200nl 6max: TPTK vs dry river donk?

Villain is a seemingly 'good' 22/17/3 over a large sample. I've been lagish.

wtf does the river donk mean? Does he really slowplay a set/two pair like this? Did he river A7? Is he bluffing with a busted draw? Block betting for...%60 of the pot? I'm lost.

poker stars, $1/$2 NL Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
Hand History Converter by Stoxpoker

BB: $501.05 (250.5 bb)
Hero (UTG): $205 (102.5 bb)
MP: $224.15 (112.1 bb)
CO: $182 (91 bb)
BTN: $101.50 (50.8 bb)
SB: $238.25 (119.1 bb)

Pre-Flop: Hero is UTG with A K
Hero raises to $6, 4 folds, BB calls $4

Flop: ($13) 2 A 6 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $10, BB calls $10

Turn: ($33) 4 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $22, BB calls $22

River: ($77) 7 (2 players)
BB bets $48, Hero ...

Looks to me slow playing a set. He's calling your bets all the way through with a large raise at end. Classic slow play, IMHO.

Well you more or less have a bluff catching hand. He could have something like AQ AJ but I would think he would just want to see that down, and his bet size seems a bit large for a blocker bet. Not counting it out but I dont think it makes up much of his range.

So it comes down to a broken flush or a a slow played hand, probably set, calling OOP with any other combo seems very weak(considering the flop texture). Even looking at the flushes you have the A so that limits his possible holdings. I dont know its slightly odd but I think think this is value by him most of the time(and even thought you are getting great odds) I think its a fold.

This could all be wrong depending on your LAGness but judging by how you usually play in vids I will stick to it. You are representing a big ace and he donks out on the river still.

Why would a good player slowplay a set on this type of board to the river though? I'm double barreling an ace-high flop with a flush draw after raising utg. That has to show tons of strength...and with that in mind I'd expect him to at very latest have check-raised the turn, if not the flop...

This is really weird. You've led out flop and turn, then he bets out. It's not a huge bet but not a really small blocking-type bet. If he really had a weak A or something he could just as easily C/C. And a bluff here makes no sense given that you've shown nothing but strength. I'm thinking maybe A7 here that's worried you'll check your AK behind on the river? I'm thinking 2-pair/set should C/R flop or turn. This is just such a bizarre line, the only hand I really think a "good" player could do this with is A7. The problem is can you actually find a fold here? I'd probably end up calling here, but I can't explain why because I don't see a single hand that a good villain does this with that we beat. But then again I don't see anything but A7 that he does this with that beats us. Maybe since we're lagish he expects this to fold out your bluffs and then he can fold to a shove? This is just such a strange spot lol.

Well you put good in "" so I took that as good numbers. I dont think he is good based on this hand(he very well maybe guy this isnt a play usually done by solid players usually. only hand that really makes sense here is is like 58 of spades but thats a pretty bad Pf call so even that doesnt makes sense. Have you seen this guy play sets before? This is really a poorly played set but that doesnt mean it isnt one.

how can this ever be a7? 21/17 doesn't call w/ a7 from bb against an utg raiser...

flopped sets aren't likely + i can't ever see them playing like this as it is basically the worst way to get money into the pot. c/r the flop would be logical as few players are going to open from utg then c-bet and fold to a reraise on an A 2 6 flop. c/r the turn at the very least if villain flopped a set.

Almost looks like a blocking bet from aq/aj, but at the same time this would make absolutely no sense seeing as villain risks getting rai and having to fold and the donk bet is as much as you would value town anyways. A blocking bet would be like $20 less. It just looks so much like a value bet, but so few hands that beat you make sense.

Anyways, if you have been opening wide from utg and double barrelling alot this kinda looks like a %&^*& brutally played 77 from villain, but combinatorially that isn't very likely. Maybe 67s would make a little more sense. I just can't see villain calling in the BB with much else with those stats (be interesting to see fold bb stat).

Anyways i'd make a crying call because you are just allowing yourself to get pushed all over the place if you fold TPTK in this spot. I can't see this ever being a busted draw tho. Villain has got to have something (and it certainly looks like somethign that beats tptk), since s/he has got to expect 0 FE (this would be like the worst bluffing line in history). Just doesn't make sense for any non-retard to take this line with a draw w/ the intent to bluff if missing.

So we are calling here so we dont get pushed around? We are getting good odds but I dont really see this a bluff enough to make that worthwhile. Chalk me up in the group that doesnt consider getting pushed around in my decision. Thats not to say I wont fight back and exploit plays like this but not the first time in this situation.

metagame wise, folding tptk here would be very bad for image. You can't allow yourself to be bluffed off a hand by lines that make no sense without really good reads, especially in 6 max. Folding atc card here is an incredibly weak line regardless (course doesn't mean you wouldn't have to do it at times). I think you also have to call just because there are very few hands that do this that make sense. Who knows, maybe villain's brain exploded 2 seconds before this hand started and s/he decided to run the worse line ever as a bluff or maybe retarded bet sizing as a blocking bet. You'll also have a very good insight to how villain plays here by seeing showdown (ofc calling down with little equity for information is not a good idea). With no idea of history/how chuck is playing, this could potentially be a missed draw far more often than i am giving it credit. I've got no idea how often he has been caught running 2 barrell bluffs/his opening range from utg etc etc.

But i'd call this down if for no other reason that no hands make sense to me other than maybe 77 and 67. I guess these hands coudl certainly call to the river if you've run a few double barrell bluffs/aren't opening super tight from utg.

Have to say this is the first hand i've ever since in the ha forum that i am actually very interested to see the results.

Well I do agree with your statement about his image here we arent quite sure, if chuck is playing maniac then I can see a call. I however disagree with the metagame comment, they have no idea what chuck has here, it could have been a DB gone wrong, and maybe will extract more value in the future. I cant imagine anyone saying OMG he folded TPTK here anymore than oh his DB didnt work. Its a push at worst.

widowmaker89 said:

Well I do agree with your statement about his image here we arent quite sure, if chuck is playing maniac then I can see a call. I however disagree with the metagame comment, they have no idea what chuck has here, it could have been a DB gone wrong, and maybe will extract more value in the future. I cant imagine anyone saying OMG he folded TPTK here anymore than oh his DB didnt work. Its a push at worst.

Click to expand...

ofc they don't know he will have folded tptk, but that is why i said that "folding atc here is incredibly weak". The point being that, metagame wise, to double barrell from utg then to fold to a 60% pot bet on the river on about as dry a board as you can is weak no matter chuck's cards. Obviously if chuck was bluffing he has no other choice but to take this line on the river.

To try and explain what i meant by the folding tptk being weak: Basically, calling down with tptk and losing the pot is a stronger metagame line than folding and having everyone at the table think you were bluffing. That is the only thing i was trying to say.

haha no worries I think everyone pretty much just writes without forming a writting strategy. I think you are overvalueing metagame here though. How often are you paying attention to what makes sense in hands you arent in? Most poeple are multi-tabling and really wont be paying attention to the logicalness of the hand, they may take in what the all in was but im not sure metagame is enough reason here.

I rewrote it so it should make sense now. To clarify, i'd make this call primarily on the basis of villain's line making almost 0 sense, not on the metagame aspect. I only made that the primary focus of the last two posts because i was directly responding to your post saying that calling down just for image isn't reason enough (with which i fully agree).

And good regs (plenty in 6 max nl200 i'm sure as i found plenty in nl100 6 max) certainly will pay attention to the lines that you take and what they can exploit. Doesn't matter at all at nl25 and below and not all that much at nl50, but i think once you start playing nl200 and above you have to be very concious of the metagame aspect. Especially in 6 max because it is alot more aggressive and you are more likely to play back at a given villain.

feitr said:

Almost looks like a blocking bet from aq/aj, but at the same time this would make absolutely no sense seeing as villain risks getting rai and having to fold and the donk bet is as much as you would value town anyways.

Click to expand...

this was like my first thought. i mean, yeah, you could easily be toast, but i think most are underestimating how often this can be an AQ/AJ type hand. i've seen players do it a lot.

i'd call because

[x] people play bad
[x] i hate folding
[x] nice pot odds
[x] OMG TPTK

Also widowmaker, my comment about folding tptk here allowing us to get pushed around isn't so much meaning that ppl will try to exploit us when we take this line, but simply that you are allowing yourself to get bluffed off of a hand far far far far too easily if you are willing to pitch tptk in this situation. The only way you could fold this imo is with really really really really good reads on villain.

[x] people play bad
[x] i hate folding
[x] nice pot odds
[x] OMG TPTK

Click to expand...

haha so true. pity i probably use this to much justify other not so sound plays.

this is most likely played bad either way though. I feel even with the odds this is played bad in the not maximizing value sense, not calling OPP with non A suited cards and chasing a flush and throwing out a prayer bluff on the river. I mean considering even hands he could hold calling the flop how many even fit here? If Chuck doesnt have the As it changes this, but I dont see enough bluffing hands playing this to call here.

Chuck says his stats are over a largish sample; maybe the river donk is a metagame play by the villian. You've repped a big Ace all the way down, villian has presumably got the same number of hands/stats on you; maybe the donk bet is sized for maximum confusion for someone holding/repping TP.

Even if that's the case I dunno what that says about his holding, other than maybe AK himself.

I'm pretty sure I agree with the fact that it's mostly AJ/AQ in retrospect. During the hand I was completely lost and just couldn't find a fold.

Any value in busting out the ed miller minraise here? Too thin?

Also, I agree metagame is important but how many regs are single tabling here? Maybe im wrong but going though the hand and realizing what a rediculous line villian took is a tall order for someone 6+ tabling. Not saying they areny paying attention but to analyze each hand all the way through is very impressive.

i actually thought of the min raise as a possibility, but if villain shoves you vomit and i honestly do not understand what on earth aq/aj (only hands min raise could possibly work against) would be trying to accomplish here.

If this is aq/aj i've honestly got to think that villain puts you on a weak ace and wants ultra thin value instead of you checking back (don't know your utg range so this is suspect...and this line still makes very little sense to do this). It just makes 0 sense to make a blocking bet this large on the river when you only bet 2/3 the pot on the turn. It makes even less sense when you lose value out of the odd 3 barrel bluff. There is just no way this can be a blocking bet from anybody that is thinking straight, since it is just as large as you would value bet the river, it folds out your hands that could bluff the river, and risks being rai.

Also, I agree metagame is important but how many regs are single tabling here? Maybe im wrong but going though the hand and realizing what a rediculous line villian took is a tall order for someone 6+ tabling. Not saying they areny paying attention but to analyze each hand all the way through is very impressive.

Click to expand...

perhaps, but taking the "oh they won't be paying attention" attitude isn't really a great idea imo. it doesn't take much concentration for villain to note that hero barrelled 2 streets then folded to a small river donk bet.

ChuckTs said:

I'm pretty sure I agree with the fact that it's mostly AJ/AQ in retrospect. During the hand I was completely lost and just couldn't find a fold.

Any value in busting out the ed miller minraise here? Too thin?

Click to expand...

too thin imo. i would have to be really really confident about AQ/AJ to do that considering that (i would guess) they're gonna cry/fold those to the minraise pretty often esp. since they don't seem spewy, and ofc a better hand is basically never folding but that goes without saying

I certainly dont like a min raise here. If villian has AQ and is donking out its to get value out of worse Aces. What hand does AQ beat here on a min raise? I think if AQ is donking here for value he isnt calling a min raise or else he would have just check called. I think by donking he should be thinking any raise beats me here.

Im not assuming they arent paying attention to our double barrell fold here, im saying to be following how we play against a wierd line is giving a lot of credit. For a villian to look into this hand realizing what an odd line villian takes and our response to it wont affect out metagame much. even if they are playing close attention are they going to take a wierd line in the future to take advantage here?

Do we have proof that he's a decent player other than his stats?
Either way, this is obviously a call. I'm kinda contemplating a value shove because he has a weaker Ace so often. Sometimes he'll do this with a monster, hoping we shove over the top, but it's hard to make monsters.

You can't go wrong with a call vs. him, against a weak player it's a shove.

I agree that this is a clear call. The Miller-Raise would have been an option if his bet was small(er), indicating a blocking bet. Here, it looks like he made much the same bet that we would have ourselves if he had checked, so I'd just go with the flow and call it.