March 29, 2007

Limit Hold ‘em: River Raises on Scary Boards

Fredrik Paulsson @ 6:09 pm - Filed under Poker Strategy.

If you make a statistical analysis of a series of typical limit hold ‘em players, you’ll find that the aggression factor - as defined by PokerTracker, meaning the ratio between betting or raising and calling - goes down the further into the hands we get. Good limit hold ‘em players rarely just call preflop, for instance (unless they’re in the big blind) so they have a very high aggression factor (AF) there. Calling on the flop is a bit more common, but the AF will still be high. On the turn, with the bigger bets, players tend to slow down and on the river, there’s a lot of checking and calling going on.

There’s nothing particularly wrong about the AF going down on later streets; in fact, if you had numbers showing that your aggression factor went UP, I’d say you were doing something really wrong. The reason that you will see calls later on in the hands is that because of pot odds, you may believe to have the worst hand but would like to get a cheap showdown. Since the pot gets bigger the further along in the hand we get, the “crying calls” tend to go up and the raises go down. Hence, a lower AF.

But while lower aggression is generally correct for the latter streets, that’s not to say that we can’t squeeze some extra profit out of a well-timed raise with the best hand. A lot of people - and I’m one of them, so consider this a confession - tends to chicken out on the river. We have a hand like AJ, and the board is 7-A-8-Q-8, and I check behind in position because he either missed his straight draw, or we’re splitting, or he had an eight and now has trips. So I check, he shows Q7 or KQ or whatever hand and I realize that I missed out on a big bet. I hate that. So I’m working on river aggression a little bit right now. I’m also working on not spewing chips on the turn, but that’s a whole other topic. What I want to talk about today is specifically the river bet or a raise on a really scary board we’re raising might seem counter-intuitive. Like this hand:

I have AK of hearts in the cut-off. One limper before me, a VERY loose, but somewhat predictable and tight player. I raise. The big blind calls, and so does the limper. We see a flop with 6 small bets in the pot.

Flop: A-J-T, rainbow. Both players check, and I bet. Big blind mucks, limper calls.

Turn: 2, making the board A-J-T-2. Limper checks, I bet, he calls.

River: K, giving me two pair, but the board is now a scary A-K-J-T-2, meaning that any queen just filled up to a straight.

Limper checks.

I bet.

I will fold to a raise here, if I think I can trust this player enough not to checkraise bluff me on a board as scary as this. It’s very rare for a player to be so tricky and gutsy as to pull something like that off. Bet/folding, as it’s called, allows me to get maximum value out of all the hands that I can beat - which is a majority of the hands he will have here - while simultaneously not paying him off when he has specifically the straight (or a slowplayed full house, or whatever).

The board is really scary for us, and our hand is mediocre at best. But it’s better than his average (given how loose he is, there’s a lot of worse two pairs, top pairs, etc, that he can have), and - and this is the key - the board is just as scary for him. Some passive players won’t even raise a straight in this spot, fearing the full house. Very few people will raise a hand like KT, because they are naturally inclined to be afraid to get raised themselves.

The board being scary is a double-edged sword. It works in our advantage if we let it.

A couple of things to be aware of though:

1. Don’t plan on bet/folding to maniacs. If you’re up against a player who might bluffraise with a hand like 89 (who missed his straight) then you’re better off just checking behind.

2. If you’re up against a competent player (or worse, players) and you bet/fold a river like this, they may well take notice. If you do bet, get raised, and fold - check who’s at the table and try to make sure that you don’t do that again for a long time. I often put that in the notes for players I know are skilled enough - “has seen me bet/fold scary river.” That way, next time I play with them I’ll know to just check behind or check/call instead. Bet/folding and having it exploited by a tricky player is a really expensive habit.

2 Comments »

  1. Perhaps I’m wrong, but I doubt that a competent player would try for a check-raise on a scary board like that, reason being that if he does, indeed, have a Q, then he should get maximum value out of his hand by betting the river. Since you’ve been betting all the way, if he now bets, don’t you “have” to call there just to make sure?

    Yes, 2 bets are better than 1, but a scary board like that would, in my opinion, make many players check right after his check so he would lose a bet. I’m not arguing your blog because it all makes sense to me, I’m just wondering if you get check-raised in that spot I’m not so sure you should fold, unless you have a good understanding of this player.

    Lets put it like this: if you were the player that made the straight on the river with a scary board like that, would you bet to get value or attempt a check-raise?

    Comment by joeeagles — April 1, 2007 @ 9:24 pm

  2. You’re right, and in hindsight I wish I had chosen a better example. I wrote this post shortly after having played the hand above (I bet, he called).

    It’s definitely dependent on your opponent, and routinely making bet/folds or raise/folds is going to get exploited by competent players at some point - but against someone who fits the general description; I think this is a safe play. The first time.

    Thanks for your comment!

    Comment by Fredrik Paulsson — April 2, 2007 @ 5:51 am

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Powered by WordPress - Part of Cardschat.com © 2004-2007.