As of November 2021, the APT Forum is closed to new posts. Like with many online forums, usage has decreased in recent years. All previous posts are still available.

Hand Review #2

edited February 2020 in Steamin' Steve's Hand Review

In this episode I review a difficult hand submitted by user monkeysystem. We especially look at a pre-flop 3-bet minimum defending range.

This episode was recorded at BestBet pokerroom in Jacksonville, Florida.


  • AceSleeves

    Excellent analysis, especially on river. I actually don't mind the small turn raise, if he re-raises me I fold and am out cheap. Definitely too much that beats us on the river and it's a just-call.

  • hnallen68
    edited August 2017

    Note: you can subscribe to APT's YouTube channel to get notified whenever a new Hand Analysis is published!

  • monkeysystem

    Thanks much for the hand review! This is great feedback!

    My instinct to raise bluffers out of hands just for the satisfaction of it will cost me a boatload of money when I start playing live cash games, if I don't break that habit.

    If my straight draw had been completed on either street with the card that also completes his flush draw, should that straight still be treated as a bluff catcher because of the possibility of the flush? How about a lower flush card on the river that leaves me with top pair instead of top trips?

    Under game theory if you have a bluff catcher on the river, you should call half and fold half to make an optimal opponent indifferent to bluffing. A straight or trips against a bet that reps a completed flush draw seems like the top half of your range and should be called. Top pair seems like the lower half of your range and should be folded. Does all that sound correct?

    My online moniker I've been using for about thirteen years now when I started playing blackjack tournaments online. I chose it because some people react viscerally to monkeys. I thought that might give me a small added advantage in a cerebral game like blackjack tournaments. It's also the level of sophistication of my system!


  • monkeysystem

    I made a mistake in part of my previous post. Your defending frequency should be 50% only if your opponent makes a pot sized bet. Otherwise it should be Y = 1 / (1 + X) where Y is the defending frequency and X is the fraction of the pot that is your opponent's bet.

  • dhirigoyd

    Great review, Steve. It really made me think of this hand in a much more analytical way than I would have otherwise. The thing that drove my thinking about it from the get go was that the flop was fairly draw heavy in my opinion. In a tournament, it seems that a BB could have defended against a pre-flop steal by 3 betting against the CO with a lot of hands, especially suited. But here specifically when looking at this flop you could imagine that he could hold QT suited (not just of heart) giving him an open-ended straight draw as well as any Ax suited of heart. The thing that bothered me was his betting pattern. If he really had a strong hand on the flop, wouldn't he have bet harder than he did to try to protect his hand? Here it's almost as if the villain is looking to steal the pot while not minding it too much if he gets called as he would get some interesting odds anyway. So wouldn't it make sense to re-raise the villain's initial flop bet to deny him any drawing odds and trying to push him out before the turn? I wouldn't think he would call without the odds, and if he 4 bets us then it still a good place to fold. does that make sense?

Sign In to comment.