$4 NLHE 6-max: Terrible checkdown of a set on river?

blueskies

blueskies

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Total posts
3,643
Awards
9
Chips
304
I had 55 at CO. UTG+1 raised to 12c. I called, BTN, SB and BB all called.

The flop's K63 rainbow. Everyone checks around.

The turn is 5d to gimme a set and create a possible diamond flush draw. SB leads out with a weird 16c bet into the 60c pot. Interestingly BB and UTG+1 all folded. (Had they called I would have shoved) I raise it up to 80c. BTN folds and after taking almost the maximum time, SB calls.

The river comes 2h, and he almost instantly checks. I have about $2 left and the pot is $2.20. I was about to value bet but something about it didn't feel right and I ended up checking it down after mulling it over.

The reason I decided to check the river is that the way he bet/called the turn heavily suggests a draw of some sort or he had made a low pair and had a straight draw to go with it.

If he was on a flush draw then he missed and would fold to a bet. If he had a 4 he would obviously check/raise me all in and win. I could get value out of some two pair combo although on that board, maybe 65? (unlikely since I have two 5's) I didn't think he had a king given the strangely low bet and the long time he took to call my turn raise. With these guys he probably would have bet the flop if he had a K.

I turned out to be right to check the river but all things equal, in that situation, was the check terrible? Was my thinking reasonable or was I just psyching myself out?
 
S

swingro

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Total posts
1,634
Chips
0
In my opinion was the right play. If he had better he would had checkraised. If he had air he would had folded. So given the fact that your hand hs showdown value you have no reason to try something on the river.
 
acky100

acky100

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Total posts
3,523
Chips
0
I think checking is bad yeah,

As played i'd probably be betting something that i could fold if raise so like 70c-$1, the amount of times they just call with two pair or top pair or even second pair etc will far outweigh the times they have a monster. Actually i dont even mind shoving because they will still call with worse enough i feel.

Is it just me or does anyone else want to bet just over half pot on the flop?
 
G

gsxr5221

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Total posts
152
Chips
0
Checking behind there is fine since you have showdown value on your hand. That board texture is very wet and draw heavy..The turn when he leads out it is kind of representing one of the draws out there either the straight or flush at this point and when it hits on the river I think he's definitely looking for a check/raise from you at this point especially after you re raised him on the turn.

His range could be very wide here including the A4, 45, (where he would have picked up a pair on turn), or even 47s, 78, etc. (even though he's out of position, there are many players that play out of position at those stakes)
 
acky100

acky100

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Total posts
3,523
Chips
0
There is no flush draws that have made it on the river? What is showdown value? It's when we have a hand that has no value in betting but is too good to bluff and there is definitely value in betting on here, the only scary thing is if he holds a 4, everything else we crush. clear value bet and easy to fold if the guy is a passive fish - he isnt gonna check raise us with a set himself probably.
 
jbbb

jbbb

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Total posts
1,384
Chips
0
Obv value bet only 56 beats you (that takes this line) and you can't just check behind because one hand beats you.
 
blueskies

blueskies

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Total posts
3,643
Awards
9
Chips
304
Obv value bet only 56 beats you (that takes this line) and you can't just check behind because one hand beats you.

You mean 45?

Specifically more than one hand beats me there. Stuff like 66 or KK is clearly out. But any 4x beats me. I think you can eliminate stuff like 84 and J4, but stuff like A4, 54, 64 and 44 are definite possibilities given his turn action.

As for the two pair possibility someone mentioned, I don't think he would have bet such a small amount on the turn if he had already two pairs by then, so he would prolly had to have made it on the river. But what 2x hand would he have taken the previous line with? 32 maybe? K2 suited. Unlikely, I think.

Therefore, taking the previous action into consideration, I came to the conclusion that he either didn't have a strong enough hand to call or he had a 4.
 
Last edited:
B

BlueNowhere

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Total posts
4,234
Chips
0
I probably lose value and check it back. betting 20% of the pot when he has 17-19% equity (depending on draw) on the turn seems too coincidental to me, suggesting either a flush or straight. One folds, one shoves, you get value from neither. If you bet $1 or w/e there is no way I could fold to a shove (needing 20% equity). Pretty sure top pair bets the flop as well so that's probably removed form his stacking off range.
 
acky100

acky100

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Total posts
3,523
Chips
0
You guys are over-complicating this. He is most likely a fish. Fish turn up with all sorts of shit. When they check to you, bet.

Do you really think a fish understands he has 17-19% equity so decides to bet 20% because he might be factoring in the fact he has atleast 1% fold equity on top of that? He's not thinking, he has a hand that's vulnerable but he wants to see a showdown, he may have a draw yeah but he might just have some shit top pair that's vulnerable. If you're Checking rivers just because potential draws come in is just wasting good money. /rant
 
jbbb

jbbb

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Total posts
1,384
Chips
0
You mean 45?

Specifically more than one hand beats me there. Stuff like 66 or KK is clearly out. But any 4x beats me. I think you can eliminate stuff like 84 and J4, but stuff like A4, 54, 64 and 44 are definite possibilities given his turn action.

As for the two pair possibility someone mentioned, I don't think he would have bet such a small amount on the turn if he had already two pairs by then, so he would prolly had to have made it on the river. But what 2x hand would he have taken the previous line with? 32 maybe? K2 suited. Unlikely, I think.

Therefore, taking the previous action into consideration, I came to the conclusion that he either didn't have a strong enough hand to call or he had a 4.

Oh yeah, my bad. I find unconverted hands hard to read. Still betting though.
 
Top