Turn Decision vs Eric "The Nit" Liu

So this is a live 10/20 game here in Vegas. I'm 25k deep Eric Liu covers. He doesn't tend to get too far out of line vs me but is definitely capable of deviating pretty far from non standard plays, hes capable of making very big folds, calls, and bluffs.

Stacks are 25k effective. Hero has AcTs in sb. Eric opens late MP to 60, Hero calls, BB(reg with 7k eff) calls. Flop 3h8c6c, Checks to eric who bets 120. Hero makes it 400. BB folds, Eric calls. Turn 4c. Hero bets 760, Eric raises to 2200. Hero calls planning on check raising all blank rivers, and leading near pot on board pairs X%. Probably checking club rivers as well.

The problem is, Eric may not always bet the river if he was bluffing/semi bluffing the turn, and we lose to almost all bluffs if he decides not to bet river. I think he believes my range is fairly strong once I call the 2200, and think if he bets river he will fold to a raise with almost all holdings (He has the ability to fold 2nd nut flush here, not sure if he would or not)

The alternate line is re-raising turn to 4800 or so. Unsure if I would bet brick rivers in this scenario if he called the 4800. I think he is more likely to look me up with flushes with this line, but it gets him off random semibluffs most likely. Also there is a straight flush possible on board which is somewhat relevant at stacks this deep.

Thoughts?

i like everything about plan A

i think i'm not extremely worried about the river checkback, the hands he turns into a bluff on the turn aren't very likely to have pairs, so he'd have to pair up on the river (something like 97s).

dont really like leading pot on board pairing rivers. if you do, it means that you were actively aware that you were doing something bad on the turn and it did it anyways, and since you arent bad and he knows youre not bad i doubt you can sell the pot frontbet.

would assume if he's raising turn he's probably betting river and its a pretty credible spot to go ham on him so seems good to me.

not huge on 4800 turn but if you do i wouldnt follow through on unchanged rivers - seems very much like a spot he should decide on turn given action up to then

I don't think calling the turn with a set and leading board pairing rivers is a inconsistent/a mistake. For example if he has a lot of bluffs, and you are planning on calling down with a set on brick rivers, it can still be consistent to change your line into leading board pairing rivers if you believe he will no longer bet his bluffs (once the board pairs) as well as no longer value bet his flushes (since the board paired) but still will give him the chance to call your river bet.

It may still be better to check river if you think he will more likely continue with a bluff than call your pot lead with part of his value range, but it is certainly a conceivable line and does not necessarily mean that I was actively aware of doing something bad on the turn.

Kinda rambled that and didn't proofread so idk if that makes sense

I dunno I just don't think his turn raise range is all that wide. Your line is perfectly consistent with a set/flush for one, and its hard to imagine hands he semibluffs turn with. With a raise from late MP and a flop bet/call into two regs, he isn't going to have many offsuit Kc or 7c type hands in his range. I guess he could have 79s or 89s, but if you think he's pure-bluffing turn a lot you probably shouldn't be CRing to begin with (not that that changes the decision now). So I think his range is weighted more towards the king high flush or the 7c5c. I think it just boils down to what he does with the king high flush. If he folds more often than not then go for it. Otherwise, ugh, I prefer just folding turn.

Think I like it.

fold pre

I don't have anything to contribute but just wanna say A+ thread title

Result?

If u go ALLIN he can't call. Scared money!

I think this is just plain spew and you said that he doesnt do weird shit vs you and can do big calldowns and yeah I know its tempting to bluff when you have such a rare AcX hand in that spot but the fact that you could be spewing chips into a straightflushdraw is actually quite relevant considering the amount you are planning to risk on this play.

And as you said your plan requires a lot of IFs.. if he checks back, you lose the pot, if the board pais and you donk, there is a decent chance you will get called by a flush, if a club his you will win the pot but if he has the nuts you will lose a massive one unless you are planning on C/C club rivers which isnt crazy given the action, and if a blank falls you are praying that he makes a hero fold with a flush.

I really dont think your play has a positive EV and not even close to 0 so you could justify it for balancing and future meta purposes

Actually I think the regular turn 3B turn bluff much more believable if you hold the nut flush and Eric represents also a flush its pretty reasonable to assume you want to go for max value and make a sizable 3B, I think the sizing you purpose its bad as a vbet, it might not be terrible in a GTO perspective since you probably dont have many bluffs there but on a scenario where your opponent represents a flush you should probably go bigger, and even then I still think the fact that he could have the straigth flush is very relevant when we are planning on shipping hundreds of blinds into this pot.

I don't think anyone can really give a good answer here as we have tons of history and metagame going back 7 years. However, there are important considerations in this spot, especially since we are so deep, that can definitely be discussed generally, and I do think that it's a very interesting spot in general.

I won't be giving any input, even though I actually have a lot to say about this hand, as we play against each other frequently and I would hate to give you more than you already have

On November 05 2014 02:52 n0rthf4ce wrote: I won't be giving any input, even though I actually have a lot to say about this hand, as we play against each other frequently and I would hate to give you more than you already have

So basically you folded and this was all just a brag post by OP.

On November 05 2014 07:17 NMcNasty wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2014 02:52 n0rthf4ce wrote: I won't be giving any input, even though I actually have a lot to say about this hand, as we play against each other frequently and I would hate to give you more than you already have So basically you folded and this was all just a brag post by OP.

maybe, but why should it matter what I did? I still think this is an interesting spot.

Edit: typo

because we want to know what happened

I'm with andrewsong on this one

also I feel like eric shouldn't ever raise the turn but oh well lol

Folding pre is bad in this scenario, its not an online game where hes getting punished by the button/blinds for opening too wide or anything. his open here is really light. not really that important.

I'm still torn on this spot. I really tend to think when I have the Ac in my hand that erics bluffs are pretty disproportionate here, couple that with the fact he may fold flushes and I think im happy going for this play. Not sure which I like better, raising turn or going for the river play.

Results are I called turn sticking to my plan, river was Kx, i checked, Eric tanked gave a sheepish grin and checked back KcKx, which I thought was a weird hand for him to raise turn with. I expected some like KcXx with a pair on the flop etc to possibly be in his bluffing range etc. I believe Eric was planning on bluffing non club/pairing/K rivers, but only he will know. Was kinda sad I didn't get to attempt a big bluff on the p3achy =_=

On November 07 2014 20:58 MezmerizePLZ wrote: I believe Eric was planning on bluffing non club/pairing/K rivers, but only he will know.

I think he pretty much has to, and his river check is consistent with the idea that he thought a set would be folding. So it looks you had the right plan, but maybe not, again I really don't feel like he gets to turn with an offsuit Kc very often at all. But still just him semibluffing his high pairs might be enough to make this a good bluff. Just depends on what he does with his regular flushes.

a set is never folding turn, it's always gonna call given stack depths, also folding pre can't be "bad" mez, calling may not be as big of a mistake in these soft live games but you can definitely fold ATo there and not feel exploited by any stretch of imagination, I mean Eric opened (used to play online) and you said BB was a regular... and well if Eric was really opening too wide from there then we should 3bet?
fwiw I liked the option of repopping the turn when eric raised to 2.2k, prob raise to like 5k and give up afterwards

On November 07 2014 20:58 MezmerizePLZ wrote: Eric tanked gave a sheepish grin

Was it like this?

On November 09 2014 17:40 TheHuHu3 wrote: Show nested quote + On November 07 2014 20:58 MezmerizePLZ wrote: Eric tanked gave a sheepish grin Was it like this?

why do you have pictures of me on your computer D:

Mez, I disagree in your statement that it's a mistake to fold pre. In fact, I believe its the opposite. Whether this was played live or online, it's still the same game. Assuming BB defends well and that Eric isn't leaking post flop, I doubt you can make up for 2.5bb even with the added money of BB calling.

On flop, Its very close between a call and a fold. We would need Eric's preflop and postflop frequency in this flop texture to get to a conclusion. However, raising is a clear mistake at this stack depth no matter how you are constructing ur flop range. As played, I think you have to 3b turn with the blocker and go with it on the river. I don't think its inconceivable for eric to be raising turn with a merged range to gain a check to him even with a hand strong as set. Im not sure what strategy you are playing on the flop and flush turns but since you raised this hand and bet, I'm gonna assume you're x/raising all your sets and some flush combos. As played, I think you have to always 3bet turn/jam river with a nut flush and the blocker. Call turn/re-evaluating river with sets and flushes. I think there's superior strat involving less flop raising that makes more in ev+ than having to risk so much chips for little to no gain.

On November 12 2014 02:53 AndrewSong wrote: Mez, I disagree in your statement that it's a mistake to fold pre. In fact, I believe its the opposite. Whether this was played live or online, it's still the same game. Assuming BB defends well and that Eric isn't leaking post flop, I doubt you can make up for 2.5bb even with the added money of BB calling. On flop, Its very close between a call and a fold. We would need Eric's preflop and postflop frequency in this flop texture to get to a conclusion. However, raising is a clear mistake at this stack depth no matter how you are constructing ur flop range. As played, I think you have to 3b turn with the blocker and go with it on the river. I don't think its inconceivable for eric to be raising turn with a merged range to gain a check to him even with a hand strong as set. Im not sure what strategy you are playing on the flop and flush turns but since you raised this hand and bet, I'm gonna assume you're x/raising all your sets and some flush combos. As played, I think you have to always 3bet turn/jam river with a nut flush and the blocker. Call turn/re-evaluating river with sets and flushes. I think there's superior strat involving less flop raising that makes more in ev+ than having to risk so much chips for little to no gain.

I agree with this man. I perfer the 3bet line i guess at this point. erics range doesnt make a lot of sense. no non-nutflush SHOULD want to bloat the pot anymore this deep. i dont really think eric should have a raising range tbh. like at all on the turn. Range plays better by flatting turn with everything. But ye above all else folding pre i think is better. The deeper we are the worse AT becomes of a flat. And even at 100bbs online AT gets folded here. So i can't really see justification for calling other than really sick reads on his tendencies and a clear plan on how to own him.

If eric is opening 50% of hands and we have ATo in SB infinity bb deep u think its a fold?

whats % of hands does Eric have to be opening to play this hand for a call? (assuming i would much rather call with this hand than 3b), Also assuming BB is not leaking too hard.

I guess I didn't really note erics opening range in the beginning post, but the players that had position on him were nits and I expected him to be opening extremely wide for his seat. What % of hands would he have to be opening for u defend ATo infinite deep from SB with a competent BB?

Opening about 15% from this spot

Kinda hilarious in my mind if you honestly think you were opening 15% here
I like fold vs 15% range. At what point does ATo become a call?

On November 16 2014 01:14 n0rthf4ce wrote: Opening about 15% from this spot

trololololol

seriously though, LP needs more hand discussion threads like this

On November 16 2014 17:39 MezmerizePLZ wrote: Kinda hilarious in my mind if you honestly think you were opening 15% here I like fold vs 15% range. At what point does ATo become a call?

vs 15% range you have ~47% equity
vs 20% range you have ~48%
vs 25% you have 52.5% (equity jump is due to the addition of a lot of KTo-JTo type hands)

ATo seems reasonable starting at 25%

after PFR opening range BB's play is a very important variable here, especially how much he squeezes - pretty much every BB out there will be squeezing at least 5% of the time (AQo+, TT+) and some at 10%+, ATo cannot continue vs a squeeze so you realize 0% of your equity after putting in 2.5bb every time he 3 bets

9 outta 10 online regs these days just dont bother w/ having a SB calling range at all anymore

9 out of 10 regs also don't have to play 1500bb deep after 3 betting oop

having 52% equity vs someone OOP. i would have to think they are god awful to think thats close to enough. especially deep where a lot of my decisions are going to be somewhat handcuffed. position is huge. if I was playing against myself i would need much better equity advantage or playability. Anytime its near similar skill level a lot of your equity is never going to get realized.

On November 18 2014 16:18 Smuft wrote: Show nested quote + On November 16 2014 17:39 MezmerizePLZ wrote: Kinda hilarious in my mind if you honestly think you were opening 15% here I like fold vs 15% range. At what point does ATo become a call? vs 15% range you have ~47% equity vs 20% range you have ~48% vs 25% you have 52.5% (equity jump is due to the addition of a lot of KTo-JTo type hands) ATo seems reasonable starting at 25% after PFR opening range BB's play is a very important variable here, especially how much he squeezes - pretty much every BB out there will be squeezing at least 5% of the time (AQo+, TT+) and some at 10%+, ATo cannot continue vs a squeeze so you realize 0% of your equity after putting in 2.5bb every time he 3 bets 9 outta 10 online regs these days just dont bother w/ having a SB calling range at all anymore

really like this post

Also after rereading the hand more carefully I also like mez's play.

It might be results oriented but if you really were going to check raise all in on river and bet pot on paired boards, thats some sick 3rd level shit your playing and i gotta admire you for that, because looking at the hands i think it probably would have worked.

Not sure if peachy was raising turn for pot control check on river or if he raised to set up bluff on river after putting you on set on flop. either way there was some serious meta game in this hand.

Doomer we're calling 2.5bb in a pot of 4.5bb so we only need 36% equity which means our ATo needs to realize 70% of it's 52% equity. Will ATo realize that much of it's equity? can't be sure but it's pretty close and at least a reasonable place to start considering calling

Peachy, do you think a stack size increase from 100bb to 1500bb should make the difference between having a calling range in the SB and not having one? I can see arguments for both sides and I'm really not sure what the right answer is but I lean towards SB still having no calling range side of the argument.

I think it's just too hard to balance an SB calling range and 3 bet range while staying competitive on enough textures. You can try to balance both but except for some very perverted solutions of doing stuff like calling some combos of premiums 33% of the time, 67s 50% of the time, AQo 25%, etc. you usually just end up gutting both ranges and making them too hard to play with.

One adjustment I would make as stacks get deeper is to just 3b a lower frequency, the EV of all our hands should get lower as stacks get deeper so I'd cut out the bottom 1-3% of my 3bet range since they are no longer profitable.

On November 19 2014 08:38 Smuft wrote: Doomer we're calling 2.5bb in a pot of 4.5bb so we only need 36% equity which means our ATo needs to realize 70% of it's 52% equity. Will ATo realize that much of it's equity? can't be sure but it's pretty close and at least a reasonable place to start considering calling Peachy, do you think a stack size increase from 100bb to 1500bb should make the difference between having a calling range in the SB and not having one? I can see arguments for both sides and I'm really not sure what the right answer is but I lean towards SB still having no calling range side of the argument. I think it's just too hard to balance an SB calling range and 3 bet range while staying competitive on enough textures. You can try to balance both but except for some very perverted solutions of doing stuff like calling some combos of premiums 33% of the time, 67s 50% of the time, AQo 25%, etc. you usually just end up gutting both ranges and making them too hard to play with. One adjustment I would make as stacks get deeper is to just 3b a lower frequency, the EV of all our hands should get lower as stacks get deeper so I'd cut out the bottom 1-3% of my 3bet range since they are no longer profitable.

Good posts. I want to add that we have to factor in how much equity we will realize in 3handed pot as well. ATo does well in hot&cold equity in both situation but there's risk of being blown out of our hand pre and post being first to act.

Regarding SB play, I think there's pros of having a calling range at this stack depth. I agree with your sentiment that it sucks because of vulnerability in our coverage, and that's exactly why I disagreed in Mez's flop raise since constructing a raising range in this texture makes our strategy problematic in future streets. However, it goes the same when you play 3bet or fold. A lot of the hands that was profitable in 100bb lose in value and our fold equity becomes considerably lower so we have to strengthen our range by folding hands that may beat the blinds when we call. We also have more risk of being blown out of our equity not just from BB but BU's 4bet as well.

just looks spewy the second x/f isn't clicked on flop, esp vs capable regs.

Ye thats a good point smuft. I didn't really account for the price we are getting i guess. It does become closer for sure.

On November 16 2014 17:39 MezmerizePLZ wrote: Kinda hilarious in my mind if you honestly think you were opening 15% here I like fold vs 15% range. At what point does ATo become a call?

15% if ur on ur phone, 10% if ur shuffling chips and gazing into my eyes.

On November 20 2014 22:28 Ryan Neilly wrote: just looks spewy the second x/f isn't clicked on flop, esp vs capable regs.

lol, with 2 overcards and the ace of club, check/folding shouldn't be an option

On November 19 2014 08:38 Smuft wrote: Doomer we're calling 2.5bb in a pot of 4.5bb so we only need 36% equity which means our ATo needs to realize 70% of it's 52% equity. Will ATo realize that much of it's equity? can't be sure but it's pretty close and at least a reasonable place to start considering calling Peachy, do you think a stack size increase from 100bb to 1500bb should make the difference between having a calling range in the SB and not having one? I can see arguments for both sides and I'm really not sure what the right answer is but I lean towards SB still having no calling range side of the argument. I think it's just too hard to balance an SB calling range and 3 bet range while staying competitive on enough textures. You can try to balance both but except for some very perverted solutions of doing stuff like calling some combos of premiums 33% of the time, 67s 50% of the time, AQo 25%, etc. you usually just end up gutting both ranges and making them too hard to play with. One adjustment I would make as stacks get deeper is to just 3b a lower frequency, the EV of all our hands should get lower as stacks get deeper so I'd cut out the bottom 1-3% of my 3bet range since they are no longer profitable.

My intuition is that 3 betting 100% of the hands you decide to play from the sb this deep is suicide. When you're 100bbs and you have TT and get 4bet you are just like lol allin, but when you're this deep even QQ is not exactly an exciting 5 bet, aswell as having to worry about defending your "call 4bet" range with some AA and KK combos? it just seems insanely difficult to give a strong player the option of putting in a 4th bet or calling with a very playable range this deep while ur out of position.. I'm definitely in the camp of wanting to have a 3 betting range and a calling range, I have some other thoughts regarding this but not exactly sure how much of my strategy I want to divulge to p3achy or other onlookers.

re: calling preflop as it depends on the bb's play, your live-read advantage over the bb can be an important factor here. if the bb is a tellbox and peachy's not a sick/fearless live-reader (or he's just not paying a lot of attention today), then you can not only diminish your positional disadvantage vs the bb, but you can also leverage your read on the bb to make your life easier vs peachy. for example, if the bb is someone whose live tells will allow you to correctly pick spots to lead-bluff flops and/or turns, then you get to basically make that bluff with impunity vs the bb and also benefit from looking stronger than usual in peachy's eyes, because you're bluffing OOP to two people.

when the bb is pretty tellboxy, you get to seize these little bluff opportunities in 5-10% of pots in my estimation, and if peachy's not keen to your game, that's a big difference. plus there are all the occasional other ways you get to use your read on the bb against peachy, such as being able to check/call correctly when the bb is telegraphing that he's also going to call behind you, etc. imo even if the bb doesn't have preflop tells because he waits for his turn to look at his cards, then even if he's squeezing 5%, you can make up for that risk if he's somewhat easy to read postflop.

one step further, if peachy is also a good live-reader and is attentive enough to know that you're aware of the bb's tells, then you're in for a world of hurt.

On November 29 2014 08:46 [vital]Myth wrote: and if peachy's not keen to your game,

On November 29 2014 08:46 [vital]Myth wrote: re: calling preflop as it depends on the bb's play, your live-read advantage over the bb can be an important factor here. if the bb is a tellbox and peachy's not a sick/fearless live-reader (or he's just not paying a lot of attention today), then you can not only diminish your positional disadvantage vs the bb, but you can also leverage your read on the bb to make your life easier vs peachy. for example, if the bb is someone whose live tells will allow you to correctly pick spots to lead-bluff flops and/or turns, then you get to basically make that bluff with impunity vs the bb and also benefit from looking stronger than usual in peachy's eyes, because you're bluffing OOP to two people. when the bb is pretty tellboxy, you get to seize these little bluff opportunities in 5-10% of pots in my estimation, and if peachy's not keen to your game, that's a big difference. plus there are all the occasional other ways you get to use your read on the bb against peachy, such as being able to check/call correctly when the bb is telegraphing that he's also going to call behind you, etc. imo even if the bb doesn't have preflop tells because he waits for his turn to look at his cards, then even if he's squeezing 5%, you can make up for that risk if he's somewhat easy to read postflop. one step further, if peachy is also a good live-reader and is attentive enough to know that you're aware of the bb's tells, then you're in for a world of hurt.

over-analysation of things that are not very important or factor into the hand enough to be worthy of discussion imo

live tells are super overrated. not that some players don't clearly give them away but i'd assume peachy & clay are pretty aware and locked in to who is giving away what and generally are always paying attention when they are in a hand

i find it very interesting peachy raises anything at all on the turn and what his reasons are for doing it vs clay (which i'm sure he won't divulge)

Live tells are the opposite of overrated. This is an exaggeration and a different format, but how AWFUL is phil hellmuth at fundamental poker, and how good is he at still crushing via live tells? That's literally the only strategy to his game...get into hand with someone that he's picked something up on. If he doesn't pick anything up...he busts or nits it up. Negreneau same shit until he became friends with all the online pros, now he can do both. Obv tourneys aren't live cash blah blah, but I think all of the stuff corwin said is extremely important, and certainly not overrated.

On December 11 2014 00:28 thewh00sel wrote: Live tells are the opposite of overrated. This is an exaggeration and a different format, but how AWFUL is phil hellmuth at fundamental poker, and how good is he at still crushing via live tells? That's literally the only strategy to his game...get into hand with someone that he's picked something up on. If he doesn't pick anything up...he busts or nits it up. Negreneau same shit until he became friends with all the online pros, now he can do both. Obv tourneys aren't live cash blah blah, but I think all of the stuff corwin said is extremely important, and certainly not overrated.

I guess I ment in this particular situation for the most part

Ofc when you're playing with a bunch of fish they're important ala Negreanu/Hellmuth

Everyone gives off some tells some of the time, especially in a smaller game like this. I'm not shy in saying I'm sure both whoosel and clay have picked up tells on me in certain spots that have led to me losing money. With that said these tells are usually only come into play when all your other analyses have broken even--don't overvalue things you see, as they may be nothing at all!

I know a mix game reg who plays technically poor game but do very well because he's able to make more correct decisions based off body language. Some people are naturally gifted at making better guesses based of body language. I think NL game are a lot different tho since players become completely immersed to the opponent when they're in a hand compared to other games. I feel that it's too dangerous to make decision based off gut feeling for huge amount of bets when your opponent is very attentive. Best way is to beat them technically. Not by gut feeling.