Read: I don't know anything about the opp's stats or tells. I did, however, note that he had a 70bb stack. Per conventional wisdom, if someone has between 40-90bb stacks in a 100bb game, they should be considered "fishy" unless proven otherwise. If they have less than 40bb, you need to consider the possibility that they might be pro short stackers, and if they are above 90bb it could just mean they don't have auto rebuy switched on. In between, however, usually implies a weak player. And this usually implies a passive calling station.
Okay, so what can I determine about about his range? First, an UTG (me) raised and two other players called before it got to him in the SB. If he had a big hand, I would suspect he would raise. He didn't, so we can rule out hands like big pocket pairs and AK-type hands. This leaves small to medium pocket pairs, as well as a bunch of calling station hands like suited aces, medium unsuited aces, and a wide range of connectors.
His check-call of my c-bet on the flop says that he isn't too scared of the flop and/or hit some part of it and/or can't read board texture and/or still thinks a small or middle pair he holds is still good. When he checks to me on the turn, I should have assumed he probably doesn't have a king in his range, as a fish is more likely to lead out here with trips than check and risk me checking behind.
Estimate. If I 'stove his prefelop range on the turn (including miscellaneous kings), I get this:
At 85% equity, I'm waaaay ahead of the villain's range. Unfortunately, I made a fundamental mistake: when I saw the second king hit on the turn, I readjusted my read to put the opponent on a specific hand (or card, in this case). I thought "wow, he check-called on a flop that had a king. Some kings were in his range. Oh, boy. What happens if he has a Kx hand? He could check-raise me!"
Woo boy, this was dumb. I should have readjusted/narrowed my Read on his range and then re-Estimated accordingly. But I didn't. I basically abandoned my overall range read on the opp, and just focused on the kings in his hand. My estimate against this way-too narrow range made me doubt the strength of my hand. This is amateur hour at work, folks.
Decide. Since I'm so far ahead of his real range, I should be on a value line here. Instead, I was scared of a specific card (king) and changed from a Value line to a Show Down Value line. This is called missed value, folks.
Implement. I should have bet for value on the turn*. Instead, SDV implies pot control, so I checked back. This is called weak, folks.
Oh well. In any case if you're wondering, here's how the hand ended up playing out:
No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
BB ($12.31)
Hero (UTG) ($10)
MP ($13.36)
CO ($13.60)
Button ($10.55)
SB ($6.95)
Preflop: Hero is UTG with A
, A
Hero bets $0.35, 1 fold, CO calls $0.35, Button calls $0.35, SB calls $0.30, 1 fold
Flop: ($1.50) 4
, 2
, K (4 players)SB checks, Hero bets $1.12, 2 folds, SB calls $1.12
Turn: ($3.74) K
(2 players)SB checks, Hero checks
River: ($3.74) 7
(2 players)SB checks, Hero bets $2.49, SB calls $2.49
Total pot: $8.72
Results:
SB had 2
, A (two pair, Kings and twos).Hero had A
, A (two pair, Aces and Kings).Outcome: Hero won $8.29
A bet for value on the turn woulda/coulda/shoulda built the pot to about $8-9 pre-action on the river, which would have set up a nice callable shove with his middle pair-type hands.
Lesson 1 is to slow down and keep ranges in mind, not specific hands.
Lesson 2 is to build value with value hands.
Lesson 3 is don't play scared.
All-in for now...
-Bug
*Yes, a bet could have scared him off, but that should not have dissuaded me from value-towning here. If he folds, he folds-- EV is still maximized by betting.
No comments:
Post a Comment