Weak top pair turned 2nd pair; FLHE

ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Fixed limit hand here. We've got about half loose-passive-ish players, an unknown and a TAG. Can we value bet this? Just check and call? Check-fold?

PokerStars 0.50/1.00 Hold'em (6 handed)

Preflop: Hero is BB with T
heart.gif
, 9
spade.gif
.
UTG calls, MP calls, CO calls, Button calls, SB completes, Hero checks.

Flop: (6 SB) T
spade.gif
, 8
spade.gif
, 4
heart.gif
(6 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, UTG calls, MP folds, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls.

Turn: (5.50 BB) 6
heart.gif
(5 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, UTG calls, CO calls, Button calls, SB calls.

River: (10.50 BB) K
club.gif
(5 players)
SB checks, Hero ...
 
Schatzdog

Schatzdog

Visionary
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Total posts
693
Yeah I get it now.

I'm either c/c or c/f the river, depending on how many bet and what reads we have on any of them in particular.

I don't think I ever lead here.
 
J

jeffred1111

Visionary
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Total posts
792
Check call unless it is 2 bet back to me, lots of busted draws will bet this river to rep a K while I don't see many K in opp hands here (unless K of spades). I think we're still ahead since that 6 didn't look to have helped anyone (nobody raised with the flush draw still there).

Yeah, I never lead here too.
 
vanquish

vanquish

Legend
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Total posts
12,000
leading here is bad imo, c/c seems reasonable
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
The more I look at it the more a ch-c or ch-f seems to be the best play. There are a bunch of hands in SSH that recommend value bets in spots I would never think to bet, and I thought this might be one of them.

There are plenty of draws out there, and none of them have really hit. A bigger ten is most probably raising at some point with this draw-heavy of a board, and a weaker pair might still call. Someone could still also have a bigger ten regardless, or some other weird hand. I dunno, maybe a ch/c or ch/f is best.

It got checked all around, and two had busted FDs, the other two holding busted gutshots, and I raked in the pot. Wouldn't have made any more had I bet anyways.

Thanks for the input.
 
J

jeffred1111

Visionary
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Total posts
792
Betting here IMHO is horrible since you can get raised/bluff quite often by busted draws and we're never getting value from an 8 or a 4 because of turn action.
 
ChuckTs

ChuckTs

Legend
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Total posts
13,642
Betting here IMHO is horrible since you can get raised/bluff quite often by busted draws and we're never getting value from an 8 or a 4 because of turn action.

This is .5/1 - you'd be surprised what will call. I've gotten called by busted j-high FDs in the past in spots just like this. An 8 will probably call if he's calling the turn, and a 4 isn't calling the turn to fold the river either.

Not to say we'll see these calls every time, but I think a value bet is closer than you guys are making it out to be.
 
F Paulsson

F Paulsson

euro love
Joined
Aug 24, 2005
Total posts
5,799
The brief version: Check, and call if it's one bet back to you. If the action went check-bet-raise back to you, fold. And then vomit as the one guy turns over a missed flush draw and the second guy shows down A-4.

Had this been heads-up, a bet would have been mandatory. This time, however, you don't have a ton of value to extract versus so many opponents, so better to avoid being raised.
 
V

viking999

Visionary
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Total posts
512
I guess I'm the only one, but I'd bet this.

I figure the only advantage to checking comes when the SB has us beat and it gets checked down. I would assume any hand that has us beat would bet behind if we check, and we're going to call anyway, so it's the same outcome.

If they're really loose-passive, they're probably not going to bluff with a busted draw if you check. Plus, everyone would be getting > 11:1 to call the bluff. It's pretty much a suicide bluff. Same goes for the prospects of being raised with nothing if you bet. Plus, you've max bet every street after the flop, so I don't know why a passive player would suddenly decide to bluff.

What do we get value out of if we bet? T + low, 8x, 69, 67, 99, 77. Again, they're getting 11:1 and they're loose-passive, so I'd expect low pairs to call here. As for a surface analysis of what can have us beat here, because of the dangerous texture of the board on the turn, I'd expect the big hands to raise almost always. I'd say UTG could have slowplayed (foolishly IMO) 97 or hell maybe even 75, or someone could have KsXs. Also, there's a remote chance of a stronger T who got scared and didn't raise.

So I think it warrants a bet/fold.

Edit: Oh yeah, so I kind of disagree with F Paulsson's analysis. I think a check makes more sense heads up, and a bet makes more sense multi-way (mostly because of the huge pot odds). A heads up, smaller pot situation is more likely to induce a bluff. The big multiway pot is going to scare other players out of making a risky bluff, but they may call weak because of the huge odds. I think what he's trying to say is that there are many players in the pot so our hand is less likely to be good, but I'm inclined to go with my read. Not to mention I'm probably going to donk off if someone else bets anyway, so why not do the betting myself?
 
Last edited:
J

jeffred1111

Visionary
Joined
Apr 16, 2007
Total posts
792
I guess I'm the only one, but I'd bet this.

I figure the only advantage to checking comes when the SB has us beat and it gets checked down. I would assume any hand that has us beat would bet behind if we check, and we're going to call anyway, so it's the same outcome.

If they're really loose-passive, they're probably not going to bluff with a busted draw if you check. Plus, everyone would be getting > 11:1 to call the bluff. It's pretty much a suicide bluff. Same goes for the prospects of being raised with nothing if you bet. Plus, you've max bet every street after the flop, so I don't know why a passive player would suddenly decide to bluff.

What do we get value out of if we bet? T + low, 8x, 69, 67, 99, 77. Again, they're getting 11:1 and they're loose-passive, so I'd expect low pairs to call here. As for a surface analysis of what can have us beat here, because of the dangerous texture of the board on the turn, I'd expect the big hands to raise almost always. I'd say UTG could have slowplayed (foolishly IMO) 97 or hell maybe even 75, or someone could have KsXs. Also, there's a remote chance of a stronger T who got scared and didn't raise.

So I think it warrants a bet/fold.

Edit: Oh yeah, so I kind of disagree with F Paulsson's analysis. I think a check makes more sense heads up, and a bet makes more sense multi-way (mostly because of the huge pot odds). A heads up, smaller pot situation is more likely to induce a bluff. The big multiway pot is going to scare other players out of making a risky bluff, but they may call weak because of the huge odds. I think what he's trying to say is that there are many players in the pot so our hand is less likely to be good, but I'm inclined to go with my read. Not to mention I'm probably going to donk off if someone else bets anyway, so why not do the betting myself?

You do not bet here because :
a) the pot is already big enough and we don't want to fold this: our hand has a lot of showdown value and b/f doesn't take us there.
b) we aren't closing the action and someone could have hit and we get raised
c) we save a bet the times it gets bet/raised and we fold (unlikely)
d) we might induce a wrong valuebet from a weaker hand
e) betting here reps our hand as stronger than what we really are holding, meaning we fold worse hands and are almost never getting called by them since villain's ranges are skewed heavily toward having us beat or having busted draws. I don't believe someone that paired a 6 is betting here... And a stronger T is not folding this unless he is horrible. Betting essentially turns our hand into a bluff.

So basically, betting here is a huge mistake wich could cost us the pot for little reward, while c/c is a small mistake (one bet mistake in a huge pot) that has a huge reward (ie. the pot). We don't need to maximize our gains at every opportunity, especially when it can lead us to making a mistake of disastrous proportions. And yes, people do bluff/raise here soemtimes in very big pots, I see it a few times per 800-900 hands session.

What I would've liked was a c/r on the turn, but if they were passive, betting is fine too.
 
jaketrevvor

jaketrevvor

Legend
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Total posts
1,402
You do not bet here because :
a) the pot is already big enough and we don't want to fold this: our hand has a lot of showdown value and b/f doesn't take us there.
b) we aren't closing the action and someone could have hit and we get raised
c) we save a bet the times it gets bet/raised and we fold (unlikely)
d) we might induce a wrong valuebet from a weaker hand
e) betting here reps our hand as stronger than what we really are holding, meaning we fold worse hands and are almost never getting called by them since villain's ranges are skewed heavily toward having us beat or having busted draws. I don't believe someone that paired a 6 is betting here... And a stronger T is not folding this unless he is horrible. Betting essentially turns our hand into a bluff.

So basically, betting here is a huge mistake wich could cost us the pot for little reward, while c/c is a small mistake (one bet mistake in a huge pot) that has a huge reward (ie. the pot). We don't need to maximize our gains at every opportunity, especially when it can lead us to making a mistake of disastrous proportions. And yes, people do bluff/raise here soemtimes in very big pots, I see it a few times per 800-900 hands session.

What I would've liked was a c/r on the turn, but if they were passive, betting is fine too.


:dito:
 
Top