99 Free showdown or value-bet the River?

[El Dukie]

Another hand from a good 15-30 game at Hollywood Park. The table's running nice and loose, though we're only 7-handed at the moment. A new player just sat down on my immediate right. He's only been here for one orbit, and I don't have much of a read on his style yet. Though he's played 4 of his first 7 hands, so I'm guessing he's not too tight. The rest of the players on this hand are loose, with occasional flashes of aggression, but no real danger.

I'm the button this hand. There's one MP limper, CO (the new player) limps, and I find 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif in my hand. I raise. SB folds, BB calls, as do the limpers. 4 to the flop for 8sb.

Flop is T /images/graemlins/heart.gif 6 /images/graemlins/club.gif 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif. Good flop for 99. Only one overcard, and not a big one at that. They all check to me. I bet, all three call. 4 players, 12sb = 6bb.

Turn is 7 /images/graemlins/club.gif, giving me a gutshot to go with my pair, but giving any 5 an open-ender. They check to me again, I bet again, and all three call again! 4 players, 10bb.

River is Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif. Another overcard. But no draws got there. They check to me. I check, taking the free showdown. 99 is good.

My main question on this one is the river. I'm obviously already behind to any T, so I was hesitant to jam it up too aggressively, especially after all 3 called my turn bet. And the Queen didn't help any, if one of them is calling along with something like AQ or KQ. (Don't laugh. Overcard callers seem fairly common in this game.) I guess the main reason I took the free showdown is that I was a little worried about a raise. If raised, I'd be put to a tough decision (though I'd probably have to make a crying call), and since my turn bet had gotten me the chance for a free showdown, I took it.

Comments?

[AceHigh]

In a loose/passive live game, I would take the free showdown.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
In a loose/passive live game, I would take the free showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't make much sense to me. If you are against three loose and basically passive players, you will make way more money in the long-run betting, even if you always call a checkraise. However, if there is a raise on this river, you can consider possibly just letting it go, depeding on your read on the raiser.

[Noo Yawk]

Once evryone checks to me, I bet this hand. Against loose players, you're going to win more than enough times to make this a pretty routine bet.

[AceHigh]

My thinking is some of these loose passive players will not bet Q or a T here, but they won't call on the river with just King or Jack high. So it's sort of a -EV play to bet because you will mostly get called by hands that beat you.

[STLantny]

Is this not a typical situation, where only a better hand will call?

[steveyz]

Checking is ok with this many opponents because I'd expect my hand to not be good a large part of the time. But I'd probably bet as I think it's a easy fold to a check-raise and you can probably get a call from hands like a 6 or a 4.

[chesspain]

[ QUOTE ]
My thinking is some of these loose passive players will not bet Q or a T here, but they won't call on the river with just King or Jack high. So it's sort of a -EV play to bet because you will mostly get called by hands that beat you.

[/ QUOTE ]

...and worse hands like 88, 78, A4, A6, 45, K6s, K4s, etc. I mean, when did loose-passive come to mean weak-tight?

[Noo Yawk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My thinking is some of these loose passive players will not bet Q or a T here, but they won't call on the river with just King or Jack high. So it's sort of a -EV play to bet because you will mostly get called by hands that beat you.

[/ QUOTE ]

...and worse hands like 88, 78, A4, A6, 45, K6s, K4s, etc. I mean, when did loose-passive come to mean weak-tight?

[/ QUOTE ]

Chesspain has this exactly right.

[elysium]

hi el duke

played perfectly.