Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="fundiver199, post: 6781742, member: 397965"] Its absolutely true, that not paying full attention will lead to mistake like the ones made preflop and on the turn in this hand. And if we find many of such mistakes when reviewing our hands later, maybe we should consider reducing our table count. Or end our session early, if we find ourselfes multitasking and not being properly focused. However I also think, there are some other important lessons to take away from the turn play in this hand. The first is to avoid the "monsters under the bed" syndrom. When there are 3 cards of the same suit on the board, our opponent could have a flush, but this does not mean, they always have it. And in the same fashion when the board is paired, our opponent could have trips, but that does not mean, they always have it. They still have a range, and often the nut part of that range is much smaller, than the fearfull part of our brain tends to assume. The second important lesson from the turn in this hand is to understand, when a bet will commit us to the pot. And in general we do not want to make a committing bet before the river without actually going all-in. So the first mistake on the turn is Heros bet sizing, which unintentionally committed him to the pot. But the second and larger mistake was to then not understand, what this does to Villains range for calling, folding or raising. Since the turn bet was committing, and Villain was out of position, the only situation, where Villain should ever call, is, if he is getting the right pot odds to draw. In that case Villain can just call and then give up on the river, if he miss. But in this case no hands were getting the odds to draw. So if Villain react correctly to this turn bet, he will not have any calling range at all. He will either fold or jam, and his range for jamming is going to be the same as his range for calling, if Hero had made an actual all-in instead of a committing bet. Or as Collin Moshman call it: a "non all-in all-in". So unless we think, Villain would fold AX to a turn jam, then we should fully expect, that he will check-jam it when facing this "non all-in all-in" from Hero. The reason, why Villain should never call on the turn, is the fact, that then he is just allowing Hero to freeroll him on the river, if Hero is somehow bluffing. Lets say Hero has a gutshot draw like QJ. If Villain call with an ace, he cant fold on the river getting 5:1. So he still get stacked, if Hero nail his gutshot, or if Hero had him beat all the time with a hand like AK. But if Hero miss, he is not going to bluff giving his opponent 5:1, or for that matter call a donk bet. So Hero will play the river 100% perfect, and this is why, Villain has to either jam or fold an AX hand on the turn, when Hero makes a committing bet like this. I am harping on a little about this, because I think, we have seen many hand histories shared, where people have made a similar mistake and failed to understand, that it takes away the option from their opponent to have a calling range. And that a turn raise is therefore not the same kind of strong move, which it is, when stacks are deeper, and the turn bet is not committing. Or for that matter when people accidentally makes a committing C-bet on the flop and then misintrepret it as very strong, when their opponent jam on them instead of just calling. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us

Language