LHE Difficulty: Being donked.

[F Paulsson]

Something that keeps happening to me since I moved down in stakes, is that people "donk" the flop (or the turn) meaning that they lead into the preflop-raiser. This is not at all unusual in no-limit, but it's not something you see a lot of solid limit players recommend and/or do very often.

So how should we continue in a situation where...

We're in the cut-off with A-9o, and openraise. Only the small blind calls, and the flop comes Q-7-4. The small blind bets.

We're being offered 6:1 to call. What's our plan now and for the rest of the hand, presuming villain is an unknown?

I think I've finally figured out what to do in these situations, but discussion can't be bad.

 

[ChuckTs]

I hate this. In NL, players who minimum donkbet or put out like 1/4 the pot are almost always block betting/bluffing and a raise usually scares them out. A significant donk bet tends to mean a lot more strength in my experience.

In FL I never really learned how to deal with it, nor did I figure out what it meant. Usually either something really weak like a gutshot to the wheel, some stronger draws or occasionally even just ace-high or a stone cold bluff.

Against an unknown I'd usually peel once, occasionally just folding with a lone overcard. Once in a while I'd actually manage to fold out the donk bettors if I had a read on them, but readless is pretty tough.

 

[Stick66]

Sure, there's a lot of block bettors out there. But when I run into this situation (LHE or NLHE), I've found that many times it means they've called PF with an Ace kicker and have hit their weaker card. AQ and A7 are very likely here and even A4 is possible. If you hit your Ace, that would most likely 2-pair them. It's not always the case, but it's something to be weary of.

Many times, I would just call them down for cheap to see what they do on later streets and make notes. Other times, I would fold to the flop bet from a tight player or act on what my notes tell me for LAGs and donks (Do they like to bluff at the Q? Or do they like to stick with 2nd pair?) Either way, it's not an easy situation.

 

[bubbasbestbabe]

Raise. AQ would try for a check raise if he could. Ax or anything else would be would be just betting out. This is prime time to try to take the pot right then and there.

 

[switch0723]

Raise. AQ would try for a check raise if he could. Ax or anything else would be would be just betting out. This is prime time to try to take the pot right then and there.

im not sure about that. I think at these stakes once he has led into pot, the villain will call a re raise, then check call down to the river if he has showdown value. Therefore we need some kind of showdown value. I think id call looking to hit an ace, but also too see if he leads out turn where we can fold

 

[F Paulsson]

Raise. AQ would try for a check raise if he could. Ax or anything else would be would be just betting out. This is prime time to try to take the pot right then and there.

Sometimes I think that if we took the "Raise" button away from you, Karen, you'd time out every time the action was on you.

I have to point out that whatever this bet means, the only hands we're folding out if we raise on the flop are total bluffs - and even then we're rarely getting them to fold. Remember, this is minbet poker.

My way of handling these situations is to take them to showdown the first time I have a hand that has any chance of winning after the river, and then make a note on that player. I've found that betting out like they do is almost always significant of something, it's just that that something differs from player to player.

Just now, before checking CC, I had a player who led into me on a 8-7-7 -A board when the ace hit the turn. I looked him up (with pocket tens) because few hands made sense other than a bluff or a semibluff since he "should" be afraid that I might have the ace, and if he has trips or actually has the ace, it would make a lot more sense to go for the checkraise and cheap showdown respectively, depending on his kicker in the latter case. Once the showdown was taken care of (yes, he was bluffing, but unfortunately he spiked a J on the river and beat me anyway), I know now what it means the next time he does that.

I think that people aren't at all very random with what they do, and I think very few people actually try to "mix it up" in any other way than which two cards they decide to play preflop.

 

[joeeagles]

people "donk" the flop (or the turn) meaning that they lead into the preflop-raiser. This is not at all unusual in no-limit, but it's not something you see a lot of solid limit players recommend and/or do very often.

The reason why, in limit, you shouldn't "donk" into the PFR is that, if the pot is HU, the PFR will automatically bet the flop no matter if he hit or missed, so you should be thinking in terms of check/raise rather than lead out. Am I right? Since we're discussing I'm curious to know why limit pros don't recommend betting the flop into the PFR, and this is the only reason that makes sense to me. In theory check/raising the turn would be more profitable, but since we're OOP and we have no certainty that the PFR will bet the turn, we can't just call the flop and plan to check/raise the turn because it might not work and we risk 1) giving a free card and 2) losing a betting round.

As far as what to do, I think I agree with Chuck that you should peel off at least another card. Pot is offering 6 to 1 (or 5-1/2 to 1) so with 2 overcards you're fully justified to call, with one overcard its less correct but if you fold everytime you might become vulnerable to this play. What makes it worse is that, as you say, the meaning of them leading out changes from player to player. So it's about adjusting to reads. But exactly what limits are we talking about here? Just curious.

 

[tenbob]

"Donk" betting is something I do lots, especially against regs on the NL tables, my main range for it is small pairs on favourable flops (set or no set ). I still get called out on it lots, but its a nice little thing to do when the done thing is C/R.

Ohh one thing, why is it a "donk" act if it ****s up thinking players ? If it induces a mistake from you is it not a great play ?

Donk bet, a little different than min bet, effective with a decent table image though.

pokerstars Game #14035451350: Hold'em No Limit ($0.50/$1.00) - 2007/12/22 - 20:36:29 (ET)
Table 'Cosette' 9-max Seat #5 is the button
Seat 1: rage4dorder ($27.15 in chips)
Seat 2: kjs6221 ($101.20 in chips)
Seat 3: hongzhong ($20 in chips)
Seat 4: king_noth_ ($141.50 in chips)
Seat 5: Steelfox7 ($18.50 in chips)
Seat 6: buccaneer ($17.95 in chips)
Seat 7: tenbob ($188.80 in chips)
Seat 8: hooper ($98 in chips)
Seat 9: cuzza83 ($26.10 in chips)
buccaneer: posts small blind $0.50
tenbob: posts big blind $1
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to tenbob [5c 5s]
hooper: folds
cuzza83: folds
rage4dorder: folds
kjs6221: calls $1
hongzhong: folds
king_noth_: folds
Steelfox7: raises $3 to $4
buccaneer: folds
tenbob: calls $3
kjs6221: calls $3
*** FLOP *** [9h 9s 7h]
tenbob: bets $14
kjs6221: folds
Steelfox7: folds
tenbob collected $11.90 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $12.50 | Rake $0.60
Board [9h 9s 7h]
Seat 1: rage4dorder folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: kjs6221 folded on the Flop
Seat 3: hongzhong folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: king_noth_ folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: Steelfox7 (button) folded on the Flop
Seat 6: buccaneer (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 7: tenbob (big blind) collected ($11.90)
Seat 8: hooper folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: cuzza83 folded before Flop (didn't bet)

 

[F Paulsson]

I'm not necessarily saying that it's a bad play, I'm just using a commonly accepted term for it. I mumble something about this in the video I just posted, but I believe it to be the case that it's only something that messes up thinking players' games until we've taken a hand to showdown. After that, make a note and it's no longer a mystery.

I'm not saying anything about it being a bad play in NL. The only reason it's questionable on the flop in limit is because it's very rarely the most profitable play.

I've thought a lot about how to handle being bet into lately, and the chief reason is that I've wanted to figure out if it's actually a play I should be making occasionally, especially into ABC TAGs. I don't think I should, since the only situation where it would be better for me to lead out is when I'm on a stonecold bluff, and it won't be long before they pick up on that unless I start balancing it by leading out with strong hands as well, at which point I'm missing value compared to checkraising.

 

[Ronaldadio]

Is this not an area where playing passive is almost the way forward?

If I`m picking up this thread in the right way, against the donks u will struggle to get them to fold any draw. The problem this give us is that we don`t know if they are on a draw, have the nuts, have zero, or anything in between!!!

It is a very interesting post. FP. It is something I have been trying to get my head around. The reverse of the situation u are suggesting (getting 6:1 to call) is that the donk will not be that interested in the pot odd, etc, they will be more interested in the fact that they have outs, regardless of how few. So the more we build the pot the more attractive it will look if they are on a draw.