Folding Their Drawing Range

Creating extra edge by utilizing inventive plays can greatly increase your no-limit expectation. Designing these plays requires familiarity with what your opponents will likely do and a conceptual understanding of the game to make sure you’re not making expectation errors with your non-standard plays.

In a $2-$5 no-limit hold’em game, a highly-predictable, passive opponent, $600 deep, open-raised to $15 from the button. In the small blind, $835 deep, holding the J 9, I three-bet to $50. I read Mr. Passive-Predictable for a reasonably wide button open-raising range and felt that he would fold a large portion of that range. Additionally, I reasoned that since he was an easy read, I would hold a post-flop play edge over him even though I was out of position. The big blind folded, and when “Mr. Passive-Predictable called the $35, I understood he had a strong range, but still felt confident in my post-flop abilities against him.

I whiffed the flop of Q 7 5. My image was aggressive, and I knew Mr. Passive-Predictable expected a continuation wager from me. If he held a hand, he was calling the flop. And if I checked, he was betting any strong hand. Since he was gun-shy about getting his chips in the center and thought I would continuation bet with any two cards, I believed that if I checked he would bet his strong hands, read my range for a lot of slow-play hands, and have few bluffs in his betting range.

I knuckled, and he checked behind me. The A came on the turn. I thought about checking again and bluffing the river if he checked, but I believed the A coming would induce bluffs even from this low-bluff propensity opponent. And I couldn’t call a bet. I fired $45 into the $105 pot. He hemmed and hawed for a while and called. I was unsure if he held a big heart, possibly with a gutshot, or had hit the ace.

The river came the 5, pairing the board. I assumed Mr. Passive-Predictable was calling with any ace. But if he’d called with a high heart, I didn’t want to check and lose to a king, a pair below a queen with a heart, split with a jack, or lose to a bluff. And all those were legitimate possibilities, though not necessarily a majority of his range.

There was $195 in the pot. He wasn’t one to raise-bluff, nor make a weak call. Since he checked the flop, I didn’t think he held a queen. If he held an underpair to a queen with a heart, he wouldn’t call any reasonable wager. With that range his play was polarized and inelastic, he was either calling or folding with little implication to bet size. That being the case, there was no need to risk any more money than I had to in order to fold jacks or worse. I bet $45 and he insta-mucked. I stacked the chips!

The hand speaks to analyzing plays against an opponent’s texture, his possible range, and what criteria were necessary to accomplish the mission. Since it’s unlikely he would fold any ace, I needed to size my bet only to fold the drawing portion of my opponent’s range, which included folding the wired pair with a heart portion also.

Since $45 would fold all the draws in his range and he’d call with his aces, there was no point in assuming any unnecessary risk by betting more than $45. Betting $100 would have the same odds of success, but I’d lose $100 when he held an ace and win the same against his drawing range.

When designing your plays, analyze what you’re looking to accomplish. What portion of your opponent’s range are you targeting? His calling range? His folding range? How can you optimize the risk vs. reward equation? Does sizing your bluff bigger widen your opponent’s folding range? Enough to justify the extra risk? If you’re value betting, will your opponents call a larger bet? If you check, will your opponent bet a lot of hands in which he’d fold? Is that option worth the risk of giving up a free card if you check?

Those are just some of the questions you need to ask yourself when designing plays and strategizing your risk vs. reward. You want to minimize your risks, but not at the cost of your rewards. There’s an equilibrium point there. It’s often a tough equation to assess. But if you think in those terms, your accuracy will improve and you’ll take fewer risks and actualize more rewards. ♠

Roy Cooke played poker professionally for 16 years prior to becoming a successful Las Vegas Real Estate Broker/Salesman. Should you wish any information about Real Estate matters-including purchase, sale or mortgage his office number is 702-376-1515 or Roy’s e-mail is [email protected]. His website is www.RoyCooke.com. Roy’s blogs and poker tips are at www.RoyCookePokerlv.com. You can also find him on Facebook or Twitter @RealRoyCooke. Please see ad below!