Here is a 3/6 hand I observed at a local B&M a few weeks ago.

MP limps
cuttoff limps
button limps
SB completes
BB checks

Pot $15

FLOP: -[6d]-[4d]

SB checks, BB bets, MP calls, cutoff raises, button folds, SB folds, BB calls, MP calls.

Pot $33

Notes on the players:

BB is the tightest player at the table besides myself. She is relatively young (30's) and hot with lots of hair, wearing the most attractive v-neck camo shirt you've ever seen. She has a boyfriend or hubby playing at another table across the room. This is the first pot that I've seen her bet at in the last 30 minutes. MP is poor and will play just about any two cards. Cutoff is a college kid with a ball cap and gotee. He plays reasonable cards but is still quite the novice as he gets confused when to bet $3 or $6. When he's raised in past pots, he's had a pretty good hand.

TURN:

BB leads out again, MP calls, cutoff raises again, BB calls, MP calls

Pot $69

River:

BB bets, MP folds, cutoff raises yet again, BB calls

Pot $93

Results in white:

BB had 66, cutoff had Ad-8d, MP said he had Kd-Tx


What are at least 2 major mistakes BB made in this hand?

Hmmmm...should've 3-bet the flop and checked the river?

-TW

stop leading out with trips when you should know someone has the made flush!!!!!!

I hate people that bet then call a raise and bet out again unimproved. Once he raised you again on the turn even the dumbest of player should think "flush!" The only thing worse that leading out repeatly like that is to be check raised on the flop, turn and river. I've seen someone able to pull that off against one guy and everyone had to laugh about that after.

hrm... certainly BB should have been wary of the raise on the turn... but maybe a good play would have been to check-raise the flop (with the 3-suited out there, you've got to think that one out of the 5 to the flop is going to be betting it). If you got raised again, you'd have to worry about the flush. The second mistake would be leading out on the turn - gotta check-call at most, and seriously think about ditching it if CO led out.

A flop check-raise would have probably been able to provide more information than just 3-betting it .... what are your thoughts on this, TW?

Well, the way I look at it is this: check-raising the flop shows more strength, and as a result, you're right, you do get more information. But I think there's a downside as well. First off, the obvious; what if it checks around? Might not be likely, but it'd be downright catastrophic to give a free card here. Someone might hit a flush with a low diamond they would've folded, or hell, someone might even hit a straight that they wouldn't have paid for.

The second problem is that check-raising could backfire if the person on your immediate left is the better. Say you check, MP leads out and everyone calls, and now it's on you...check-raising basically "traps" the whole field for another bet, so you're not getting rid of anyone...and if someone has the bare Ad, you're actually giving them value with your raise.

Mostly, though, I think it'd just too risky from a freecard perspective.

Now, as far as leading out the turn...if BB had 3-bet and the flop been capped, leading out on the turn would be abysmal. But because of how the BB played up to this point (having called the flop-raise), she really can't know whether she's up against a flush or not. So now she has to make an under-informed decision whether to lead out (thus ruining a possible free-card play if the CO has the bare Ad), or check-call. If she had managed to get this info on the flop, she can now make a better decision on the turn, because she would know whether she or her opponent is the one who's drawing.

What I'm basically saying is that I think the BB has to pump the flop, even though it's scary, for three reasons. (1) she can define her hand somewhat better (albeit expensively in cases where she's up against the flush already)...(2) Someone with the bare Ad or Kd ain't gonna fold, but you can at least charge them while you're still probably in the lead, and (3) you might be able to knock out weaker draws (low diamonds, straight draws) that could also beat you.

And at any rate, the lead-out river bet was nothing short of tragic.

-TW

Check-raise vs. 3-bet - fair enough. Yeah, I forgot to say something about the river bet ... you can't *possibly* think your trips are still good with all that action and a possible straight and a possible flush on the board. Of course, then, maybe she was counting on the "I'm-so-hot-that-if-I-keep-betting-these-silly-guys-will-soft-play-and-fold" move ...

Hmm. I dont have a problem with the way this hand was played that much, except for the river bet after the turn raise. Leading the turn is not a huge deal because the CO couldve been making a free card play with the , and assuming no one has a callable hand without a d on the river, you miss 2 bets by checking the turn. I mightve 3 bet the flop with 666 then checked the turn when the CO four bet, but part of me would still be wondering if he didnt 4bet with the , since with 3 people in the pot this is not a -EV move, especially if you think other peoples hands are strong enough to pay you off if even when you catch your 4th D.

Also, even if you do get popped on the turn, and figure someone for the made flush, your set still has a pretty substantial amount of outs- with the MP's dead money in the pot also, the pot odds are probably not too far off as far as you putting in two bets. Sure, your probably -EV still, but not hugely, and if you combine that with the fact that at the time you are betting, you have a reasonable chance of having the best hand, as well as the possibility of extracting lots and lots of bets if the board pairs (you might be able to get a CR off, or even a 3 bet?) then i dont mind the turn bet.

Leading the river in a spot where you should be crying calling is just stupid obviously-and the more disciplined players (of which i obviously am not one) mightve even mucked it on that river, with one person behind still to act especially...But thats aprobably a pretty sketchy play in a pot that big i guess.

Mecos,

Based on how the hand was played, I don't have a problem with the turn bet either. But I still think calling on the flop was an utter tragedy. Sure, it's scary to flop a set on a single-suit board when someone's giving you action, but you're still ahead here often enough that I think a 3-bet is mandatory.

As far as the river, we clearly agree that the lead-out was nothing short of a debacle, but I don't think there's anyway to check-fold here. The pot is too large, and even though a flush looks very likely, there's at least a dim chance of something like Ad9x, or overcards with the Ad that he was pumping, hell maybe even the lower set. As far as the player to act, I don't think he's too much of a worry based on his passive play.

-TW