History: Former Grader and Vegas 8 member David Tighe is deep into Event’s 39’s $1,500 No Limit Hold’em Freezeout at the 2009 World Series of Poker. The table is nine-handed with an average stack of around 45,000. Also on the table is Allan Iversen, an aggressive Scandinavian player who, like David, has two times the average. With the bubble approaching, David and Iversen have been taking it in turns to steal the blinds, but so far avoided one another.
The blinds are 800/1,600 with a running ante of 200.
Pot = 4,200
The action folds around to David in middle position.
David looks down at [Ks-Js]
What’s your move? How does the introduction of antes affect the size of your raise? Do you have a specific system for calculating the amount you raise?
Adam Goulding says:
“Unless players behind have a tendency to three-bet my raises, I’m happy to make it just under three times the big blind here (i.e. 4,500) and hope to play a flop in position against one of the blinds. When antes come into play, it’s certainly favourable to play more aggressively preflop as there is so much more dead money up for grabs, but I don’t see the need to increase our raise sizes too dramatically as most players don’t necessarily adapt to the extra antes in the middle and will play, roughly, the same game. I don’t have a system; it’s very much about the table dynamics and game flow at the time, whether there are antes in the middle or not.”
Gavin Hall says:
“We have a good strength hand that has good flop potential, although not at the top of our range. The bubble is approaching and people are likely to be playing tighter, either to make the money or preserve stack sizes. I would raise to around 3,750, mainly as I think we can call a three-bet with the potential of this hand and less than 2.5 times the bet size makes this easier to do without necessarily meaning we are playing for our stack, but then that will come down to an individual read on the villain’s range.”
David raises to 4,200.
Allan Iversen flat calls on the button.
The small blind calls.
Pot = 16,800
Flop: [9c-Td-Qh]
The small blind checks.
What’s your move? What is the best way to disguise our hand and does betting small look too suspicious?
Adam Goulding says:
“Even against an aggressive player, I think checking here would be a poor play. If we make a standard continuation bet (as our opponents would expect us to do on a high flop), then we extract value from draws, sets and two pairs (some of which may raise). The chances are that one of them at least has connected with the flop, so I’m happy to try and build a pot now rather than potentially miss out on a street of value that may occur on a future street if a potential caller becomes suspicious, decides to play small ball, or is slowed down by some sort of scare card on the turn or river. I’d bet around two thirds of the pot (i.e. 11,000); I don’t think the stack sizes require we make it less.”
Gavin Hall says:
“It is reasonably likely that this flop is going to have connected in some way with either the button or the small blind, so we do want to bet as we can start to build the pot with the nuts. Because it's quite a connected board, a smallish bet can be interpreted as a pair with kicker type hand, things like K-Q, K-T, K-T, A-Q, A-T, A-9, 9-8 for example, so we can get away with pricing the other players into the hand without a smallish bet looking out of place. I probably make it just under half pot, around 8,000 and hope that we get raised.”
David bets 7,500.
Iversen calls.
The small blind folds.
Pot = 31,800
Turn: [3d]
What’s your move? Should we be concerned about the flush draw, or can we discount that hand?
Adam Goulding says:
"I don’t see any reason to be scared of the flush draw, even as a potential backdroor scare card on the river as, like us with him, he won’t have expected us to have made the flush and won’t let it affect his decision. For a similar reasoning to before, I’d bet again, say, 20,000, which would be enough to let him hang himself if he wants to turn his hand into a bluff or make a move with the open-ended straight draw, whilst at the same time making it look like we’re betting small enough to get away from the hand if facing an all-in. The stack sizes make me tempted to check-raise in an effort to commit him, but I think he’d have just about enough to fold, and would also expect him to check back on the turn for pot control. If he has a monster, it’s going in either way.”
Gavin Hall says:
“This card is basically a blank and not going to have improved the villain’s holdings so we have to make a decision about how many flush draws are likely to be in the buttons range that would call on the flop with a backdoor draw. Realistically, there are not too many: A-K, A-Q, A-J, A-9, K-Q, K-J, K-9, Q-J, J-9, 9-8, 8-7, maybe 7-6 too. Of those hands, how many of them would have raised us either preflop or on the flop? Probably most of them unless the villain is floating us with a random A-x suited trash. Therefore, we should not be afraid of the flush as his possible hand combos that fit the way the hand has played out are so small. So, we don’t need to bet for protection, instead we have to weigh up what worse hand is going to call us and what can we extract value from.
Whilst we don’t have exact stack information, the average is around 45,000 and this pot is already 31,000, so a bet here is basically forcing our opponent to make a decision for his stack, and with only the river to come, it’s unlikely he is going to be doing that with a pair/draw combo like J-9, so I would check hoping that he decides to get creative.”
David checks.
Iversen checks.
Pot = 31,800
River: [9d]
What’s your move? Is this a good river card for us? What’s the best amount to raise and do we fold if he raises?
Adam Goulding says:
Whilst I don’t think this card will have hit his range (I believe he would have given more action with a set, if not on the flop, then on the turn), I think it’s a bad card because it looks like it could have hit our range, thus making it more difficult for any bet we make to get paid off. At the moment, I’m thinking that he’s got a one pair hand, maybe with a straight draw to boot (e.g. K-T), and is braced to close down. However, I still think we make a value bet, say 10,000, in the hope that he realises he’s behind and makes a move, has hit trip nines, or just finds it too difficult to fold top pair. I think if we check, he’ll just check behind too many hands to make it a profitable move.”
Gavin Hall says:
“As I highlighted above, I don’t think we need to be scared of the flush and I don’t see the villain risking his tournament chances with what looks like a marginal hand. I would bet around 10,000 and hope he has a nine that has just tripped up.”
David bets 17,500.
Iversen calls… and mucks.
Could David have extracted any more chips out of Iversen in this hand or did he play the hand optimally? What do you think Iversen had?
Adam Goulding says:
“I don’t think David could have done much differently. The key to this hand is assessing the stacks, and working out the correct bet sizes to either commit your opponent - if you think he has a hand - or induce him into bluffing if you think he doesn’t, or is on a draw and believes he has fold equity. By the looks of it, however, it seems as though Iversen was intent on playing small ball and had no interest in going broke with what was likely a marginal hand.
I don’t think this is the type of board Iversen will have floated, especially three-handed, and, as an aggressive player, I would have expected him to three-bet a wide range to put pressure on David, especially as we’re closing in on the bubble. Therefore, I think his range is restricted to hands like K-T, Q-J, J-T, 8-8 and so on”
Gavin Hall says:
“I have to be honest, I think that’s a pretty optimal line as I am basically putting the villain on something like 9-8 or K-9 which I am not certain he would bet if checked to on the river with full house, straight and flush possibilities, as now our small bet on the flop and check on the turn could come back to haunt us as it can be reinterpreted as strength looking to get paid off solely due to the way the cards have fallen. We have basically told our villain a story that says we have a hand that, up to the flop, we are happy to have one quarter of our stack involved with and we are not afraid of the flush and don’t need to protect it on the turn, so I don’t see the villain firing the river in this spot too often when checked to. I also can’t see him ever raising without a full house.
If we bet the turn, we can check the river looking to induce a bluff, but I think the percentage that the villain calls is small, so, overall, the check is optimal and, on the river, 60 percent of the pot as a bet is a pretty nice catch.”
Adam Goulding and Gavin Hall both became Blue Belts as a result of the Grading process. If you would like to express your views on the hand, then please leave your feedback in the comments’ box below.