75s steal flops two pair. Turn? plan?

9-handed table breaking. Villain is loose winning reg. Plays 6max and FR mostly 50nl, some 25nl.
He doesn't fold to many flop cbets (55%) or turn cbets (50%).

Turn play? I considered all options.

$25 No Limit Holdem
5 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight.com
Table ABI

Stacks:
UTG (32) 129bb
daven (CO) (25) 100bb
BTN (79) 318bb
SB (47) 188bb
BB (13) 51bb

Blinds: 0/0

Pre-Flop: (0, 5 players) daven is CO :7d: :5d:
1 fold, daven raises to 1, BTN calls 1, SB calls 1, BB calls 1

Flop: :td: :7c: :5h: (3, 4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, daven bets 3, BTN calls 3, SB folds, BB folds

Turn: :ah: (9, 2 players)
daven (21.35)?

daven bets 6.

Why are you opening 4x in the CO 5 handed with a half-stack in the BB?

I'm confused as to what you think this should be anything other than a bet?

What reasons would you have for checking? You already said he doesn't fold to turns either right? So clear bet.

value bet it. you're going to bluff this card a lot as well i'd imagine. plus our position/initiative will let us play better than villain on the river

edit: as for sizing, i'd make it whatever you would normally bet with QJ or Kxhh or whatever bluffs you would double barrel

I have to disagree with the guys here a bit. I don't cbet any garbage or even overs into three players on this board, so that turn is very bad for my range actually. Because of that my only bluffs are oesd's pretty much.

Here I'd just c/f and value bet river with a wide range (including this hand) because I feel like that's a better fit for my overall strategy.

Goes without saying that if there's some dynamic going on (and there very often is), then I would absolutely bet thrice.

But it's a loose reg at 25NL. I think anything but b/f is FPS. We mostly only beat hands that are making bad calls, but I don't want to give the described player too much credit for accounting for number of players to the flop and board texture for cbets and the like.

From a loose villain's perspective, he sees a wide opening range, a standard cbet and then a clear barreling card on the turn, and he'll talk himself into enough calls for us to justify betting into what is a very thin range of hands that beat us.

Well, a discussion about the competence of regs at 25nl is not an interesting one, so I'm just going to say that vs competent opposition I feel like I can create a better overall strategy by checking this turn.

FPS running wild

I can see having some checking range on the turn. But I don't see why we would ever c/f 57 here, maybe c/c 57.

What griffey said. What's the reasoning behind x/f turn? If I were to check this turn, I would think it's to x/c.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by griffey24

I can see having some checking range on the turn. But I don't see why we would ever c/f 57 here, maybe c/c 57.

---

Why do you think betting is such a good investment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pocketfours

Why do you think betting is such a good investment?

---

We block 55/77, and some villains might 3b TT vs CO and/or raise flop. So we're only behind AT mostly.

I don't love our flop cbet sizing, which may narrow his range somewhat, but I think given the frequency we might want to be bluffing this card (with QJ/KQdd,cc,hh, 89s, 46s, 7x/5x into bluffs) that it should be a bet.

Well there's a big difference in strategy. I absolutely wouldn't cbet any QJ, KQ or unpaired Ax here. I also wouldn't bet 5x/7x on the turn and not even on the flop always, depending on oop villains.

Open seems loose to me given current reads on BTN unless he's just a nit who doesn't fold post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icanhastreebet

Open seems loose to me given current reads on BTN unless he's just a nit who doesn't fold post.

---

This. Also if you are opening this wide why are you 4xing?

Whether I agreed with them or not, P4's lines always made me think more about poker, for that I am grateful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Whether I agreed with them or not, P4's lines always made me think more about poker, for that I am grateful.

---

Haha +1 to this.. rarely agreeing, but definitely good to see how other players might play in certain spots or think about certain spots.

If I'm villain and somehow have like AJ here I'm barelling off facing a check thinking "well... nobody is every checking two pair + here" haha.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stacks

daven bets 6.

Why are you opening 4x in the CO 5 handed with a half-stack in the BB?

---

ftp hand history convert issues, i opened to 0.85

Full Tilt Poker Game #32773006294: Table ABI (6 max) - NL Hold'em - $0.10/$0.25 - 22:57:08 ET - 2013/06/04
Seat 1: 2crexxata2 ($12.64)
Seat 2: alboxxadictogb ($32.13)
Seat 3: davxxenigma ($25)
Seat 4: PitoxxNca ($5.54), is sitting out
Seat 5: Dooxxmi4ka ($79.42)
Seat 6: CoxxnnorResin ($46.89)
ConnorResin posts the small blind of $0.10
2creata2 posts the big blind of $0.25
The button is in seat #5
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to davxxenigma [7d 5d]
alboaxxdictogb folds
davexxnigma raises to $0.85
Dooxxmi4ka calls $0.85
ConxxnorResin calls $0.75
2crexxata2 calls $0.60
*** FLOP *** [Td 7c 5h] (Total Pot: $3.40, 4 Players)
ConxxnorResin checks
2crxxeata2 checks
davexxnigma has 15 seconds left to act
davexxnigma bets $2.80
Dooxxmi4ka calls $2.80
ConnxxorResin folds
2crexxata2 folds
*** TURN *** [Td 7c 5h] [Ah] (Total Pot: $9, 2 Players)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by griffey24

If I'm villain and somehow have like AJ here I'm barelling off facing a check thinking "well... nobody is every checking two pair + here" haha.

---

that's why we're only considering action vs competent villain

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by griffey24

We block 55/77, and some villains might 3b TT vs CO and/or raise flop. So we're only behind AT mostly.
.

---

I had put A4s+ in villains pre flatting. Would you guys too??

Yeah you can check this (at all stakes really), but I wouldn't call it my default play. I used to think "2p has to be played with strong bets, especially the more vulnerable bottom 2p that you want to protect" but it's more complex than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackvance

Yeah you can check this (at all stakes really), but I wouldn't call it my default play. I used to think "2p has to be played with strong bets, especially the more vulnerable bottom 2p that you want to protect" but it's more complex than that.

---

Could ya elaborate on the complexities if ya feel like it?

Sure. The gist of it is that you want your checking range to be stronger, as a general strategic plan to invest less in general, but also to prevent opponents from being able to auto-bluff you off of hands whenever you show weakness (ie, check).

It's also important that you are well aware of the lines you take after you show down a hand at a table. If it was a strong hand, and you use this line again, people are more inclined to fold (so bank in your memory to use this as a bluff, unless you know your opponents are multi-level thinkers, in which case the leveling game begins but that's more advanced stuff), and you can use other lines, like checking 2p here, to get value. Like I said it's not my default play but it's definitely in my repertoire depending on my opponents and what I've been doing at a table.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackvance

Sure. The gist of it is that you want your checking range to be stronger, as a general strategic plan to invest less in general, but also to prevent opponents from being able to auto-bluff you off of hands whenever you show weakness (ie, check).

---

The argument that P4s made for checking is that we're near the bottom of our range, so checking with this hand actually makes our checking range weaker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surviva316

The argument that P4s made for checking is that we're near the bottom of our range, so checking with this hand actually makes our checking range weaker.

---

You'll want to rethink that :) Moving bottom two from our betting range to our checking range makes both ranges stronger, which is exactly what I want.

P4, could you please explain how the betting range becomes stronger?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surviva316

The argument that P4s made for checking is that we're near the bottom of our range, so checking with this hand actually makes our checking range weaker.

---

It still makes your checking range stronger, unless you're betting all your air here (if you have this in your range after a cbet), and your checking range is the nuts. I personally would never c/f here barring reads, rather c/c or b/f. To c/f here seems pretty specific play against strong opponents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eugmac

P4, could you please explain how the betting range becomes stronger?

---

Well by stronger I mean more polarized, less vulnerable and stronger against opponents made hands. Technically it could be considered weaker because it contains a higher bluff frequency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eugmac

P4, could you please explain how the betting range becomes stronger?

---

If your range that bets the turn is mostly sets (TT/AA/77/55), an occasional AT and some semi-bluffs (98/86), then removing bottom 2p from your betting range, makes the average of your betting range stronger.

EDIT: I think I bluff here a high frequency of air on the turn, depends a bit on how much I can rep the A (like if I can have a random AK here), that might change things a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pocketfours

Well by stronger I mean more polarized, less vulnerable and stronger against opponents made hands. Technically it could be considered weaker because it contains a higher bluff frequency.

---

Makes perfect sense, ty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pocketfours

Well by stronger I mean more polarized, less vulnerable and stronger against opponents made hands. Technically it could be considered weaker because it contains a higher bluff frequency.

---

Ya knOw I'm so glad there are more of the ftr wizards here in the bc . I'm getting ready to start grinding 10nl again and I couldn't express more enthusiasm that you guys will be around .

Thanks