20-40 mirage river decision

So I'm playing at the mirage, which historically has treated me well, though it always takes a while to get my head wrapped around games with lots of limping. You see that so little in San Jose games.


Anyway, everyone folds preflop to the cutoff, who has just sat down and posted, and who checks. I am on the button with 66, and raise.


Both blinds come, and the poster folds.


Flop is AKQ. The blinds check, and I take a random stab at the pot. The sb calls, and the bb folds.


Some notes about the sb: he's a loose caller, but when he bets he generally has a good hand, or a total bluff. He's much more likely to just check-call with medium hands.


The turn is a Q. Sb checks, I check behind.


The river is a 6, which is why I'm posting this instead of routine folding on the river to his bet. But now....


Do I raise, or flat call? I should tell you that I was *sure* that he really liked his hand and was slowplaying on the flop, though I couldn't tell you why I thought that now.


How many of you raise, and how many of you just call, fearing the bigger full?


- target

I would raise once but would not engage in a raising war. If I were reraised then I would just make a crying call. But I would pop it once.


Post the results and what you chose to do, if you get a chance.

Raise. Even if he is full, he might just call, fearing you have a monster.


(my guess is you raised and he reraised with a higher boat, but you still did right).

If you do not raise here I find it hard to imagine you ever raise without an imortal lock. You must raise and pay off his reraise if that happens. At the very least you show you cannot be run over and do not need the nuts to bet.


Jimbo

Raise it. Maybe he liked the flop because he flopped a straight or an Ace with a draw. Maybe he had AK and played it strangely. You shouldn't assume that this player has a monster based on such little evidence. There are other very reasonable explanations that are consistent with the situation. If he rerasises you, then the monster hand theory becomes more plausible, and at that point it probably makes sense to just call.

I think you'll have the best hand aprox. 75% of the time. But if he folds to a raise a decent percentage of these times, you will not always collect 2 bets. On the other hand, you are virtually guaranteed to be re-raised those times he has you beat and will therefore lose 3 bets. All I'm saying is that I think it's closer than everyone else has stated so far.

In my experience typical players do not ever fold for single raises on the river unless they were trying to buy the pot. This opponent sounded like a fairly typical loose player, so I would discount the possibility of him folding anything so much as an ace. Not having your raises paid off by decent hands on the river is more something you worry about against an expert player.

You stay all the way to the river with your piece of cheese, you spike the only card that can help you, and you now wonder if you should raise or call? Give me a break. YOU FOLD HERE!!!! What is the matter with you?

Uh. Perhaps you should reread the post?


- target

Well, note that he cold bluffs at least some of the time. Those times, he'll fold. That's what Kevin was thinking, and I was thinking it at the time as well.


- target

Well, I just called. I was so sure that he had a monster that I was afraid of losing three bets. Further (and seemingly contradictorily), there was some chance that he was bluffing, so I'd only get the one bet anyway in that case.


But I didn't consider that he could have a monster that I was ahead of, and that I am probably ahead of most of them here.


So I called, and he turned over JT, slowplaying it on the flop. So I was right that he had a big hand, but I was still ahead.


This was a really unusual call for me. I like raising, and do it a lot, but I was so damn sure that he had a huge hand, that I chickened out.


Trusted my read too much.


Oh well, at least it only cost me a shrimp coctail.


- target

Whatever your point, communication is destroyed by incivility.

Target,


In my previous post prior to your posted results I asked when you would ever raise if not here. I cannot quite deceide if you gained long term value here by showing yourself to be a calling station and perhaps will not get bluffed into on the river as often or lost it as you may not cast much fear into limpers.


Just a thought,


Jimbo

So he should fold to a bet on the end here then?


What IS the matter with him, anyway? Life's too short to put chips in the pot when you're bluffing at the pot and spike a miracle card, I guess.


You're right. He's an idiot.

I think the hand shows that he is a thinking player, but people might value bet more against you on the river, fearing a raise less than normal.


BTW, if this player is aggressive, a raise is in order on the river, as a pre-flop 3 bet with any 2 cards Q or higher is in order to eliminate the poster, thus eliminating a full house as a possibility. I think it is close, but 3 queens and TJ are likely enough to make a raise correct. There's no law that says you have to call a 3 bet.


Dan Z.

"In my experience typical players do not ever fold for single raises on the river unless they were trying to buy the pot."


Really? I never would've thunk it, but judging from some recent comments (skp's multi-way action for 3 bets game) and now yours above, maybe some of the games I play in ARE on the tough side.


A guy bets the river for thin value, gets raised, then thinks back on the play of the hand, only to determine it's feasible for his opponent to have the better hand, and folds. I'm not saying it's the norm in my games, but neither is it rare. Definitely not "never" as you stated.


All I was trying to say is that between the times he might be bluffing, the times he'll have a marginal hand which he would fold, and the times it's gonna cost our hero 3 bets, it might be closer than it looks on the surface. I don't like the idea of auto-mated play like, "Hey, I just hit an under-full so of course I have to raise!" I'm not saying raising is wrong, just that there are other things to think about.

barring some sort of bizarre huge extraordinary read if you even consider just calling you shouldnt be playing 20-40.

well, i was thinking that unless he flopped a full house, then slow playing was wrong for him.


so you should call.


but apparantly he didnt know this, so you should have raised i guess.


brad

Those who fail to raise on the river with that hand would make suitable employees at where I work.


We make these kinds of silly decisions all the time.