Search This Blog

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

COTW #7 Review/Analysis

This is a review of COTW#7:

I’m not a big fan of this particular cotw. The HH examples were played poorly and the OP does not explain what ranges to 3-bet with. Our 3-betting range is often going to either be for value or polarized depending on the opponent and that will require that we know how s/he plays to some degree. Knowing why we 3-bet is only half the battle and know what to 3-bet with is going to help us create a much better strategy as far as post-flop play goes.

The 87s hand was also played poorly on all streets. Pre-flop I think isolating here with the intention of calling a 3-bet with 87s is going to be pretty bad even if u have good implied odds. The villains range is so tight that it will be difficult for the Hero to have much FE which is mainly what SCs are best for. Hero will not hit the flop hard enough often enough to make it worth his iso/call 3-bet investment. Depending on table dynamics, I think flatting can be ok as well as raising smaller to call the min 3-bet if u want the pot heads up. Post-flop play was also very meh. There is very little value in calling the flop because the villain is not very likely to double barrel on this type of board with a hand like AK and by calling, you give him a chance to catch up. With the amount of equity we have, shoving is going to be more profitable as we can never fold the flop and we have some FE if the villain is nitty enough. Again, all this is going to be opponent specific, but for the most part I think raising is the better play. The turn bet was way too big considering the spr. Against the villain’s range, we practically have the nuts here. Our huge bet is not optimal for value and accomplishes nothing except for letting our opponent play perfectly against us. We can make a smaller bet here for value and it will help us balance the times we decide to double barrel bluff the turn for cheaper.

Not sure about the JJ hand or what it teaches. This post is meant for fullring players and as such, the hand was played at a 9 handed table. Folding JJ IP to a 3-bet seems a bit nitty but is probably correct against other FR nits, especially one from the blinds against your UTG open.

The 66 hand that the OP 3-bets with is explained poorly. He runs an equity calculation of his hand versus the villains opening range but what is important is not so much the villain’s opening range but his 3-bet calling range which is generally going to be tighter and stronger. His 3-bet there with 66 is a total bluff unless he expects the villain to call with his whole opening range and even then he is 50/50.

The 42s hand requires more explanation. He is most likely 3-betting a polarized range here since villain is folding so much but OP does not state that. He only says you should be asking yourself why, which is not going to be enough. You need a coherent game plan pre-flop that also extends to post-flop play.

Not sure about the Q9s hand. Seems like a spew to 3-bet it IP when the hand has so much post-flop potential. Can be profitable if villain is folding a lot to 3-bets and/or folding to c-bets a lot post-flop. His 3-bet sizing seems to be a tad big as well. He is creating a spot where there will be a ton of RIO when he is called with a fairly big pot/shallow spr.

The HHs were not the best, but there are still some pretty good content in the post and worth a read. As is with everything you read, question it and don’t take it to heart. Everyone’s game is a little different and what you take away from this post may be different from what another takes away. Nothing in poker is set in stone.

No comments:

Post a Comment