$400 NLHE 6-max: 88, counterfeited, river bet.

F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
$400 NL HE 6-max: 88, counterfeited, river bet.

--------------------
HAND 1
--------------------

$2/$4 No Limit Hold'em Cash Game, 6 Players
Poker Tools by Stoxpoker - Hand Details


Hero (MP): $529.50 (132.4 bb)
UTG: $858.80 (214.7 bb)
SB: $236.55 (59.1 bb)
BTN: $394 (98.5 bb)
CO: $381.70 (95.4 bb)
BB: $400 (100 bb)

Pre-Flop: Hero is MP with 8
club.gif
8
spade.gif

UTG folds, Hero raises to $12, CO calls $12, 3 folds

Flop: ($30) 5
diamond.gif
T
diamond.gif
9
spade.gif
(2 players)
Hero bets $16, CO calls $16

Turn: ($62) 9
heart.gif
(2 players)
Hero bets $28, CO calls $28

River: ($118) T
spade.gif
(2 players)
Hero bets $40

Villain is 56/7, WTSD of 27%.
 
Z

Zybomb

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Total posts
372
Chips
0
I like the river bet, including the bet sizing. This will fold out busted diamond draws and QJ along with random J8 87s often enough to make this an +EV play and there aren't too many hands besides like Tx combos villain really shows up with here. His hand is a draw way more than 1/3 of the time, which is all we need to break even here

As for the turn play I don't really like the bet sizing. Your bet of less than 1/2 the pot doesn't really accomplish too much. Villain is probably going to call this bet with any made hand that he called the flop with and certainly with every draw plus we're OOP. Now if the river blanks out we don't really know how to proceed if villain is the type that can value bet thinly (i.e Tx). Obv if villain is the type that would check behind a Ten almost always, but bluff missed draws if checked to, it's an easy check/bluff catcher call, but we don't always have the luxury of villain being so predictable. I'd either bet a lot more ($40ish) or check, depending on the villain (how often he folds to double barrells how hed play different hands etc)
 
M

Mamushi

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 24, 2009
Total posts
90
Chips
0
Some thoughts from FP and some of the others would be nice to hear, I don't know that I would ever play this hand this way at 25nl. It would certainly be easier IP.
 
W

WossaPotOddz

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Total posts
127
Chips
0
With no re-raise PF we can assume he doesn't have TT-AA, the flop is super draw heavy with T9 and the flush draw out there so we can probably assume that 55 raises the flop plus pretty much any hand with a ten which means from the flop play we can narrow his range down to a 9, smaller PP's than yours and drawing hands.

No raise on the turn confirms the flop range and probably knocks any hand with a 9 out as he's probably gotta be raising on the turn because you have bet so small and the board is super draw heavy now and he can't be afraid of a better 9 or TT, 55 at this point because it's 400nl and that's just nittesville.

So yeah the small "value" river bet seems like solid play imo. With the way it played out and the board texture from the flop he can't have any calling hands here much ever. Maybe some sort of AT, JT, QT type hand played it like this, no raise on the flop makes these holdings kinda 50/50 methinks but if he does have one of them you'll know when he raises the river.

As for betting more than $40....I don't really see the point, $40 gets the job done considering villains river range, betting more is just wasting money.

EDIT - I like zybombs analysis also
 
P

Pantheon

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Total posts
28
Chips
0
I'm having a hard time finding many hands that fit villain's play that aren't busted draws. I suppose something like JT could show up, but hands like that are such a small part of his range, and we'll have the luxury of not having to showdown if something like that is the case because we will get raised on the river anyway.

I'm a little skeptical as to whether we will get him to fold something along the lines of an A-high flush draw though - his stats are fishy after all. But still, we fold more than enough worse flush and straight draws out for that to be much of a consideration, so I like the river bet.

As for the turn play I don't really like the bet sizing. Your bet of less than 1/2 the pot doesn't really accomplish too much. Villain is probably going to call this bet with any made hand that he called the flop with and certainly with every draw plus we're OOP. Now if the river blanks out we don't really know how to proceed if villain is the type that can value bet thinly (i.e Tx). Obv if villain is the type that would check behind a Ten almost always, but bluff missed draws if checked to, it's an easy check/bluff catcher call, but we don't always have the luxury of villain being so predictable. I'd either bet a lot more ($40ish) or check, depending on the villain (how often he folds to double barrells how hed play different hands etc)

Isn't he going to generally call a 3/4 pot to pot-sized bet with the same hands you mentioned him calling the smaller bet with, given his stats? I don't see any great difference between the two in this specific example.
 
Z

Zybomb

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Total posts
372
Chips
0
Isn't he going to generally call a 3/4 pot to pot-sized bet with the same hands you mentioned him calling the smaller bet with, given his stats? I don't see any great difference between the two in this specific example.

i missed the stats ncluded at the end and it's a good point you bring up. How does his pre stats translate to post? Would this also mean he'd raise flops with a Ten and bet most draws that miss if we check the turn? If so I might get sneaky on the turn and go for a C/R. If not I'd still often bet more, if I know villains will call infinite with a draw I try and make them pay to do so.

I agree though that given villains stats (something i missed the first time around) the turn isn't as big of an error as I thought it was
 
Last edited:
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
My computer has decided to go on strike and it happened right around the time that I posted this yesterday. I was about to make an edit when it went kaboom. Today, it worked for awhile agian but decided to give up just when I was about to add to this thread. Figures. Now I'm on Lori's computer, and I'm giving it a second (well, third) shot:

Villain is ridiculously passive postflop, over the 100-or-so hands that I had on him. Other important postflop stats that I can remember (and that specifically have bearing on the turn bet sizing) is that he peels the flop wide (50%+) but is tight on the turn (folds 80%+ to second barrels). I thought at the time - although I could be wrong about this - that on the turn he had more nines and tens in his calling range than draws, especially since I didn't think he'd necessarily continue with gutshots either. My turn bet, in other words, was designed to avoid giving a free card to a six-outer and was also a sort of pre-emptive blocking bet (since if called I was planning to check/fold almost any river).

The river bet was really the point of the thread, but looking back I think I made the biggest mistake on the flop, not the turn. The flop c-bet should probably be close to pot-sized, since that's when he peels wide. Especially since he folds so often on the turn. My flop and turn strategy versus this opponent should be to fire two barrels with basically my entire range, and make the first bet big and the second bet small. When I bet the turn, his calling range with hands that beat me is a lot of tens and a lot of nines. There's like 80 combos of 9 and T hands he can have, and I don't think his drawing hands (that calls a turn bet) outnumber them. I hope that explains why my bet sizing was so small.
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
if villain is like you describe - passive and plays fit or fold on turn - is there really value in barreling the turn? aren't we always giving money to every hand that beats us and folding every hand that we beat?
 
W

WossaPotOddz

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Total posts
127
Chips
0
I think check/calling turn flips our hand face up
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
if villain is like you describe - passive and plays fit or fold on turn - is there really value in barreling the turn? aren't we always giving money to every hand that beats us and folding every hand that we beat?

Not EVERY hand that we beat. He can certainly have draws. But more importantly, he'll fold a lot of hands with some equity (even if it's only 10% on average, or whatever) which is certainly nothing to sneer at. I'm not a fan of "betting for protection" as a general concept, but that's essentially what my tur bet is - I don't want to give a free card because my hand is super vulnerable and my hand still beats his total range.
 
W

WossaPotOddz

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Total posts
127
Chips
0
It is when he folds the turn 80% of the time
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
Not EVERY hand that we beat. He can certainly have draws. But more importantly, he'll fold a lot of hands with some equity (even if it's only 10% on average, or whatever) which is certainly nothing to sneer at. .

If we only win 10% equity over the hands we fold, we do need to fold a huge amount of them to make up for the money we lose to hands that are ahead.

It is when he folds the turn 80% of the time

Fold to turn cbet% is a not really the kind of stat that we should base our decisions on when we have 100 hands on villain, imo.
 
W

WossaPotOddz

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Total posts
127
Chips
0
Good point

edit - FP what would you do on the river if an off suit ace drops?
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
If we only win 10% equity over the hands we fold, we do need to fold a huge amount of them to make up for the money we lose to hands that are ahead.



Fold to turn cbet% is a not really the kind of stat that we should base our decisions on when we have 100 hands on villain, imo.

If he folds too often on the turn, it's obviously good to bet the turn. If he doesn't fold often enough on the turn, it's obviously good to bet the turn. If our 56/7 friend in the CO surprisingly folds just the correct amount of hands on the turn, checking is better. I have an immensely hard time seeing an argument for checking the turn versus passive opponents.

edit - FP what would you do on the river if an off suit ace drops?
You mean if I'd be tempted to bluff an ace as well? Probably not; I'd probably just check/fold.
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
If he folds too often on the turn, it's obviously good to bet the turn. If he doesn't fold often enough on the turn, it's obviously good to bet the turn. If our 56/7 friend in the CO surprisingly folds just the correct amount of hands on the turn, checking is better. I have an immensely hard time seeing an argument for checking the turn versus passive opponents.

If he plays fit or fold on the turn, he plays perfect against 88 on a T995 board. He may be a fish, but it just happens that playing fit or fold is the correct play here against your holding.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
If he plays fit or fold on the turn, he plays perfect against 88 on a T995 board. He may be a fish, but it just happens that playing fit or fold is the correct play here against your holding.

If he plays fit-or-fold then consider what you wrote here:

If we only win 10% equity over the hands we fold, we do need to fold a huge amount of them to make up for the money we lose to hands that are ahead.

The only time you can even consider checking as the superior alternative is when there's a decent chance that he'll raise as a bluff or when you think he'll bet as a bluff when checked to.

edit: In other words, to be a bit more clear: Given his (presumaby) wide range going in on the turn, he can't create a winning strategy without bluffs. Fit/fold is his least losing strategy, but it still loses money to me betting my entire range. Including 88.
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
When we bet out a hand that has 10% equity on the turn, we win 10% of a $62 pot, i.e. about $6.

When we bet into a hand that is ahead, Tx or 9x, it is typically 95% ahead as we only have 2 outs to a boat, and that means we lose 95% of $28, i.e. $26.

That means we need to fold more than 80% of his range to make betting profitable. Considering this villain calls with any T and any 9 on the flop, i'm not convinced that 80% of his range has neither.

It's a little more favorable to a bet when you consider he can have draws in his range too, But while decent villains typically have lots of draws in their range as they typically select suited cards and connectors preflop, a 56/7 does not and that unbalances his range towards marginal made hands a lot more than towards draws.
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
Little known fact: 32.3% of the top 56% range contains a T or a 9.

Since he's folding none of those on the flop but will fold some of the rest, i assume that on the turn, we're probably close to 50% of villain's range containing a T or a 9.


EDIT: the above ignores card removal effect. Once we take out one T and one 9 on the flop, that's about 24%. Once we take out 2 nines and one T on the turn, it's about 20% of the 56% range.

If he folds 40% of his range on the flop, none of which contains a T or a 9, then we still have 33% of the remaining range that has a T or a 9 in it.
 
Last edited:
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
When we bet out a hand that has 10% equity on the turn, we win 10% of a $62 pot, i.e. about $6.

When we bet into a hand that is ahead, Tx or 9x, it is typically 95% ahead as we only have 2 outs to a boat, and that means we lose 95% of $28, i.e. $26.

That means we need to fold more than 80% of his range to make betting profitable. Considering this villain calls with any T and any 9 on the flop, i'm not convinced that 80% of his range has neither.

As a sidenote, this is only true if we think it's true that he will never bluff the river after we've checked twice. I've said that he's passive (and I stand by that) but on average our loss will be a little bit bigger because he's going to bluff - or even "value-bet!" - a weaker hand than ours when checked to on the river, even if it's very rare. We run the same risk either way when we check the river, of course, but on average I think his bluffing frequency will be lower then - if nothing else then by virtue of his range being stronger on average, but I think even compensating for that we will still find the number of hands that he'll (rarely) bluff to be smaller.

It's a little more favorable to a bet when you consider he can have draws in his range too, But while decent villains typically have lots of draws in their range as they typically select suited cards and connectors preflop, a 56/7 does not and that unbalances his range towards marginal made hands a lot more than towards draws.
I think you may be either underestimating the number of draws in his range or how much equity they have. My "10%" number from above was not my estimate for what his total equity was for the hands that I don't beat; it was a sidenote on the fact that there IS value in folding out even a hand like A7 (if he should happen to show up with that).

Here's my guess on his range on the turn that I beat:

88-66,44-22,AJs+,Ad8d,Ad7d,Ad6d,Ad5d,Ad4d,Ad3d,Ad2d,KJs+,K8s-K7s,K5s,QJs,Q8s-Q5s,J8s-J7s,87s,76s,65s,54s,AJo+,A8o,A5o,KJo+,K8o,QJo,Q8o,87o

It's really hard to guess on what a 56/7 would flat preflop with and then also guess what he folds to a c-bet, but I gave him a 35% range preflop (adjusted with adding some suited connectors that aren't naturally in there and making sure all pocket pairs are in). That range has ~20% equity vs me on the turn and is 250 combos total.

The range that beats me has 95% equity (as you said) and is 128 combos wide (I really wish I had PokerRazor installed on this computer; doing this with Stove took forever). That's including big pocket pairs because I don't know which of those that he 3-bets, but as a compromise I took out AA but left in JJ-KK. So as best as I can see, his range on the turn consists of 1/3rd hands that beat me, and 2/3rds hands that don't. The larger part of his range consists of hands that have on average 20% equity vs me. There are ways for me to make that range smaller (making betting less attractive), but with the unhelpful consequence that its equity goes up (making betting more attractive) so it doesn't seem to matter much.
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
So as best as I can see, his range on the turn consists of 1/3rd hands that beat me, and 2/3rds hands that don't. The larger part of his range consists of hands that have on average 20% equity vs me. There are ways for me to make that range smaller (making betting less attractive), but with the unhelpful consequence that its equity goes up (making betting more attractive) so it doesn't seem to matter much.

when he folds a hands with 20% equity we win $12. When he calls with a hand with 95% equity we lose $26. If the ranges are 2/3 vs. 1/3, then our EV for betting is (2/3)*12-(1/3)*26 = -0.6.

We need him to make mistakes for the bet to be profitable, but it's hard for him to make mistakes because he won't fold a 9, a T or better, his fold to turn bet% means he folds trash now, and the price we give him makes it decent to call with his draws.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
Awards
1
Chips
1
when he folds a hands with 20% equity we win $12. When he calls with a hand with 95% equity we lose $26. If the ranges are 2/3 vs. 1/3, then our EV for betting is (2/3)*12-(1/3)*26 = -0.6.

We need him to make mistakes for the bet to be profitable, but it's hard for him to make mistakes because he won't fold a 9, a T or better, his fold to turn bet% means he folds trash now, and the price we give him makes it decent to call with his draws.
Sure. But ending the hand now instead of checking to him twice (which, as I noted above, will sometimes make even the most passive of villains take a stab at it) I think outweighs the .15bb immediate loss. Btw, you forgot that I have some equity even when called by a better hand - doesn't make a huge difference, but at least enough to make my bet 0EV, if not immediately profitable.

Now, in fairness, I thought my turn bet was better than just break-even, and I'm happy to concede that there wasn't as much value in it as I thought it was. But I still feel that betting is better than check/folding twice because there's "hidden" value in betting, e.g. sometimes getting him to fold a hand he shouldn't (KQ), believably bluffing the river and avoiding getting bluffed out (even if it's a rare occurrence).
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
Now, in fairness, I thought my turn bet was better than just break-even, and I'm happy to concede that there wasn't as much value in it as I thought it was.

and i'm happy to concede it's not the mistake i made it look like. :)

i do think the discussion was worth it, though, because looking at ranges more closely, it comes out that when a fish has a high VPIP, it changes the ratio between marginal made hands and drawing hands that he has in his range compared to what a tighter player would show up with. And that is a worthwhile lesson beyond the hand ITT.
 
W

WossaPotOddz

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 4, 2009
Total posts
127
Chips
0
Gotta say I enjoyed that, wp guys.
 
Top