I induced the bluff, now do I call it?

[mcatdog]

Villain has only been at the table a couple of orbits, but he seems pretty aggressive. He's only shown down one hand. In that hand, I raised to $7 preflop with 33, a fish called, and he made it $27. I folded -- good/bad fold? -- and the fish called. The flop was A96 and the villain got all-in with AQs against the fish's 98o.

On this hand, I checked the flop because I wanted to see what he did on the turn before I decided whether I wanted to play for stacks. When he checked the turn I figured I was probably good, so I bet 2/3 pot hoping to represent AK with a diamond and induce a check-raise bluff all-in.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (5 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Hero ($200)
SB ($476.85)
BB ($177.60)
UTG ($402)
MP ($199.80)

Preflop: Hero is Button with J, J.
UTG raises to $8, 1 fold, Hero raises to $28, 2 folds, UTG calls $20.

Flop: ($59) 8, 5, 2 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero checks.

Turn: ($59) 7 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $40, UTG raises to $374

[andr3w321]

I think you have to fold here. Even if he only has something like 99 with a diamond he can still suckout. I would have just bet $45 on the flop and go from there. Keep in mind that he is utg and after he calls your reraise preflop I'm not so sure your JJ is even good.

[mcatdog]

[bdawg56kg]

I understand why you checked the flop, but you really have to bet here, unless you KNOW this guy will bluff if you check behind. What do you do if an overcard falls and he leads out for 45-50?

As played, I'd probably fold, but it's close.

[mcatdog]

If I bet the flop, am I value-betting or bluffing? A smart person once told me not to bet if getting raised would make me want to puke. If the turn is an overcard and he bets out, I'd probably fold. He's less likely to bluff in such a case because the way I played the flop, in his mind I might very well have that overcard.

[Cocco_Bill]

You have to bet this flop because there is too many turn cards that could hurt your hand. I would rather check AA than JJ here(i wouldn't check either one).

[bdawg56kg]

If I bet the flop, am I value-betting or bluffing? A smart person once told me not to bet if getting raised would make me want to puke.

And how do you feel about getting raised on the turn? Seriously though that doesn't apply in every situation. You are betting to protect what is likely the best hand at the moment. The fact that you'd make a flop c-bet with AK/AQ/air means that you should do it with JJ. Also, I think what you are getting at is that betting the flop causes all worse hands to fold, and all better hands to call/raise. This is simply not true.

[Rondavu]

You chose a really bad spot to "induce" a bluff. As played, it leans towards fold here and wait on villain to pick up a better read. I have to say that his check bomb all in looks really out of place. I think you're ahead often, but is it often enough? That's usually when I default to how familiar the opponent is. That's kinda what makes it a fold.

I have to admit I'd call sometimes anyway. Just looks like you're ahead.

[Fnord]

Big pot, weak hand with good showdown value, why are we fucking around here?

[mcatdog]

And how do you feel about getting raised on the turn? Seriously though that doesn't apply in every situation. You are betting to protect what is likely the best hand at the moment. The fact that you'd make a flop c-bet with AK/AQ/air means that you should do it with JJ. Also, I think what you are getting at is that betting the flop causes all worse hands to fold, and all better hands to call/raise. This is simply not true.

I'm not saying I like getting raised on the turn, but I don't hate it as much as I would hate getting raised on the flop. In other words, I think my equity against his range now is much better than it would be if he'd check-raised the flop all-in. Do you disagree with this?

[natdang]

Ugh. Like Fnord said, big pot, good hand but extremely vulnerable given the board. My goal here isn't to induce a bluff for extra value, it's to get out alive. If that means taking it down on the flop, so be it.

[mcatdog]

I think you guys are getting confused by my title. The purpose of my flop check wasn't to induce a bluff, it was to control the pot size and see what he did on the turn before I decided whether I wanted to play for stacks. When he checked again I realized that me under-representing my hand on the flop meant that he might try to push me off my hand if I bet now.

[natdang]

I think the flop check is pretty ugly regardless, I don't think you need any more information when you have an overpair but the board is halfway to ugly. Lead out the flop. If he has you killed at this point (QQ, KK, AA not as likely) with a set, he probably doesn't like that board any more than you do, and will raise you hoping to take out AK. By checking the flop you let AKd and AQd stick around. (bad idea given the turn)

[mcatdog]

By checking the flop you let AKd and AQd stick around.

So what? If I bet the flop both of those hands are certainly check-raising all-in and unless you're planning on calling that all-in, you're better off checking if he has one of these two hands.

[aislephive]

By checking the flop you let AKd and AQd stick around.

So what? If I bet the flop both of those hands are certainly check-raising all-in and unless you're planning on calling that all-in, you're better off checking if he has one of these two hands.

Your hand is ridiculously vulnerable to consider checking. If you get repopped generally you fold without a good read, you almost never have to worry about somebody bluff raising in a reraised pot.

[bdawg56kg]

The purpose of my flop check wasn't to induce a bluff, it was to control the pot size and see what he did on the turn before I decided whether I wanted to play for stacks.

Dude, if he has AA/KK/QQ/flush/set, he is pumping this pot regardless if you check or bet the flop. Pot control has little value here, since the pot is already inflated and he can get the money in easily on two streets, even if you check the flop.

In other words, I think my equity against his range now is much better than it would be if he'd check-raised the flop all-in. Do you disagree with this?

It could be true if he had a big draw like AKd, in which case it'd be better to check flop and get the money in on a safe turn, but how the hell do you assign him such a tight range? You can't. Sure he could have a draw, but it's much more likely he has just overcards (you are a solid favorite), overpair (you are a significant dog), or underpair/air (solid favorite).

[mcatdog]

It could be true if he had a big draw like AKd, in which case it'd be better to check flop and get the money in on a safe turn, but how the hell do you assign him such a tight range? You can't. Sure he could have a draw, but it's much more likely he has just overcards (you are a solid favorite), overpair (you are a significant dog), or underpair/air (solid favorite).

Don't you think that after I checked the flop, he's more likely to check-raise the turn all-in with air or a crappy draw because I showed so much weakness by checking the flop? He can't imagine that I have an overpair here -- everyone in this thread asserts that it's unthinkable to check this flop with an overpair. Anyway, that was my rationale for calling him and I turned out to be right. I laughed pretty hard when the river was a diamond and the pot was shipped my way anyway, 6 7 no good. But I had my doubts about whether I played the hand well.

I guess you guys convinced me that betting the flop here is the "right play" but I'd like to add one more thought. Earlier in the thread you said that since I'd make a continuation bet with missed overcards, I should do it with JJ. Well, I don't always continuation bet with missed overcards and I don't believe that it's correct to always do that, so the flip side of your advice is that I should sometimes deviate from the "right play" and check behind with an overpair to keep myself from being too predictable.

[aislephive]

It could be true if he had a big draw like AKd, in which case it'd be better to check flop and get the money in on a safe turn, but how the hell do you assign him such a tight range? You can't. Sure he could have a draw, but it's much more likely he has just overcards (you are a solid favorite), overpair (you are a significant dog), or underpair/air (solid favorite).

Don't you think that after I checked the flop, he's more likely to check-raise the turn all-in with air or a crappy draw because I showed so much weakness by checking the flop? He can't imagine that I have an overpair here -- everyone in this thread asserts that it's unthinkable to check this flop with an overpair. Anyway, that was my rationale for calling him and I turned out to be right. I laughed pretty hard when the river was a diamond and the pot was shipped my way anyway, 6 7 no good. But I had my doubts about whether I played the hand well.

I guess you guys convinced me that betting the flop here is the "right play" but I'd like to add one more thought. Earlier in the thread you said that since I'd make a continuation bet with missed overcards, I should do it with JJ. Well, I don't always continuation bet with missed overcards and I don't believe that it's correct to always do that, so the flip side of your advice is that I should sometimes deviate from the "right play" and check behind with an overpair to keep myself from being too predictable.

This is 100nl man, you don't need to make plays for the sake of unpredictability. The fact that you might check a flop with no pair no draw or with the stone cold nuts doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. You aren't playing against the same players often, you're usually playing some fishcakes who are looking to give money away.

[bdawg56kg]

Don't you think that after I checked the flop, he's more likely to check-raise the turn all-in with air or a crappy draw because I showed so much weakness by checking the flop? He can't imagine that I have an overpair here -- everyone in this thread asserts that it's unthinkable to check this flop with an overpair.

If I had a hand like AdAx or KdKx I'd be much more comfortable checking this flop to induce bluffs and what not, but JJ (w/o a diamond) is simply not the hand to be doing it with unless you are absolutely certain that this guy will bluff if you check, which is very hard to know for sure. The EV you gain by inducing bluffs is less than the EV you stand to lose by giving a free card here, IMO.

Earlier in the thread you said that since I'd make a continuation bet with missed overcards, I should do it with JJ. Well, I don't always continuation bet with missed overcards and I don't believe that it's correct to always do that, so the flip side of your advice is that I should sometimes deviate from the "right play" and check behind with an overpair to keep myself from being too predictable.

It is certainly fine (and necessary against good regulars) to mix up your play and check behind with overpairs/top pair, but like I said above, JJ is not the right hand to do that with in this spot. Save the mixing it up with a less vulnerable hand like AdAx or KdKx. Also the drier the board, the more willing I'd be to check behind w/an overpair.

[mcatdog]

This is 100nl man, you don't need to make plays for the sake of unpredictability. The fact that you might check a flop with no pair no draw or with the stone cold nuts doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. You aren't playing against the same players often, you're usually playing some fishcakes who are looking to give money away.

I finally grew a pair and moved up to 200NL and I find that playing against aggressive players like my opponent in this hand is quite a bit more difficult than you suggest.

[Miffed22001]

so yeah you called right?

stars players havent got past raising AA utg yet to 56s

[aislephive]

This is 100nl man, you don't need to make plays for the sake of unpredictability. The fact that you might check a flop with no pair no draw or with the stone cold nuts doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. You aren't playing against the same players often, you're usually playing some fishcakes who are looking to give money away.

I finally grew a pair and moved up to 200NL and I find that playing against aggressive players like my opponent in this hand is quite a bit more difficult than you suggest.

Oops, for some reason I thought this was 100nl. Still, people aren't going to know your game well enough at 1/2 for that stuff to really matter. Mixing your play up is fine, but the stuff you're getting into about "well i would play a certain hand this way too" is not really applicable until 3/6+ IMO.