This is a discussion on $5 NLHE 6-max: $5 NLHE 6-max: Villain shoves on the river and I have a flush within the online poker forums, in the Cash Game Hand Analysis section; Hello fellas, my 1st post here among many more to be expected :)
Very weird hand and I'd like to hear your opinion on how
With no reads on Zoom I know it sounds nitty but I like to check back this river. Why did V stop donk leading for a min bet? We raised flop and turn. On the turn our raise was pot sized and we got snapped so Vs range should be pretty narrow. We could be facing a larger flush, a set, two pair, or something like a pair and the naked Ad. If V holds the Ad this is a good hand to bluff since he blocks the nut flushes. But without reads this is only a very small portion of what the average population will make it to the river with given this line. And most players will just give up on missed draws on the river so we are trying to pick off the rare occasion where we guessed correctly that V was bluffing. I think this is a bad plan in general. The min bets on flop and turn could be to induce or to block, again, no reads so it's dangerous to go for 3 streets of value. Relative hand strength changes a lot on the river when the board pairs. If the board did not pair then SB vs BB I think I would be more inclined to stack off. Had we bet smaller OTT to keep ranges wider I could understand going for river value. I feel like our hand is a bluff catcher here and in zoom micros I don't think Vs are bluffing river often enough at this sizing for us to be profitable when we call down. You didn't list pot sizes on each street but if my quick math is right then we need to be correct something like 45% of the time to be profitable here and I just don't see Vs bluff raising river into three streets of aggression for stacks while 137 BB effective often enough to think we are good that frequently.
So...he's repping a full house or quads. Can he have it, based on his play? I would say yes.
In my experience, min donk bets are often medium to bad players trying to set their price to get to the next street. I'd say he didn't like 3 diamonds on the flop, but based on his min donk, his most likely holding was the lone A or K of diamonds, a set, or 2 pair. All of which would be losing to a flopped flush, but had outs to beat you.
I'm with Cornbread here, and don't mind checking behind on the river (remember, position allows you to win more on your best hands, and LOSE LESS on your 2nd best hands). Here, he clearly seems to love the fact that the board paired, so it would seem his hand on the flop was either a set or 2 pair, which is now either a boat or quads. And of course, all of this is presupposing that he is at least a little bit intelligent, and isn't spew monkeying off when he hits trip 8s on the river with no boat or flush.
Clearly you lost the hand, or you wouldn't be posting it. It's always a good idea to tread warily when you have a straight or flush and the board pairs.
Fine defending this hand against a min-raise from SB.
Your raise need to be larger. The pot is effectively 30c, and you only made it 10c more. This is missing heaps of value and not charging him to stick around and try to draw out on you.
This time your raise was very large, and I like that. Someone making these min donkbets is probably a bad player, so just go for value, when you are likely to have the best hand.
I am ok betting the river for value, but now your sizing is very small again. Its almost like, you are trying to be nice and tell him, you dont have a boat. And its a bet-fold, when he check-raise. He hardly ever do this with a worse hand than a J high flush.
Thanks guys for your comments. He actually showed a broken flush-draw with Kd10s.
I was lucky to have got the hand but when I reviewed it, it did look like I could have lost a lot of cash there and I'm giving my best not to get result oriented. Only after a review have I realized that my hand was a bluffcatch in this spot.
By the river I put him on 66, 88 or a broken flushdraw, I ruled out AQ KQ because of his minraise PF. If he raised river for, say, 4x my size instead of all in I would have folded it. Does my logic make sense here? Shove just seemed weak in this spot, OR he precisely put me on a flush and wanted to extract all my cash if he had a boat.
re: Poker & $5 NLHE 6-max: $5 NLHE 6-max: Villain shoves on the river and I have a flush
Despite the fact that we have flush, this is not the strongest hand on this Board. We are losing flush over, it is also possible fullhouse and four of a kind eights. During the entire draw, the opponent did not show aggression and plays a check/push on the river, and the push here is an overbet. Thus, I think that the opponent has a fullhouse or four of kind. Fold
If he raised river for, say, 4x my size instead of all in I would have folded it. Does my logic make sense here?
Honestly no. The larger a bet, you face, the more you are allowed to fold. Pot on the river was 1,6$, if I did the math correctly, you bet 0,4$, he shipped it in for effectively 6$, since you were the shortest stack. He is risking 3 times the pot, so if this is a bluff, he need you to fold 75% of the time. This is sometimes called your minimum defense frequenzy or MDF.
Dont fall into the trap of thinking, that large oversized bets or raises must be a bluff. That is absolutely not true in general, even though this time it was. To be honest only a maniac makes his play on the river at 5NL. It is quite possible, you induced it by betting so small, so I guess, you can say, it worked perfectly this time. But against the general population at 5NL you get much more value by making a larger bet like 1$ into the 1,6$ pot than by inducing them to make a spazz ship with a busted draw.