Up against a steal raise

[colgin]

My opponent in this hand is what I would refer to as a "2+2er in training". He plays tighter than your average Party player but not tight enough. He seems to have some comprehension of pot odds but still chases too much. I am pretty sure he is on a steal in this hand.

Party Poker 3/6 Hold'em (10 handed)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 4/images/graemlins/spade.gif, A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
<font color="666666">7 folds</font>, <font color="CC3333">Button raises</font>, <font color="666666">1 fold</font>, Hero calls,

Flop: (4.33 SB) 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif, A/images/graemlins/club.gif, 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="CC3333">Button bets</font>, Hero calls.

Turn: (3.16 BB) 8/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="CC3333">Button bets</font>, Hero calls.

River: (5.16 BB) 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
<font color="CC3333">Hero bets</font>, <font color="CC3333">Button raises</font>, Hero calls.

Final Pot: 9.16 BB
<font color="green">Main Pot: 9.16 BB, between Button and Hero.</font>

Comments?

[sthief09]

I hate defending with aces, since they're so likely to be dominated, but The Dude told me to do it in a similar situation yesterday, and if The Dude says it's okay, then it's okay.

if you bet the river, you have to be able to fold to a raise. those are the rules /images/graemlins/wink.gif you can't possibly fold to a raise here, so I don't like betting the river. I have a strong feeling that the button has nothing/little since a number of players would just call with an A, and a board isn't that probable. still, I think if you bet, you have to be able to fold.

[BassMan712]

You check/called the flop &amp; turn, why didn't you do the same on the river? If you're beat you pay an extra bet to get to a showdown if raised. If you're ahead, you have the blind stealer bluffing into your better hand. I don't really a benefit to betting out on the river.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
You check/called the flop &amp; turn, why didn't you do the same on the river? If you're beat you pay an extra bet to get to a showdown if raised. If you're ahead, you have the blind stealer bluffing into your better hand. I don't really a benefit to betting out on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

the check-call, check-call, bet and fold to a raise play is a great one. you don't lose anything extra when you're behind, but you don't let your opponent check behind on the river. unfortunately, folding to a raise is easier said than done.

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate defending with aces, since they're so likely to be dominated, but The Dude told me to do it in a similar situation yesterday, and if The Dude says it's okay, then it's okay.


[/ QUOTE ]

In some situations I don't like defending with Ace-rag. Here I think my opponent could be raising from the button with almost any two cards. I think my Ace high is likely the best hand pre-flop and when I hit my Ace I feel pretty good about my hand here.

[ QUOTE ]
if you bet the river, you have to be able to fold to a raise. those are the rules you can't possibly fold to a raise here, so I don't like betting the river. I have a strong feeling that the button has nothing/little since a number of players would just call with an A, and a board isn't that probable. still, I think if you bet, you have to be able to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

I also thought my opponent had little/nothing and was just taking stabs at the pot. I was not sure whether he could take a third stab at the pot if I checked to him again at the river but I thought he would likely call here if he had any piece of the flop. If he had nothing then he would presumably fold. I thought I had a value bet, albeit a thin one, on the river and I did not want to see the hand get checked through. Of course I hate it when I get raised here but I still think my hand may be good and am not folding top pair. I do expect to see two pair or some such, however.

Mind you, I do see the argument for just check-calling the river. That's why I posted the hand.

All the best,

Colgin

[Garbonzo]

I think I will try to give a response before reading the rest for once.

First off, I think your description of the player is essentially me....

Second, I prefer to reraise immediatley if I put someone on a steal and feel that my hand is strong enough to play back at him. So I reraise preflop, and I will usually bet out and 3 bet most flops. If he is still around I reevaluate.

I have a hard time check calling to the river under these circumstances. It seems/is very passive. I would be more inclined to be passive if I held a STRONGER hand, I think it has a very nice effect on opponents when you dope-a-rope them with a monster occasionally....

Seeing as...I am the player you desribed, please take my comments with a grain of salt...and two shots of Wild Turkey.

Regards.

[Garbonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You check/called the flop &amp; turn, why didn't you do the same on the river? If you're beat you pay an extra bet to get to a showdown if raised. If you're ahead, you have the blind stealer bluffing into your better hand. I don't really a benefit to betting out on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

the check-call, check-call, bet and fold to a raise play is a great one. you don't lose anything extra when you're behind, but you don't let your opponent check behind on the river. unfortunately, folding to a raise is easier said than done.

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel like folding to a raise on the river here would be wrong based on the descriptions the poster has given us.

To me, the whole hand lookis like a mating ritual and gamesmanship...as such, I would strongly consider 3 betting the river...and I will call down any raise with my top pair no kicker against a pre flop steal raise.

I might be kinda, just a teeny eeny bit, sometimes, every other Sunday a bit of a LAG....

[colgin]

Thanks for the responses everyone.

"2+2er in training" had 5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif and MHIG.

I think my river bet is questionable here because it put me at risk of getting bluffed out of the pot. Several of you think folding the river after getting raised here is correct so that makes me question betting in the first place and putting myself in that situation. On the other hand, how many players will try this kind of bluff-raise on the end?

[BassMan712]

If you can fold to a raise on the river more power to you and, by all means, bet out the river. I like to see a showdown in this situation.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
If you can fold to a raise on the river more power to you and, by all means, bet out the river. I like to see a showdown in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

the point is you don't bet if you can't fold the river.

[sthief09]

you missed my point entirely. in another post I wrote "I have a strong feeling Button has little/nothing." as a result, you can't fold to a raise. but that's a reason for not betting in the first place. this isn't a scary enough board to bet and fold to a raise. if the middle card paired and a 3-flush came, then your opponent has to have brass balls to bluff at that board. then you can fold to a raise. if your opponent wasn't aggressive, you can bet and fold to a raise. but the fact of the matter is he's aggressive, and the deuce pairing isn't scary at all. an aggressive player will bet if checked to, so there's little risk that he'll check through.

[sthief09]

the best tactic to use with mediocre hands against aggressive, somewhat thinking players is to check-call. they'll continue to bluff away, but fold to a check-raise.

[Garbonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you can fold to a raise on the river more power to you and, by all means, bet out the river. I like to see a showdown in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

the point is you don't bet if you can't fold the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand this statement. I mean, I understand, but something is not registering.

He has top pair against one loosey button raiser who has acted like a thief (no offense) the entire hand...i feel like the reason he should bet is because he CAN call or raise on the river against this opponent in this hand...does that make ANY sense??

[Garbonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
the best tactic to use with mediocre hands against aggressive, somewhat thinking players is to check-call. they'll continue to bluff away, but fold to a check-raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that sounds right, since I get check called plenty as I bet into other peoples stronger hands...however, if his "any two" read is accurate his hand is no longer mediocre, correct? It's significantly above average.

Also, you can prevent some steal raises in the future (which is good I think) by playing back at the agressive opponent. Correct?

[sthief09]

Betting and getting called here is +EV
Calling after being raised is +EV

So, if you treat them as isolated events, they are both good plays.

But look at the river as a whole. After you're raised, you wish you hadn't bet, but you still have to call. the street, as a whole, is -EV, because you paid 2 BB for a hand that's probably not worth that much.

take a similar example. you limp in MP with a suited connector. you think it'll be +EV. however, the player behind you raises. you have to call his raise because it's +EV. but, if you look at your play as a whole, you wish you hadn't raised, because paying 2 SB for a suited connector is too much. if the guy rarely raises, then you can defend the limp. if he often raises you can't.

the river bet is far from bad (and it could be good, since I might be wrong), since the only hands that beat him are A9 and better. if he knows his opponent will make a desperation bluff raise like he did, then betting is good. but from the way he described his opponent originally, I didn't think he would be raising the river with 6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif5 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif. I actually like it a lot more given the results.

[Garbonzo]

Thank you for the responses....so much to learn so much to learn.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
If you can fold to a raise on the river more power to you and, by all means, bet out the river. I like to see a showdown in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's fine, but you also do not want the river to get checked through.

[MarkD]

You can't fold the river after getting raised because of the chance your opponent has A5, A6 or A7 and is raising his 'two pair'.

I like the river bet and think calling the raise in this spot is clear because you have two pair and it's just as likely that the nine will play.

I don't think you are strong enought to 3-bet though.

Of course I'm responding to the results but this is what I thought when I first read the hand too.

[MarkD]

[ QUOTE ]
you ... do not want the river to get checked through.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the key to the hand. I think calling after you get raised on THIS hand will often be a split pot or a counterfeited 89. Often enough that calling the raise is not wrong and betting is correct because you don't want the river to get checked through so I think the river plays itself here.

[colgin]

[ QUOTE ]
You can't fold the river after getting raised because of the chance your opponent has A5, A6 or A7 and is raising his 'two pair'.

I like the river bet and think calling the raise in this spot is clear because you have two pair and it's just as likely that the nine will play.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never thought for a second about folding to the raise. I just had a "uh oh" feeling when he played back at me. It made me wonder if my river bet, which seemd pretty clear to me when I made it, was indeed correct.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you are strong enought to 3-bet though.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, I think a three-bet here would be pretty crazy. I can't imagine you will get called by worse hands all that often when you make that bet.

Thanks again.

Colgin

[Garbonzo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can't fold the river after getting raised because of the chance your opponent has A5, A6 or A7 and is raising his 'two pair'.

I like the river bet and think calling the raise in this spot is clear because you have two pair and it's just as likely that the nine will play.


[/ QUOTE ]

I never thought for a second about folding to the raise. I just had a "uh oh" feeling when he played back at me. It made me wonder if my river bet, which seemd pretty clear to me when I made it, was indeed correct.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you are strong enought to 3-bet though.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, I think a three-bet here would be pretty crazy. I can't imagine you will get called by worse hands all that often when you make that bet.

Thanks again.

Colgin

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone correct me if my thinking is wrong.

Many people here said do not bet unless you can fold to a raise. So if you bet and get raised here, some are suggesting you fold, if not specifically in this situation, then generally.

The reraise on the river to me is about more than wether you get called by a worse hand, it's also about telling an agressive player to watch his arse if he is going to try to push you around. River raises are usually legitimate, and I think when he makes this raise you can write a nice descriptive note...

No one has mentioned preflop. Is reraising immediatley not a valid/appropriate way to play the hand? I would have done this, and I am curious if it is slightly wrong or utterly off base.

[MarkD]

I would generally fold pre-flop here. Re-raising and calling are valid. I think they are all pretty close but I do think reraising may be the worst option (that is a relative ranking which would also depend on the dynamics of the situation between yourself and the button).

From the BB I would rank the options: 1) Fold, 2) call, 3) raise. From the SB things change drastically. Now it's 1) Fold, 2) Raise, 3) Call and there are large divisions between the three options.

[ QUOTE ]
Many people here said do not bet unless you can fold to a raise. So if you bet and get raised here, some are suggesting you fold, if not specifically in this situation, then generally.


[/ QUOTE ]

This was what I was referring to in my post. Folding on the end in THIS hand would be wrong. Failing to bet because you don't want to fold to a rasie is also wrong. This is a clear bet and a clear call for the reasons outlined in this thread already.

There are definitely situations though where you would employ the exact same line and bet the river for most of the same reasons but also have to throw your hand away if raised. I can't think of a good example right now but it is possible because the river bluff raise is very rare.

[ QUOTE ]
The reraise on the river to me is about more than wether you get called by a worse hand, it's also about telling an agressive player to watch his arse if he is going to try to push you around.

[/ QUOTE ]

The river re-raise is all about being called by a worse hand. If you don't think you will be called by a worse hand don't even think about making the river reraise. None of the meta-game reasons mentioned are even close to being big enough reasons to make the reraise. The fact that you bet into him and called his raise is enough to tell an agressive player that he isn't going to push you around, and if he tries it he's going to spill chips.

[Garbonzo]

Thank you very much for the good response to my answers Marc, it is very much appreciated.

Regards.

[sthief09]

For some reason, I find this hand to be incredibly interesting.

I think the main misunderstanding (from my perspective, at least) is whether you have a strong enough hand to bet. there was never a debate about whether to call the raise or the flop and turn play (I really think preflop is a matter of preferance and headsup ability).

This is going to be confusing the first time, so bear with me. I'll try clarifying after I get my initial thoughts out.

So what makes a hand worthy of betting after check-calling twice? Either a hand that is, in relation to the board, strong enough to withstand a raise, or a mediocre hand with an especially scary board, on which the PFR will need a stronger hand to raise. In order for this, you need a mediore opponent.

So the river has 6 scenarios (in general, not in this hand):
1. Check-call
2. Check-fold
3. Bet-call a raise
4. Bet-fold to a raise
5. Bet-3bet
6. Check-raise

The three scenarios I'm concerned with are Bet/call a raise, check/call, and bet/fold to a raise. More specifically, when can you bet?

Obviously, the first and most important is a read on an opponent. Will an opponent bluff raise the river? If the answer is yes, then bet/fold to a raise is out of the question. If the answer is no, then check/calling is out of the question. Right?

Now if the opponent is unknown, we have to do a little of both. With our stronger hands, we can bet into the river and safely call a raise. With the weaker hands, check-calling is better.

So when can we bet and fold to a raise? Is this possible to do with no read? Can we only do this on extremely scary boards, like a 4-straight or a 4 flush? Or can we do it when a 3-flush hits, or if a mid-high range card pairs the board (something like a 9-Q)?

When I first started posting in the thread, I was very adament about only betting if you can fold to a raise. The more I think about it, the more advantages there are to betting:
1. your opponent will bluff if he has nothing (perhaps we didn't know that before the hand, but we do now)
2. the board paired low, so Hero beats all 2 pair except aces-up, and beats all aces 8 or lower

so say the board didn't pair. Hero has a crap kicker, and depending on the river, some weak aces can still beat hero. can we still bet and call a raise? relative to the board, hero has a much weaker hand if the river comes with a 3 rather than another deuce. With the deuce, there are few hands that can beat hero.

so now to generalize. I'm not stating this because I know, but because I want to see if I'm right. It seems like the criteria for the following options are:

1. Bet/Call Raise: your hand needs to be strong relative to the board, and/or your opponent must have a high bluffing frequency. Without a read, your hand needs to be much stronger relative to the board (if we don't know that Button is aggressive here, can we bet/call?).

2. Bet/Fold to a Raise: the river card has to be extremely scary, thus making your holding somewhat weak relative to the board, and/or your opponent must have a low betting frequency. the less you know about your opponent, the scarier the board has to be. How high your pair is matters very little, since a raise means exactly a big hand or a bluff. I think knowledge of your opponent is much more important here

3. Check/call: when in doubt, this seems to be the best option. either you have a mediocre hand, like 86 on a K6439 board, or you don't know/trust your opponent enough to fold to a raise.


after writing all that, I understand why you think betting out is best. but I still have 2 questions. what if the river was a 3 that leaves A4 a somewhat weak hand? also, what if we have no read on the button?

thanks, as always, for your responses, Mark.

[MarkD]

[This is way longer than I initially thought but I wanted to put it on paper to clarify some of my own thoughts and since I was doing that anyways I figured I might as well share it.

Also, it’s long and it’s late and I got stuff I need to do so I’m not going to proofread. If there is any grammar or spelling mistakes that bug you tough.]

I’m not Mr. Essay like some people are and I’m certainly no NPA but I’ll try to give a synopsis of the check/call, check/call, bet line (CCCCB line). I also want to make it quite clear that this is not some line that I invented or am trying to take credit for. I’m just trying to explain my thoughts on it, nothing more. Also, I know you understand pretty much everything I’m going to say already but I feel I might as well flesh out my thoughts fully for anyone else that is reading and also in case anyone disagrees with something they have all the information they need to stick it to me.

Generally I know I am going to use the CCCCB line, or a variation of it, on the flop. In these cases my hand is relatively strong and I am head’s up or against two opponents maximum and I’m out of position.

A few conditions must be satisfied in order for me to use the CCCCB line:
1) I must have a decent showdown hand.
2) I must not be fully confident that my hand is best (i.e. It’s not a monster).
3) I must have reason to believe my opponent will bet for me.
4) I must not be too afraid of giving free cards.

In point 3 I am less concerned with flush draws and OESD’s, since they will call anyways, then I am with over card outs hence the reason this line is generally best when your hand is a pair of kings or aces on the flop. Of course, if I suspected a flush draw or OESD that may change the line again but let’s not go there.

In these situations the theory of why CCCCB is the best line is because it both minimizes our losses and maximizes our win and does so in a very simplistic fashion. So how does it work and why?

Well, our opponent is generally going to be the pre-flop aggressor and he is going to have position on us as indicated earlier. These two factors make it very likely he is going to continue with his aggression when an ace or a king appears on the flop. He is expected to continue betting after we check to him and so he does and we let him. If we were to try and seize the initiative earlier in the hand, before the river, our opponent would gain a lot of information about our hand and become suspicious and wary all at once. He will realize that bluffing is futile but will also know that we have a decent hand and will be able to punish us those times when he has an even better hand. By taking the initiative early all we end up doing is winning the minimum while losing the maximum. How many times have you bluffed off a bunch of chips to a weak player when he check/called, check/called, check/called you with a lone pair?

So we’ve established that by playing possum on the flop and turn we have enticed our opponent to bet for us. He will feel proud and magnificent as he fires chips into the pot pushing us around. Sometimes he will feel proud and magnificent on the flop but then become cowardly and afraid on the turn and check behind with his high cards that have not connected with the board. This is ok as well.

So at this stage we have taken one of two paths to get to the river:
1) Check/call the flop, check/call the turn
2) Check/call the flop, check through on the turn

In both scenarios we will now bet out on the river.

Betting the river after either of the two above action sequences is very confusing for our opponent. The vast majority of the time that river card is going to appear very innocent and he’s going to suspect that it did not help us. Our opponent is going to be suspicious of us and this will entice him to call our bet with a vast number of weak hands that he would have folded on the flop or turn if we had tried to seize the initiative earlier. He’s going to want to “see” our hand. Opponents are wary about being bluffed out of pots. They perceive bluffing to be a big part of poker and they don’t want to be bluffed so they will call. All of these are good things. By playing possum not only have we enticed our opponent to bet a weak hand we have now also enticed him to call with that weak hand. We are tricky devils.

Another benefit to waiting until the river to bet is that the vast majority of our opponents do not like to raise the river without a very strong hand. Most opponents don’t like to value bet the river very much either. If we would have tried to seize the initiative earlier in the hand we would often get raised by a hand that has us beat but we won’t be sure if we are beat or if we have just created a dynamic where are opponent now feels obligated to fight back. Just like the rabbit that gets cornered must fight, some opponents just don’t like to feel like they are getting pushed around.

So what if we get raised on the river? Do we call? Well, that’s a function of our opponent, the board texture, and the relative strength of our hand. In general most players do not bluff raise the river but the line we have chosen confuses our opponents so much that they believe we are on a bluff and try to re-bluff us sometimes. They really don’t know how they are supposed to react to our river bet so sometimes they will end up raising a hand weaker than ours simply because they have become convinced they have the best hand. They don’t believe we would play a hand stronger then theirs in the fashion we have because they wouldn’t. “Surely he would have bet or raised me at some point if he had an ace, my nines king kicker is good here and I’m going to punish this guy for trying to bluff me. Razoo!” This leads me to think that in general we will have to call if we are raised on the river, but this isn’t necessarily so. Again, board texture, opponent tendencies, and relative strength of our hand will be the deciding points in this decision (our first real decision of the hand). Note: if we arrived at the river following line 2 we will have to call more raises than if we follow line 1 since our opponent will be more inclined to view our river bet as a bluff since he showed weakness checking the turn. Also, it should be noted that we won’t often get raised on the river and hence we won’t have to worry about this very much. J

Now, let’s deal with specifics:
[ QUOTE ]
1. Bet/Call Raise: your hand needs to be strong relative to the board, and/or your opponent must have a high bluffing frequency. Without a read, your hand needs to be much stronger relative to the board (if we don't know that Button is aggressive here, can we bet/call?).

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement generally agrees with what I wrote above outlining my general views regarding this line. It should be noted that in the original hand of this thread the river card improved our hand since a lot of opponents with middle two pair will fail to notice they were counterfeited and we have caught up to a lot of ace hands that had us beat prior to the river.

[ QUOTE ]
2. Bet/Fold to a Raise: the river card has to be extremely scary, thus making your holding somewhat weak relative to the board, and/or your opponent must have a low betting frequency. the less you know about your opponent, the scarier the board has to be. How high your pair is matters very little, since a raise means exactly a big hand or a bluff. I think knowledge of your opponent is much more important here

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I agree. We have manipulated our opponent and he has become unpredictable in many ways. But at the same time many opponents will give us very reliable information that we should make use of. I don’t think any of these points are things that we can generalize but as stated earlier – we won’t often have to make this decision.

[ QUOTE ]
3. Check/call: when in doubt, this seems to be the best option. either you have a mediocre hand, like 86 on a K6439 board, or you don't know/trust your opponent enough to fold to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This example is really much different than what we have been discussing and we would have taken a different line in the hand. I don’t think it really applies.

[ QUOTE ]
what if the river was a 3 that leaves A4 a somewhat weak hand? also, what if we have no read on the button?

[/ QUOTE ]

To answer both questions at once I am still going to bet the river and will generally call a raise. I only need to be right in this spot 1 in 9 times and we have an opponent who may be responding irrationally to our confusing line.

[Garbonzo]

Sthief and Marc, your exchange just nailed some very important concepts for me.

I have too often been on the wrong side of this exchange, being rope a doped to the river and paying off a better hand.

Muchas Gracias.

[MarkD]

Generally you can assume your opponents have simply stumbled upon the right strategy out of dumb luck. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[rjc199]

These two posts are magnificent for their analysis and insight!