200NL river bluff

villain is 46/11/5 over only 25 or so hands. i've been pretty basic TAG for the session

floated flop because i'd already seen him minraise a guy and ended up showing down K high and minraised another hand that didn't show down. was standard for him. i had position and thought it was likely a spot would open up where i could take it from him later in the hand, something i'll do from time to time

as far as the rest of the hand, what you see is what you get. like? no like?

fulltiltpoker Game #3956900510: Table Scholar (6 max) - $1/$2 - No Limit Hold'em - 20:56:05 ET - 2007/10/24
Seat 1: ILoveMondays ($515.75)
Seat 2: 123 blackjack ($47.75), is sitting out
Seat 3: ClvrName ($672.45)
Seat 4: combuboom ($213.35)
Seat 5: wonerboy ($193)
Seat 6: CGalley ($97.80)
wonerboy posts the small blind of $1
CGalley posts the big blind of $2
The button is in seat #4
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to combuboom [Ad 6d]
ILoveMondays folds
ClvrName folds
combuboom raises to $7
wonerboy calls $6
CGalley folds
*** FLOP *** [Th 4s 3d]
wonerboy checks
combuboom bets $11
wonerboy raises to $22
combuboom calls $11
*** TURN *** [Th 4s 3d] [Td]
wonerboy bets $16
combuboom calls $16
*** RIVER *** [Th 4s 3d Td] [7c]
wonerboy bets $19
combuboom has 15 seconds left to act
combuboom raises to $94

What are you trying to tell him you have? Is your whole bet based on your read of him as weak? Even a weak player could get a ten. I don't like it.

I like it because he's showing absolutely no real strength, and it seems like a raise at some point should take the pot down.

I don't like it because he's donkish enough to probably call 55-99 and A4/A3. You're also not putting out a very believable line - what types of hands follow your line?

I'm not a cash game expert and SH even less, but I'll still give my 2 cents. His bet on the river looks either valuish, $19 in a $92 pot, or weak. So you raise it to $94 and pot is now $205. He needs to put $75 to call.

Being a cash game this isn't about odds of course. He'll call or fold only if he thinks he's behind or ahead, it's not an odds-based decision. I think the move is good and could work if he doesn't have a T, and we know the chances of that (villain having the T) are small.

Again though, his bet being that small on the river is a sign he has something, probably not a T but it has to be something better than your hand, so either a small PP or he paired something on the flop. So the only way for you to win this is bluffing, banking on the fact he likely doesn't have a T, he likely is weak whatever it is he has, and your image has been tight throughout the session.

Considering the above I like the move representing a T or a high PP, and I think it gets a fold more times than not. For this to be + EV, if my math is correct (but I'm doing it real fast), you need to get a fold about 45% of the time, and that sounds reasonable to me given a) your image and b) the way you played this throughout (leading the flop, calling his check/raise, calling the turn). Somehow he has to give you credit for a hand and I can't see anything weak make this call.

just took a cursory glance, will read through everything after but fwiw, i'm pretty clearly repping a T or set, (he can put me on an overpair too). this is exactly how i'd play either one against this guy

But remember you're up against what seems to be a pretty bad player here.

I think a donkish player like this would be more likely to shut down to straight up aggression rather than the representation of a slowplayed trips+. He's probably just not smart/observant enough to put two and two together.

Regardless, I don't hate it, I just don't love it. I suck at postflop play anyways, so take my words with a grain of salt

ChuckTs said:

I suck at postflop play anyways

Click to expand...

Yeah me too, ESPECIALLY at shorthanded cash games. I think I'm too weak, not enough aggressive and I get fooled easily 6-handed. An area I'm trying to work on.

I agree with Chuck though that he has to be the smart/observant type, or else it won't work. The key is that you've been TAG throughout the session, and that river raise should discourage a hand with no T, like a small pair or A3, A4, from calling.

I think we need to consider the villain having 65, most probably 6d5d. He's playing pretty loose so I can see him calling a raise from the SB with suited connectors.

Flopping an open-ended straight draw would fit perfectly with his min. raise, as he doesn't want to risk a lot but figures you'll fold a high A if you've just made a continuation bet. On the turn he feels obligated to bet it again (correct, as/and he has picked up a flush draw possibly) but again doesn't want to risk a lot so makes a really tiny bet (still very much in-keeping with his donkish profilee). When he does hit his straight he makes a veryvery small value bet (either just a bad play or figures since its so small its just calling out for a big raise from you).

Anyway, just a theory.

jt

What did he do after you bet this?

jaketrevvor said:

When he does hit his straight he makes a veryvery small value bet (either just a bad play or figures since its so small its just calling out for a big raise from you).

Click to expand...

not how donks roll. he hits his well-disguised gin card when i may very well have a T and he's going to bet $19 into $92? believe me, that's not the type of bad play you're going to see around there. to induce a raise? so we're going to put him on a fake blocking bet, basically? i think we'd be out-thinking ourselves.. that'd be, um, sophisticated for this guy and i think it's a pretty paranoid thought

regarding my perception of him: obviously his stats are not those of a good player, but i hadn't seen him actually calling off chips himself all over the place with anything less than reasonable hands (though bearing in mind this was only 25 hands in.. but also bearing in mind he'd played like 40% of them). he just seemed a bit spewy and silly in his aggression at times and liked to take cheap stabs as evidenced by his minraising fetish

once he bet $19 into $92 on the river. i was 95% sure it was simply a blocking bet. this means almost never trips, a FH, or a straight.

so, as chuck alluded to, i think it mostly comes down to how often i can get a bad player to fold something weakish like A4, 55-66, 88-99. i think his 46% VP$IP actually bodes well for me because we don't have to put him on a pocket pair just because he called a PF raise. means he can have like A4 pretty easily here and 88-99 is the top of his range (and it's very possible he'd reraise those).

obviously i feel retarded if he snapcalls me with 88 and i'd immediately make a "do not bluff" note. basic formula for me is this: if a) the guy strikes me as very definitely weak, b) there's a reasonable range of strong hands my line can represent and c) i don't have a "calling station, do not bluff" note on the guy yet, then i'll probably take a shot at it. i thought all conditions were met. the fact that he's not a good player may complicate it. according to joe's math i need to get a fold 45% of the time. i dunno, seems reasonable to me, probably +EV no?

Well that means he either has to be bluffing at least %45 of the time, or bluffing <%45 of the time, let's say %X, but is folding hands that beat you frequently enough to make up for that %45-%X. If that makes sense.

well i'm mostly counting on him folding hands that beat me, the weak type i mentioned above, not for him to have no pair. block-betting as opposed to bluffing

I don't think it's that great because you're not representing anything except pocket sevens and you'll get called a lot. TBH I'd just fold on the flop. Or if you don't feel like giving up, I'd prefer either a 3-bet on the flop or maybe a raise on the turn, but it's quite likely that he has a Ten which he's never folding so maybe a turn raise is not that great. I'd probably just fold the river - you can be pretty sure you're behind here - if you think not, then call and your ace-high may be good. Anyway, I think there are more believable times you can bluff.

Bombjack said:

I don't think it's that great because you're not representing anything except pocket sevens

Click to expand...

why do people keep saying this? i'm repping 33, 44, 77, any good T, an overpair if he chooses to put me on one -- some will play an overpair this thin for value, i probably wouldn't, but he doesnt know that-- and the only flop draw got there (56). newsflash: when you raise the river after the guy bets you're pretty much ALWAYS representing a small/very strong range. that doesn't mean you shouldn't do ever it as a bluff.. that's ridiculously exploitable at 200+ 6max. the range of big hands i'm repping is actually larger than it would be in most situations given the line that took place, which is why it's sooo puzzling to me that people keep thinking this

he can't put me on a flop backdoor diamond draw when i bet/call the flop, so the board is for all practical purposes kind of dry by the turn, which makes my call and then raise on the river look huge. you're going to put me on a turned diamond draw that bet/floated the flop and bluffs the river? then i guess you're a genius. or did i just float two streets with complete air? what else can i have but big hands? honestly, i would not suggest looking people up when they take this line (i've bluffed like this maybe ten times ever and had the monster maybe one hundred times).

p.s. 3betting the dry flop when i'm in position looks like exactly what i'd be doing.. making a play back at the minraise. it's unconvincing and i'm pretty much never doing it with any real hand. i dont like raising turn because im getting the right implied odds, the suckbet could be a T at that point, and getting reraised and pushing myself off the deceptive BD nut flush draw would suck pretty bad. by the river bet i pretty much know he doesn't have trips or better, all other things are in line, bombs away

You say you're getting the right odds to call on the turn, but if you're going to turn your hand into a bluff on the river anyway and raise when you hit or not, why not raise on the turn instead? At least then you can convincingly rep a ten.

BTW I think 3-betting the flop looks pretty strong. I suppose it depends on your style. I'd play an overpair this way and it'll fold out medium pairs.

Bombjack said:

You say you're getting the right odds to call on the turn, but if you're going to turn your hand into a bluff on the river anyway and raise when you hit or not, why not raise on the turn instead? At least then you can convincingly rep a ten.

Click to expand...

because i can't predict the future. if he bets $60 on the river, i'm folding. like i said, on the turn he can have a T and be making a stupid suckbet, he might be weak. by the river bet it's pretty clear he's weak so i fired. i'm not always going to fold out 88, 99 or even weaker from bad players, but i guessed i could enough for it to be profitable. and fwiw, i'm usually not raising the turn with AT against this guy. if you think it's an unconvincing representation, by all means you can start calling people light when they do this. i just don't think you'll like the results

Bombjack said:

BTW I think 3-betting the flop looks pretty strong. I suppose it depends on your style. I'd play an overpair this way and it'll fold out medium pairs.

Click to expand...

this strikes me as logically incongruous. if you have an overpair, you don't want to fold out medium pairs. you're in position to extract with a dominating hand on a dry board. that's why people don't play real hands on dry boards that way generally. mostly losing value when ahead and in the case of an overpair losing the max when behind. theres a 2+2 theorem based on that very concept

I like this bluff. Based on the numbers, villain looks rather donkish to me. He is showing no real strength on this hand, except for the check raise on the flop. However, what I would expect to see in that situation is an over card trying to bluff at the pot and take it down right there, thinking you also had nothing.

If I was playing this hand against combu, and he called my check raise, I would pretty much automatically put him on either an over pair or a 10 with a good kicker (suited king or ace more likely) to warrant the preflop raise. A small set is also possible given his position in this hand. Either way, combu is repping strength.

What the donk looks like to me is a typical donk. Someone who does not think beyond what they have in their hand. These types of players don't really give much thought of what kind of cards their opponent has, nor do they even attempt to try and represent a hand they don't actually have. What this looks like from the villain is possibly a small pair or outright bluff thinking he can get you to fold. Players of this "caliber" don't understand pot odds, fold equity, or any of the theoretical aspects of poker play. They only understand that hand X beats hand Y, and they think that any bet should suffice as a bluff. Donks certainly don't try and place a "raise me" sized bet here, as that is a level of sophistication far beyond what they are capable of.

The only thing I'm scared of if I make this bluff, is that the donk is oblivious to what I could be representing (ie a 10, overpair, etc). I've seen this so many times, that I am leery of outright bluffing donks now, just because they don't even understand when someone is making a move on them. This kind of reminds me of this time back in high school. My friend was a middle linebacker and was going to tackle a running back on the other team. The RB juked and my friend was toasted, except that the RB juked back the other way and got flattened, because my friend didn't even react to the jukes at all. Horrible play by my friend, but the point is that the RB got too tricky and it backfired on him.

Sure, you don't want to be folding out hands with 2 outs versus an overpair on this flop, but you don't mind too much folding out hands with 5 or 8 outs, which is why it would be a good spot to re-raise with an overpair if you think you're against a hand like 56 or TJ. I'd say it's definitely a mistake not to 3-bet a min-raise with AA or KK on this flop. And I don't think this player is familiar with the latest 2+2 "theorem" so don't worry about that. It just comes down to the principle that high pairs aren't likely to improve and you want to get your money in early with this sort of hand. They're not strong enough to slow play.

Bombjack said:

but you don't mind too much folding out hands with 5 or 8 outs

Click to expand...

personally i kind of do mind especially when the cost of folding them out is losing value from every bluff and every hand with 2 outs as well as losing the max when i'm behind. he only has 8 outs if he has exactly 56 (even 40% VPIP guy is folding 25 to a raise) so that's a bit of a stretch. 2 outs and 5 outs are both far more likely, and given the guy's history he could have no pair no draw on the flop. as said, i have position. the times he does outdraw me, i'm counting on myself to be able to discern his strength a fair amount of the time from his actions and bet sizing, lose the minimum thanks to position, and extract the maximum thanks to position. when i'm in position, i want to play poker and let the advantage work for me. we're not talking about a Jd9d7h board, we're talking 10 4 3 rainbow. people seem to want to just take the pot down early and let their disadvantaged opponent off the hook unless they have them drawing dead and i happen to think it's an unprofitable phobia, especially at 6max

addendum: what you call "slowplaying", i call getting max value. the other day i flopped a K high flush, PFR bet out and i shoved all in for 5x his bet because i put him on an overpair that wasnt folding. i didn't slowplay it just by virtue of it being the 2nd nuts. to me it doesn't matter if you have the nuts, the 2nd nuts, the 12th nuts, just do what will win the most in the long run against your opponent's range

I'm not quite sure about this bluff, but I don't really have any meaningful input yet. Combu, what range are you putting Villain on, or are you playing this more to represent a monster, in which case he'll only call down with something huge himself?

basically putting him on something less than trip Ts, less than JJ. i'm nearly sure the river bet is a blocking bet, and he's betting larger with trips or better. best hand i can see him having is 88-99. A4, 55, 66, i guess maybe 67... a pretty weak range. i expect him to be folding all of those the majority of the time, even if he's pretty bad. if i'm right, it's profitable, if i'm wrong, it's not. that's the short version

Yeah pretty read dependent. Looking at this I'd say 77-99, but it does come down to whether he's "good" enough to bin it. I'm not convinced myself because if you had what it is you're repping (10/Overpair/FH) you'd look for value on the end, not to blow him out the hand, in which case your bet on the end would be around $40-60, not the size of the pot.

If he has weak tendencies and you've seen him fold to aggression then maybe. I'd also say this has some balancing value so next time you make a monster you'll get paid off.

Schatzdog said:

I'm not convinced myself because if you had what it is you're repping (10/Overpair/FH) you'd look for value on the end, not to blow him out the hand, in which case your bet on the end would be around $40-60, not the size of the pot.

Click to expand...

nah, just because he made a retarded underbet doesn't mean i'm going to cater to him by only tripling it for value. i may, but i can easily bet this much or more, completely dependent on what i put him on. he made a ridiculously small bet so i did 5x it as a raise. 3x the bet would be the standard if he made a real bet of at least 2/3 the pot (and fyi, tripling that would be making a bet of more than the pot... more than the pot is pretty standard). the size of the pot should dictate your raise size more than their bet size. if he minbets $2 into $92, would you raise to $6-$8?

Obviously not. If I did have a FH or a 10 I'd definately bet less than $94 though. My bet size will pretty much always be related to the pot size not really to the last bet size. When you are bet into for $19 on the river there is ~$111 in the pot. If I've got a monster here I'd probably bet $70-$80 because I want a call. But yours is a bluff, you don't want a call necessarily.

i understand where you're coming from, schatz. honestly it just depends on where his head's at, and looking at it too deep can just spin you around. you could easily look at it the exact opposite way and say "well, if he's bluffing, why would he risk so much when he could just raise to $75 for the same effect with less risk?" there's about a million different ways you can think about it. if you had 99 are you honestly going to even consider calling me here? i'm pretty sure you'd fold it without thinking very hard, especially when i haven't shown down a hand that was a bluff on any street at any time. all i can tell you is that you'd be losing money in the long run calling me, because i only occasionally bluff this way, but you'd be right this one time. i'll get called here sometimes. the bluff is based on it being the minority of the time, and it's difficult to prove it either way. i've yet to see someone reasonably put me on a hand other than a monster, and putting him on a strong hand is a long shot considering his river bet. this is 6max 200 NL and currently 5-handed. when are you going to bluff? only when checked to? never? this isn't full ring, you have to play some poker