$5 NL HE 6-max: Too ambitious to bluff villian off top pair??

[Jarud]

Game

Hold'em

Game Format

No Limit

Stakes

$.02/$.05

Table Format

6-max (6 seats)

Currency

$

pretty standard defend from BB imo,
we flop a flush draw on a on texture that connects well with my range, CU caps his range somewhat when he checks flop, button leads out, i decide to call, (should we check raise?)
i didnt want to get blown off my hand with a 3bet, turn is a 4 which is again good for my range, in hinsdisght should we consider leading turn?? villian checks back and we whiff on the river, villians range contains a ton of weak queens, we block some nut combos but unfortunately block a ton of club draws that we want villian to hold, i decide to 2x pot the river to try and get exactly what villian had to fold, i believe we would make this bet with the nuts and 4x holdings. would K6 of hearts be a better bluff candidate because it allows villians range to hold more flush draws? or is it just to hopeful to expect villian to fold top pair?
thankyou
jarud

Replay this hand on CardsChat

 

[Aballinamion]

pretty standard defend from BB imo,
we flop a flush draw on a on texture that connects well with my range, CU caps his range somewhat when he checks flop, button leads out, i decide to call, (should we check raise?)
i didnt want to get blown off my hand with a 3bet, turn is a 4 which is again good for my range, in hinsdisght should we consider leading turn?? villian checks back and we whiff on the river, villians range contains a ton of weak queens, we block some nut combos but unfortunately block a ton of club draws that we want villian to hold, i decide to 2x pot the river to try and get exactly what villian had to fold, i believe we would make this bet with the nuts and 4x holdings. would K6 of hearts be a better bluff candidate because it allows villians range to hold more flush draws? or is it just to hopeful to expect villian to fold top pair?
thankyou
jarud

Replay this hand on CardsChat

Thanks a lot for subject your hand to the forum analysis. Preflop I think it’s okay, sometimes we can 3-bet light (having information about villains) to eliminate one of the players and make our odds postflop get better since we are playing OOP.
But we also have nice pot odds to be calling preflop, as you did it.
On the flop we can call sometimes and check raise sometimes with the same idea of the preflop action, to eliminate players involved in the pot and also to protect our entire BB’s defending range: we would check raise with a couple of semi-bluffs with a lot of implied odds (flush draws and straight draws) and with a ton of value hands as our sets and two pair that we flopped.
On the turn we would continue leading the pot and betting for protection when we hold values and for bluff with our entire range thinking already what we are going to do on any hypothetical river: we are going to shove a lot of rivers in spite of the outcome.
Shoving the river is better when we check-raise flop and lead the turn. As played I would check-fold river.
What or how would you have been played if you had a set or two pair instead of a flush draw? Betting so small on the river allows your opponent to play close to perfection in position plus, you give it plenty of pot odds to call your river bet.

 

[Station_Master]

Preflop: standard call though you could squeeze once in a while depending how often you expect the villains to fold.

Flop: standard call, but a raise would be ok. You don't have tons of value on this board and lots of draws so x-raising them all might mean over bluffing.

Turn: a decent spot to lead but dont mind the check. You dont have that many 4s so might not get tons of folds.

River: I like the ambition of the 2x pot bet, but is it really necessary? After checking the turn villain will have lots of 88, 99, busted flush draws etc. You dont have the best hand to bluff with the clubs though the 6 is a good blocker. I would be targeting weaker hands to fold and not try to get a Q to fold, even though they arguably should for 2 pot! The other problem is if you really had 4x or 65 would you not just lead the turn? When the main draw misses it can be hard to get villains to fold top pair, especially at 5NL. I dont think it's a bad bet per se but I prefer a smaller size (and starting the bluff on the turn) and obviously this was the wrong villain to choose , so make a note and 2x for value next time!

 

[Station_Master]

Thanks a lot for subject your hand to the forum analysis. Preflop I think it’s okay, sometimes we can 3-bet light (having information about villains) to eliminate one of the players and make our odds postflop get better since we are playing OOP.
But we also have nice pot odds to be calling preflop, as you did it.
On the flop we can call sometimes and check raise sometimes with the same idea of the preflop action, to eliminate players involved in the pot and also to protect our entire BB’s defending range: we would check raise with a couple of semi-bluffs with a lot of implied odds (flush draws and straight draws) and with a ton of value hands as our sets and two pair that we flopped.
On the turn we would continue leading the pot and betting for protection when we hold values and for bluff with our entire range thinking already what we are going to do on any hypothetical river: we are going to shove a lot of rivers in spite of the outcome.
Shoving the river is better when we check-raise flop and lead the turn. As played I would check-fold river.
What or how would you have been played if you had a set or two pair instead of a flush draw? Betting so small on the river allows your opponent to play close to perfection in position plus, you give it plenty of pot odds to call your river bet.

I think you might have misread the river bet,it was 2x pot! So not a small bet. Though I am inclined to agree that check fold on the river is the best play once we get here like this as it's not the best bluffing hand

 

[Aballinamion]

I think you might have misread the river bet,it was 2x pot! So not a small bet. Though I am inclined to agree that check fold on the river is the best play once we get here like this as it's not the best bluffing hand

Yes, sorry about this errata! LOL
In fact I was thinking that hero had lead the turn and aiming a river shove, this is why I made this mistake, considering 2 times pot a small bet.
You gave a good advice mate, make a note about villain and move on!
If I was villain I would’ve folded a ton of Qx in this same spot and have called only with KQo that somehow decided to call preflop.
Thanks for your observation and for your reply!

 

[gustav197poker]

Too wide a call for my liking, as I'm not a fan of multiway pots in 6-Max, but I do like your line for long tables.
On the flop you can also raise to win the pot now, but I prefer to just call in MWB. And on the river there are really very few value hands that play that way. Maybe you represent 5-6 that got better with an OESD, but really that means a very small part of your range. The bluff is not necessary according to how you played on previous streets.
Greetings.

 

[Jarud]

thanks for speedy replies and great analysis, lots to think about going forward,

 

[fundiver199]

Preflop
Yes I think, this is a standard defend given his sizing.

Flop
Check-calling and check-raising both have merits. If you check-raise all draws, you are overbluffing, because you dont have that many hands, that want to check-raise for value (44, 33, 43s). However one element, which has not been mentioned, is that the bet comes from the field caller not the preflop raiser. This means, he has a weaker range, since he likely 3-bet QQ, KK and AA preflop. Even AQ and KQ are often 3-bet, given that its BTN vs. CO. And because of that this is not a bad spot to start a big multistreet bluff.

Turn
I do in fact like leading out here, when the board pair second card. This is a card, which could have hit you, and the problem with check-calling is, now you only have one card left to hit, and if you do, its kind of difficult to get paid, because then you either need to lead river or check and pray, he will bet again. But checking is not terrible. He might check back and give you a free card, which his exactly, what happened.

River
I think, its fine to bluff here, since the chance of winning at showdown is pretty low. It really sucks, if he check back and then flip over KJ or KT, which you cant even beat. The question however is, if its more profitable to go for a small bet saying, you have top pair or better. Or for the overbet, where you are saying, you have a straight or a boat or maybe trips top kicker. With the small bet you are just trying to fold out any A high or K high, that decided to not barrel the turn. Maybe some weak pairs like A3 as well. With the overbet you are also trying to make 55-JJ and maybe even some QX fold.

But the question is, if those hands make up enough of his range to justify risking 3 times more, than you would on a more standard 2/3 pot sized bet? Is he folding 3 times more often to the larger sizing? I am not convinced about that, and I also think, he is probably supposed to call you down with a hand like the one, he had, since its very near the top of his range after just calling preflop and then checking back the turn. Apart from some boats, that might check back turn as a slowplay, and maybe 65s, that rivered a straight, what can he even have here, thats better than QJ or QT?

So I actually think, a good player in a mid or high stakes game would also call with QT of hearts realizing, that its an MDF defend, and that you can have a lot of bluffs. And a bad player is not folding top pair in a 5$ game, because well... its top pair, and its less than the price of a cup of coffee to see your hand. So I perfer to use a normal bet size here, which would of course still have gotten called, but you would have cut your losses.

 

[rastapapolos]

You played the hand passively to overbet river. If you lead turn, you can overbet river with great chance that villain fold. You have a lot of 4x in BB.

 

[loafaBREAD]

You can bet 1/3 or 1/4 pot OTR to get v off A high FDs. 2x pot represents trips/boats in a spot where its easy to find bluffs. V is never folding tp there.

XR flop with the KQ blocker isn't a bad idea either.

 

[LOKIE77]

As in any bluff situation you need to select the correct situation and opponent. If you put them on an over pair they are never folding at the small stakes level as they only play their two cards. Hence the reason there is not much bluffing at the smaller stakes. As you are out of position it is either a fold or a 3 Bet IMO. If you get 4 bet just fold sometimes we defend our BB with trash and just get into trouble when we have to act first. The advantage of 3 betting is you will normally find out preflop if they have a premium made hand ie they 4 bet or if they just call you it is with other hands like middle pairs or a couple broadway cards 3 betting also gets you heads up by eliminating other callers. Look at your opponents position and playing style and tendencies. If the board is good for your range then I would be firing a couple bullets try to get them off AK type of hand or do a-lot of check calling if your hand has some showdown value like a marginally made hand mid pair, top pair with weak kicker etc in order to keep the pot small and get to showdown. For me the bottom line is identifying your opponents playing type if they are a NITT or calling station and only play top hands and don't fold any pair well they can't be bluffed you just wait to make a hand and value bet them on every street. If they are a TAG player and can read the texture of the board and know about hand ranges and what you are representing and you are telling a believable story with your bets, bet sizing, and pre and post flop actions then a TAG can fold even at the smaller stakes but then again if they sense any weakness or inconsistencies in your bluffing story/betting line then you will get called especially at the smaller stakes/micro stakes. Good luck.