10NL AA in 4bet pot on scary board. Committed?

[PinkFart]

I'm running at 26/20 and villian is 18/11 over 70 hands. How's my flop bet size here? And should I be calling his ship here or folding even with half my stack in the middle? Thoughts please?

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed) - Full Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

BB ($2.89)
Hero (UTG) ($14.32)
MP ($10)
CO ($10.79)
Button ($10.65)
SB ($10.12)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with A, A
Hero bets $0.40, 1 fold, CO raises to $1.20, 3 folds, Hero raises to $2.50, CO calls $1.30

Flop: ($5.15) J, K, K (2 players)
Hero bets $3.25, CO raises to $8.29 (All-In), Hero?

[The Aul Switcharoo]

sick. Probably fold and kick a penguin. Might tiltingly call and be shown A J and then think I'm the greatest

[Guest]

..

Sick spot, so draw heavy, I think u got to call and go lookin for the 2 outer if he has a king, a fair bit of the time he will a good jack or a combo draw.

[shano_88]

Never folding.

[Maloney]

Call/ really cant say much else really

[tipp86]

Your 4 bet size is so horrible its not even funny. Make it about 3 at least.

As played im probably calling its probably marginal tho.

[digiman]

Your 4 bet size is so horrible its not even funny. Make it about 3 at least.

As played im probably calling its probably marginal tho.

His 4b size is spot on, 30bb would be way to much.

[tipp86]

His 4b size is spot on, 30bb would be way to much.

Really ? Is it not pretty much a min raise tho ? I could understand smaller 4 bets in late position situations but these kind of 4 bets are never really bluffs.

[Emmet]

4bet size is absolutely spot on. Gives players the impression of fold equity, means you can 4bet bluff more profitably, and induces retardedness more.

[tipp86]

Im actually putting a bit more thought into this now that you have brought it up and thinking what is my 4 bet sizing.

I realise his 4bb open is the cause of this pot inflating so much aswell. If he opens for 3 bbs and the guy 3 bets to 9bb what do you 4 bet to then?

[tipp86]

4bet size is absolutely spot on. Gives players the impression of fold equity, means you can 4bet bluff more profitably, and induces retardedness more.

How often do you take a retarded line against a min raise 4 bet from utg? What kind of hands do you plan on 4 bet bluffing utg?

[Emmet]

I try to imagine that I'm not retarded though.

The same cannot be said for a lot of others, especially at 10nl

[Tar.Aldarion]

Dunno If I can fold, he prob has something like AK and I probably have to give him my money anyway what with the draws that I know, in my heart...as I call...he does not have..

[cardshark202]

4bet size is grand. Not a problem with it. My standard is to 4b small, since there is no need to 4b bigger with these stacks. As played your cbet was farrrrrrr too big. You can bet 1/3rd pot here easily enough. Gotta call now, too much in there to fold. He might shove QQ or something.

[tipp86]

I just looked at 7/8 random EP 4 bet hands and none of my 4 bets were as big as 30bbs. Most fell in the 22-26 bbs region. The thing i did notice was they were all 1.5 times the 3 bet.

Is making it 2.50 bad if my open is 30 and his 3 bet is 90 ? Should i be making it about 2 or is 2.50 fine?

[BobSloane]

Most people - myself included - are jamming or folding vs a 4bet 100bbs deep. So when you 4bet you should be doing it for value and snap calling the jam - or doing it as a bluff and snap folding vs a jam. So it makes sense to 4bet small as you are normally getting a jam or a fold in response. If i raise 3bbs and villain 3bets to 10bbs I will typically 4b to 22-24bbs. Whether its 22 or 24 is game/villain dependant - not hand strength dependant obv. Ideally I'd go less than that but if you go too small the feckers start (often correctly imo)calling the 4bets which I dont really want.

In the hand posted I would have probably 4bet to $2.60. Neither here nor there I suppose but its what I would have done.

In the scenario you mention tipp where you open for 3bbs and get 3bet to 9 I would 4bet to 21 or 22

[PinkFart]

Ok so the call was right what about the bet size? I think I went too big but if we do go smaller say $1.75 do we fold to his shove then or are we still pretty much commited?

[tipp86]

Most people - myself included - are jamming or folding vs a 4bet 100bbs deep. So when you 4bet you should be doing it for value and snap calling the jam - or doing it as a bluff and snap folding vs a jam. So it makes sense to 4bet small as you are normally getting a jam or a fold in response. If i raise 3bbs and villain 3bets to 10bbs I will typically 4b to 22-24bbs. Whether its 22 or 24 is game/villain dependant - not hand strength dependant obv. Ideally I'd go less than that but if you go too small the feckers start (often correctly imo)calling the 4bets which I dont really want.

In the hand posted I would have probably 4bet to $2.60. Neither here nor there I suppose but its what I would have done.

In the scenario you mention tipp where you open for 3bbs and get 3bet to 9 I would 4bet to 21 or 22

I see the point 100% but the one question i will pose is are we ever 4 bet folding from utg ? As far as im concerned i dont think so thats why i dont mind a small bit bigger on the 4 bet as i do think villians can call with a lot of hands they wont shove.

Im shite at the maths side of things but isnt villian pretty close to getting implied odds to set mine here its 1.30 to call the pot has 3.85 in it and villian will have 8.15 behind to stack hero. So its 1.30 to win 12 as it has to be a perfect position to stack a guy with a set.

Maybe im way off forgive me if i am.

[fuzzbox]

3bet more, never fold now.

[BobSloane]

@tipp
Yeah I get what you're saying about 4bet folding utg - and my other post is more typical of bvb / button v blinds / co v button type scenarios. But certainly you can 4bet/fold hands from utg like A2s or whatever versus certain opponents. Some people love 3betting utg opens because it looks so strong and ties the hands of the other players between utg and the 3bettor.

As for the set-mining part of your post. It doesn't really make much sense if you think about it. Say someone opens utg and you have 55. Are you really going to 3bet him? And if he 4bets you to a size like in the op. Are you really going to call with the logic of aha now I'm getting 9-1 implied odds and can stack his AA. What if he has QQ and the flop is AK5? What if he was 4bet bluffing and is done with the hand. I doubt thats how you are typically playing small/medium pocket pairs v an utg raise - but if it is you're doing it wrong imo. Tbh the only reason I can think of to 3bet in such a situation might be to discourage some aggro player from squeezing behind but even then I think its a bad idea.

[fuzzbox]

So there is 0.05 + 0.10 + 0.4 + 1.2 = 1.75 in the middle, we make it 2.5 to go putting 3.85 in the middle and asking villain to call 1.3 more.

I don't see many people folding to this action getting this price (~3:1)

This is interesting to state because we should also be making this play as a bluff if we make it for value.

I'd 4 bet stronger on both bluff and value.

Never fold now, there is too much chance that you have the best hand, and too much in the middle.

I'd bet less on the flop too - you want villains to believe they can bluff you.

[fuzzbox]

Ok so the call was right what about the bet size? I think I went too big but if we do go smaller say $1.75 do we fold to his shove then or are we still pretty much commited?

I'm committed, but you want villains to believe that you can fold. The reason you bet smaller is to encourage more bluffs when you have a strong hand, and also to make your bluffing cheaper when you are, in fact, bluffing.

[fuzzbox]

4bet size is absolutely spot on. Gives players the impression of fold equity, means you can 4bet bluff more profitably, and induces retardedness more.

How can both of these be true at the same time?

Either we can bluff more properly & therefore ppl fold more often, OR we induce retardedness more - but then we can't bluff as easily, because ppl shove retardedly.

You cannot have both at the same time, since the actions are entirely different.

[AndyFatBastard]

I'm committed, but you want villains to believe that you can fold. The reason you bet smaller is to encourage more bluffs when you have a strong hand, and also to make your bluffing cheaper when you are, in fact, bluffing.

How can both of these be true at the same time?

Either we can bluff more properly & therefore ppl fold more often, OR we induce retardedness more - but then we can't bluff as easily, because ppl shove retardedly.

You cannot have both at the same time, since the actions are entirely different.

You answered your own question. You get more value from your value range and lose less money on your bluffing range. I would find it very hard to believe that the value lost from the times you get 5bet or your 4bet is called when you are bluffing, and your opponent is suffering from induce retardedness, would outweigh the value gained from 4betting smaller. * And as long as our 4betting range contains more value hands than bluffs, the retardedness above is profitable more often than it's not.


As an aside, I'm of the opinion that flat calling a 4bet 100BBs deep with any hand other than AA is a mistake (KK might be marginally ok). Ditto for folding on any street once you've done it. I'll have to ask Redjoker what his thoughts are, since this is right up his street. But I'm generally delighted whenever I see players do it and will take a note on it every time, especially if we get to showdown.


*That sentence was hard to construct, I hope I got my meaning across.

[tipp86]

@tipp
Yeah I get what you're saying about 4bet folding utg - and my other post is more typical of bvb / button v blinds / co v button type scenarios. But certainly you can 4bet/fold hands from utg like A2s or whatever versus certain opponents. Some people love 3betting utg opens because it looks so strong and ties the hands of the other players between utg and the 3bettor.

As for the set-mining part of your post. It doesn't really make much sense if you think about it. Say someone opens utg and you have 55. Are you really going to 3bet him? And if he 4bets you to a size like in the op. Are you really going to call with the logic of aha now I'm getting 9-1 implied odds and can stack his AA. What if he has QQ and the flop is AK5? What if he was 4bet bluffing and is done with the hand. I doubt thats how you are typically playing small/medium pocket pairs v an utg raise - but if it is you're doing it wrong imo. Tbh the only reason I can think of to 3bet in such a situation might be to discourage some aggro player from squeezing behind but even then I think its a bad idea.

I wont argue for a minute wit what your saying. the one thing i will say is good regs at this level will be happy to call with implied odds there not going to take into account other variables. Fwiw i was a silly villian 3 betting pairs for a very long time in the past i didnt realise it was such a huge leak until it came up in discussion here.

[BobSloane]

I wont argue for a minute wit what your saying. the one thing i will say is good regs at this level will be happy to call with implied odds there not going to take into account other variables. Fwiw i was a silly villian 3 betting pairs for a very long time in the past i didnt realise it was such a huge leak until it came up in discussion here.

lol. There are posters here who are right when they give advice probably >90% of the time. I'm not one of them. Have played more hands in the hu league than nl 6max cash since turn of the year. And thats because I dropped about 50BIs in the last few months of 2010 more through bad play than bad luck. Just so you know!

[Jinky]

make your cbet a bit smaller