$200 NLHE Full Ring: $1-$3 live, weird river

[kanselau]

villains calling range will be largely inelastic with a perceived bluffing range.

SPR is 1, GII

I don't think our hero has a polarised range here , just because we get caught bluffing once doesn't make us a serial bluffer , usually the other way around we stop bluffing.

The board is just loaded with all sorts of monsters and is too risky to bluff here. Anyway that's just me , maybe my game has not evolved enough to pull of a bluff here.

Some people don't look at SPRs they look at $ value.

 

[duggs]

I don't think our hero has a polarised range here , just because we get caught bluffing once doesn't make us a serial bluffer , usually the other way around we stop bluffing.

The board is just loaded with all sorts of monsters and is too risky to bluff here. Anyway that's just me , maybe my game has not evolved enough to pull of a bluff here.

Some people don't look at SPRs they look at $ value.

our perceived range is flush/air when we shove. let him bluff catch

 

[Four Dogs]

I may be bad at math but I'm pretty sure the pot is 188 and he's calling 75 so that's 2.5-1.

You're better at math than me. That does change things a bit. He'll only need to make $135 to break even. A 1/2 pot bet on the river would still have to be called $100 of the time or a full pot 50%.

 

[Deco]

I bet the turn bigger and shove the river
As played the sizing makes are play pretty tricky. I probably bet/fold $140, this guys previous hand has proven he won't overvalue trips and shove here, still feels wrong given the odds we'd get but I think it's for the best.

Note on villain: He is youngish, seemingly professional (non-poker) guy. Has about $700 and seems vaguely competent. Only showdown was in a limped pot where he made a big raise on the flop on a two-tone board and shut down after flush hit. He folded to a river bet and showed 62o for bottom 2 pair. After some discussion he said "There's no hand I'm folding on the button for $3."

vaguely competitent [ ]

 

[frozensprx]

i think everyone is overthinking this hand. This is live poker. Unless you have spent many hours playing with this guy or seen him float to the river and bluff, his most likely holdings are either flush draws, sets, or smaller kings. Given the river and your holdings the king is much less likely. Play accordingly. You are likely beat here and as painful as it is to fold trips, I think it is definitely the right play to check/fold UNLESS you have seen this youngster floating and bluffing against other opponents. Of course it is your money and you can do with it what you want but I can't think of many people that will flat UTG opens then call flop when UTG shows massive strength by betting into 3 people on a somewhat dry board. I'm pretty sure this guy has you beat.

 

[baudib1]

i think everyone is overthinking this hand. This is live poker. Unless you have spent many hours playing with this guy or seen him float to the river and bluff, his most likely holdings are either flush draws, sets, or smaller kings. Given the river and your holdings the king is much less likely. Play accordingly. You are likely beat here and as painful as it is to fold trips, I think it is definitely the right play to check/fold UNLESS you have seen this youngster floating and bluffing against other opponents. Of course it is your money and you can do with it what you want but I can't think of many people that will flat UTG opens then call flop when UTG shows massive strength by betting into 3 people on a somewhat dry board. I'm pretty sure this guy has you beat.

sorry but...lol? He has a set 0% of the time

 

[frozensprx]

sorry but...lol? He has a set 0% of the time

Care to explain? Or just give an opinion without any reasoning? If I ever play you i will just call down with my sets then raise the river.

 

[ScottishMatt]

We have evidence he doesn't slowplay. He doesn't have a set on the river here. We also have evidence that he values position enough to play a range there that we have dominated.

 

[frozensprx]

evidence he doesnt slowplay? last time I checked OP said ONE hand where villain folded 2pair.........that is one hand. If you think villain is capable of calling down every street with a smaller king then river is an easy jam, but it seems you are all giving the villain credit for being a competent player and if so I don't imagine he'd call you down with a weaker king and if he would then obviously just value bet the shit outta him from there on out. You said he folded 2pr earlier when a flush came through so what makes you think he would call you down with any hands you beat? Maybe I smoke too much but this seems like a blatantly obvious check/ call or check/ fold depending on the size of villain's bet. Call me a nit but this is leaning towards a check/fold.

 

[baudib1]

No one flats a 3/5th pot-size bet on the flop vs. a perceived range that includes TP, overpairs and flush draws with a hand that beats top pair, especially when they are 130 BBs deep vs. an EP PFR.

If you don't know that villain's range after calling flop and turn bets is mostly marginal made hands, I'm not sure what to say other than you aren't great at hand-reading.

All I can say really is that you guys are missing value in a ton of spots if you think the river is a check-something.

 

[duggs]

+1 to all of that.

Bit besides the point but c/f much much better than c/c

 

[Matt Vaughan]

Wish I could sub that post and come back to it later; well said baudib.

 

[js520]

If villain raised flop to let's say $90 what would you have done?

 

[Ducky7]

Bit late but i didnt read results and what not,

I B/F river dont give him credit for bluffing in this spot and no hands really missed to turn into a bluff plus hes more likely to call a 3rd with 1p hands 7x or bigger pairs, and he's never raising the river without the nuts so ye b/f

Agree x/c is horrible id prefer x/f if we are gonna check ha

 

[frozensprx]

No one flats a 3/5th pot-size bet on the flop vs. a perceived range that includes TP, overpairs and flush draws with a hand that beats top pair, especially when they are 130 BBs deep vs. an EP PFR.

If you don't know that villain's range after calling flop and turn bets is mostly marginal made hands, I'm not sure what to say other than you aren't great at hand-reading.

All I can say really is that you guys are missing value in a ton of spots if you think the river is a check-something.

You make a good case. However, you make a good case against a thinking opponent. This guy is an unknown. I have personally witnessed live players take this same line then make a massive overbet on the river. It of course isn't the most logical way to play a set vs an EP open on a K high board, but not all live players play according to a set strategy, or even take the time to think that since he opened from EP his range is much stronger. I've seen "regs" open any ace from EP many times in live poker. I know several live players that play based on "feel" and all sorts of other stuff. On top of that, you are saying he has a weaker made hand that he is calling all streets from an EP open? So you think he assumes hero is bluffing? If he does have a showdown value hand like JJ or something then the most profitable line would be to make a small bet and fold to a raise.

 

[duggs]

1/ bad players are more face up not less
2/ strong hands raise to protect earlier
3/ if a hand like JJ is calling then jamming is better than b/f

 

[frozensprx]

good points duggs. And you are totally right on 3rd point because if villain was trying to bluffcatch hero, then it would make more sense for hero to jam and make it look more like a bluff.

 

[Aleksei]

Why is check-calling so bad here? Are we convinced he never has worse Kings? Because if he can bet ANY worse, even if it's just KQ, we have odds to call a pot-sized bet.

 

[duggs]

What? The point is c/c gets owned by the few combos of flushes he has, expecting villain to bet trips on the river is optimistic, especially as he is far more likely to call a bet than to bet himself, curious as to why you think we have the odds?

 

[Deco]

Why is check-calling so bad here? Are we convinced he never has worse Kings? Because if he can bet ANY worse, even if it's just KQ, we have odds to call a pot-sized bet.

Most of the hands we beat will check back whilst every hand that beats us will still bet. We save no money against the hands that beat us but lose value against the hands we beat.

We pretty much allow villain to play perfectly.

 

[Deco]

Check/call river lines should be used when there is plenty of busted draws/air for villain to bluff. They should never be used because the river scared us too much to bet.

 

[Matt Vaughan]

Check/call river lines should be used when there is plenty of busted draws/air for villain to bluff. They should never be used because the river scared us too much to bet.

Well said.

 

[baudib1]

Here's an example of a hand from this exact same session, in fact it was the first hand I played, where I played it similarly until the river.

I raise KdJh UTG. Get 2 callers. Flop Kh Ts 3s. I bet 1 caller. Turn 4d. I bet he calls. River Qh, I check he bets I call.

There is still merit to betting the river esp. If balance for our range is taken into account. However our absolute hand-strength is worse. The Qh is a mixed bag; gutterballs got there as well as QT; KQ was beating us anyway but will now be emboldened to bet/raise on the river.

I felt I get more value by check-calling because he ends up getting to the river with more busted draws draws that wont call a bet. He had A9ss.

 

[micromoi]

u have to push u r willing to call so why not betting it your self, he might be a very bad player looking for a flush u cant do much about it, or a player with some kind of KQ, KJ, or even K10.