If continuing turn/river, 2/3 pot.

If it's in fact being done 100% of flops, seems like you should be able to counter that by raising the mini-bet a substantial amount of the time (if you having nothing or have a made hand to protect) or flatting (if it offers you good odds for a draw).

Not that I suggest that here. No specific indication that this Villain is employing this strategy.

And I find it suspect to call anything that's done the same way 100% of the time "GTO."

 

[boltonguy]

25NL 6-max anonymous fast fold. No reads, no HUDs.
Hero in UTG holds . Not much debate here as this is in my opening range so Hero opens for $0.75 (standard open).
Folds to Villain in BN who is effective stack with $40.08. Villain 3 bets to $2.25.
Folds back to Hero who calls. Pot is $4.85.

One thing to add - this hand was played Saturday night at 10:30pm EST and 3 bet frequencies were very high so I think V's range is wider than "normal" for this game.

Flop is . Hero checks to check/call. Villain bets $1.20 or about 1/4 pot.

So Hero is confused by this bet. Looking at the flop, there is a possibility that Hero is ahead with second pair. I know that V's 3! range includes AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, and AQ but the 3! frequencies were so high that night that this bet made Hero think it was a sign that he was ahead. Why the small bet? Get worse hands to call & better hands to fold ...

Hero should have gone with the read on the frequencies/bet size and X/R to $4.50 but instead Hero calls.

Turn is . Pot is $7.25. Hero?

 

[JustinInMN]

Turn is . Pot is $7.25. Hero?

I don't see a reason to lead at all as played. I think you check and re-evaluate. Does it take a second bullet here to convince you to fold. Are you hoping for a check behind and a safe river? Are you assuming villain can bluff two barrels here? (Tough in an anonymous game.)

I see little upside to betting unless you think you can get called by an ace-hi miss with one card to come. I guess folding out that sort of hand for protection is good, but you do lose out on the chance to collect from possible bluffs from that sort of hand. You will surely get called if beat.

Check and hope for a check behind. If you get that action, the call on the flop looks much better than it did to me before the turn.

 

[grebe]

Check. I expect a 2/3 pot bet. with ALMOST 100% of V's range. It's like the lure of the Siren's song.

*Plans to check/call all the way down with this hand will be an expensive endeavor in the long run.

 

[stellrnebula]

Villain is correctly betting small because his range is much stronger than yours. He gets to bet with a very high frequency (maybe even with 100% of range). He has the overpair advantage (AA, KK) along with some set and two pair combinations (QQ, 45s at some frequency) while you should not have QQ in your range and should rarely have 44 or 55. 88 also blocks some combinations of hands he might 3b preflop that have incentive to bluff on the flop and/or turn (78s, 68s), so 99/TT/JJ and Qx make better bluff catching candidates.

As played, X/F turn.

 

[boltonguy]

25NL 6-max anonymous fast fold. No reads, no HUDs.
Hero in UTG holds . Not much debate here as this is in my opening range so Hero opens for $0.75 (standard open).
Folds to Villain in BN who is effective stack with $40.08. Villain 3 bets to $2.25.
Folds back to Hero who calls. Pot is $4.85.

One thing to add - this hand was played Saturday night at 10:30pm EST and 3 bet frequencies were very high so I think V's range is wider than "normal" for this game.

Flop is . Hero checks to check/call. Villain bets $1.20 or about 1/4 pot.

So Hero is confused by this bet. Looking at the flop, there is a possibility that Hero is ahead with second pair. I know that V's 3! range includes AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, and AQ but the 3! frequencies were so high that night that this bet made Hero think it was a sign that he was ahead. Why the small bet? Get worse hands to call & better hands to fold ...

Hero should have gone with the read on the frequencies/bet size and X/R to $4.50 but instead Hero calls.

Turn is . Pot is $7.25. Hero checks. Villain bets $2.75 or just over 1/3 pot. Hero calls for all the reasons above and this card is a brick except for the fact that it puts a BDFD on the board. I know a lot of people said fold and I understand that.

River is . Pot is $12.75. Hero?

 

[BGinGA]

Jeez, I hope Villain doesn't have A5 or 65 suited.......

 

[Jimulacrum]

I have two main lines of thought on this hand

1. Check-fold flop. Check-fold turn. Check-fold river. Check-fold FFS. A pair of eights is not going to be good here often enough to justify calling all the way to showdown to defend the initial $4.85 pot.

2. If we start from the premise that 88 is good here, with Villain likely holding overcards, it's still wrong to just call on the flop and turn. This hand is too vulnerable for that. Raising is the play. Force him to pay to chase, or fold and give up the pot. That said, as played, if you believe you were good on the flop, you're very probably still good, so check the river with the intention of calling. Far fewer weaker hands would call a bet here than would bluff.

Absent any information at all about this player, #1 is the clear choice. Your set-mine whiffed. If you pay off to the river on failed set-mining expeditions, you're better off not set-mining at all.

 

[johnnyesper]

Jeez, I hope Villain doesn't have A5 or 65 suited.......

If you take a typical 3! range from the BTN those hands are in there. It's the bottom of the villain's range but it's in there. You need some hands to protect the AA, KK, QQ 3!s.

As played it looks like the villain valued you on all three streets. I would have check called flop, turn, and folded river. Sadly, it looks like 88s are no good here.

 

[boltonguy]

So I'll save myself the humiliation: Villain had
I should have gone with my read and played more aggressively on flop when it was cheap and the board hadnt yet paired ...

 

[johnnyesper]

So I'll save myself the humiliation: Villain had
I should have gone with my read and played more aggressively on flop when it was cheap and the board hadnt yet paired ...

That is not a combo I would think the villain would have in their 3! range but it's close to where they should be. I'm not sure if you play the flop aggressively would have been the right play. I'm sure I'm wrong. I have a feeling a solver would say differently.

 

[JustinInMN]

That is not a combo I would think the villain would have in their 3! range but it's close to where they should be. I'm not sure if you play the flop aggressively would have been the right play. I'm sure I'm wrong. I have a feeling a solver would say differently.

If hero check-raises flop and bets the turn, it's pretty tough for villain to continue with just a five. If we knew 75s was in villians 3-betting range, check-raising the flop I think becomes the superior play. While we are way ahead of this particular hand, we are also vulnerable to the ace-hi holdings in villains range so I do prefer the check-raise for protection as much as for value.

But without the datapoint of 75s being a possible villain holding, I think folding flop was the play. Knowing this data point, check-raise flop is the play.

 

[Eriks]

A bit late to the party here:

pre seems standard.

Flop check/call as well. If we do check raise here we turn our hand into a bluff and just value town ourselves. Sure, we’ll get AK type hands to fold but those only have 6 outs. I think the downside of raising outweighs and makes it a call. Check/folding seems too tight; we can’t be calling 3-bets with 88 with the sole intention of flopping a set imo.

Turn: While his flopbet sizing was standard (not knowing his actual hand) I would expect a larger turnbet and would probably fold to 2/3+. 1/3 pot here is pretty weird. For that size I think check/call is good.

River: Check and evaluate. How much did he bet?

 

[boltonguy]

I led for pot, he jammed.

 

[Eriks]

I led for pot

Seems like a mistake. Are we bluffing or valuebetting? I think he’s likely to call (or raise) better hands and fold worse. Maybe he finds a fold sometimes with like 99-TT if he somehow bet flop+turn with them, but I wouldn’t count on it.

 

[JustinInMN]

I agree, leading at the river is a huge error. Especially if part of your justification for continuing past the flop is villain is 3 betting wide, well now a good hunk of what you hoped was is villain's range now beats you. Check call or Check fold are really the only actions that made any sense on this river. You are either going to catch a bluff or pay off a better hand. There is no value in leading with 88 unless you pretty much think villain has exactly 77 or 6x. (Maybe he will make a considered laydown with 99 or TT, but that's tough to see after he bet two streets with it.) Which really seems like wishful thinking more than a read in an anonymous game.

 

[JustinInMN]

Maybe he will make a considered laydown with 99 or TT, but that's tough to see after he bet two streets with it.

To add the detail, it's either or, if you bet this river you are hoping he will make a considered laydown with a hand he 3-bet pre and led twice, or he will pay off a weaker hand (which that range just got narrower with the bottom flop card pairing.) There is no world where villain is calling with 6x but making a considered laydown with 99.

We all fall into this trap from time to time where we justify illogical actions, and we just compound mistakes street after street. I probably would have been tempted to call the flop, but I landed on a clear fold after typing out my analysis. That's why strategy threads are useful. Forces you to take the time to analyze situations before they happen again.