River aggression.

[nothumb]

I have been noticing that my river aggression tends to be pretty low compared to my other stats. What is the breakdown for you guys between different streets, generally?

Anyway, here is a hand with an interesting river decision (I think).

I have AJo in MP1 at Paradise 2/4. Two loose, bad limpers to me and I raise, knocking out everyone else, and they both call.

Flop: 966 all red with two diamonds.

Checked to me and I bet. I have the A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif. One very loose, passive, awful caller.

Turn brings a black 4. Check, bet, call.

River brings the 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif. He checks.

I think I have the best hand here. At worst a split. I think he will call me with ace or king high, most likely, and possibly worse if he's curious. I also think that if he doesn't call me, it is valuable in that it gets people wondering. If he does call me, it is a sort of advertisement.

Good place for a value bet?

NT

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
Good place for a value bet?


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so.

[ QUOTE ]
If he does call me, it is a sort of advertisement.


[/ QUOTE ]

Check it through. If you want people to advertise show them what you had even if your beat.

Stu

[nothumb]

Which do you think is better, checking down and letting this guy show his T-high or whatever he has, or betting and either A. having him fold or B. showing that he called you and can't beat your Ace high.

I prefer to bet, but also because I haven't been as aggressive on the river. I think when opponents get used to you letting it go through for free on the river they call with more cheese.

Again, in this scenario, assume you are 95% sure you have the best hand.

NT

[littlejohn]

Not sure that my numbers are any good but flop is 2.99, turn is 3.37 and river is 2.4

And I think you're going to be good here the 1 in 6 times you need to be to bet this. But I also wouldn't be surprised to see you lost to pocket 5's or 7's or something.

[nothumb]

I have in the past overbet an ace-high with 2 pair on board and gotten called by those crappy pairs. But this guy I knew well and had a good read and I think he leads either the flop or turn with one of those hands. He likes to forget what happened on previous streets a lot. Love those guys.

I was running the same way as you for a while, my river aggression is now up over 3 and I'm feeling better about life...

NT

[CinnamonWind]

I'd bet. He's shown no resistance yet. Why assume he will now? You not only have a chance to win by having him fold, but you may have the best hand. You're risking one BB (probably) to potentially avoid a split or win another BB in this spot. It's an easy bet.

Then again, I am super aggressive, so what do I know.

[J.R.]

You not only have a chance to win by having him fold, but you may have the best hand.

I'm stalking. Which is it? Actually, what better hand fold after getting to the river? And what worse ahnds pay off? Do you think a bare A folds now?

[CinnamonWind]

[ QUOTE ]
You not only have a chance to win by having him fold, but you may have the best hand.

I'm stalking. Which is it? Actually, what better hand fold after getting to the river? And what worse ahnds pay off? Do you think a bare A folds now?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if you're asking me these obvious questions to stalk me or test me, but you already know the answers.

It's both on the river. You bet because you a) may have the best hand and get called by K high or someone who is curious and b) may get a naked ace to fold and save yourself half the pot (weak players often put the PF raiser on a big pair).

You're not getting many better hands to fold, obviously. Yet it's also unlikely you're in against a better hand at this point, since they have shown no aggression. Probably a split at worst.

At 2-4, many worse hands pay you off. People will call you down here with Q high. So if they're weak and have a naked ace, your bet may save you half the pot, and if they're loose and hold a K-high, you're earning an extra BB. You're not often beat if they call you down, and so it's almost always at worst a split. But being the aggressor is almost always preferable in spots like this.

Bah, why am I writing all this? It's poker 101 stuff.

[J.R.]

You're not getting many better hands to fold, obviously....You're not often beat if they call you down, and so it's almost always at worst a split.

[ QUOTE ]
You not only have a chance to win by having him fold

[/ QUOTE ]



So if they're weak and have a naked ace, your bet may save you half the pot

What were they doing calling the turn with A high if they are weak?


People will call you down here with Q high.

Sure there are folks like this, but how common are these people? Are these folks plus 3.25 times the number folks who will fold an Ace on the river > the number of guys who call with a better hand on this river? Yes, I'm giving you a hard time but this is what you have to consider, no?


But being the aggressor is almost always preferable in spots like this.

Sorry if its Poker 101 but I fail to why betting is superior to checking in a relatively loose passive game?

[David BB]

[ QUOTE ]
I was running the same way as you for a while, my river aggression is now up over 3 and I'm feeling better about life...

[/ QUOTE ]

That sounds extremely high. I'm at 1.68 (compared to 3.58 on the flop and 3.36 on the turn) and I rarely shy away from a value bet.

I'd be interested in hearing some more numbers.

[James282]

No harm can come from betting. A missed ace high flush draw might not even notice the board is double paired. OTOH, I have been called down by king high and jack high and all sorts of bizarre hands on the river. "All you can do is hand them the rope, and let them decide if they want to hang themselves or not."
-James

[CinnamonWind]

[ QUOTE ]
You're not getting many better hands to fold, obviously....You're not often beat if they call you down, and so it's almost always at worst a split.

[ QUOTE ]
You not only have a chance to win by having him fold

[/ QUOTE ]



So if they're weak and have a naked ace, your bet may save you half the pot

What were they doing calling the turn with A high if they are weak?


People will call you down here with Q high.

Sure there are folks like this, but how common are these people? Are these folks plus 3.25 times the number folks who will fold an Ace on the river > the number of guys who call with a better hand on this river? Yes, I'm giving you a hard time but this is what you have to consider, no?


But being the aggressor is almost always preferable in spots like this.

Sorry if its Poker 101 but I fail to why betting is superior to checking in a relatively loose passive game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Many players will chase an ace to the river and fold if they don't hit it. It's extremely common from weak players. Some players actually believe that their kicker on the ace factors in to the showdown in this spot at low limits. Some will fold because they put you on a big pair. Some will fold because they missed a 22 or 33 set. Some will even fold 77 or 88 in this spot. Always give your opponent the opportunity to make a mistake. By not betting, you don't do that in this situation (see "The Theory of Poker").

How common is a player that will call you down with K or Q high on this board? Common enough to make betting correct, that's for sure. Again, I don't know if you've played the Paradise 2-4 recently, but there are many players who with K or Q high will call you down on this board.

If you fail to see why betting is superior to checking (and giving the initiative to your opponent), you just may not fully understand basic low limit poker, I'm afraid. It really IS poker 101 that you bet in this spot, for the reasons I have outlined. Big upside, low downside.

[J.R.]

Your first post implied this was a 2-way bet- you could both fold better hands and get worse hands to call. In a subsquent post you said you are not getting a better hand to fold. So it seems you now advocate betting solely for value and with the chance of getting the same hand (an A) to fold?

I am aware that you want to induce your opponent's to make a mistake, but against loose passive opponent (I haven't played 2-4 at paradise lately but assume it is, somewhat loose passive, and the original poster described him as loose), isnt it likely they are passively calling with a pair and folding no pair other than perhaps an A? I supppose you think not. That is all my point is.

If a player is loose, their big mistake is calling when they should fold and not folding when they should call, so if the opponent's are loose, should you expect them to fold when they should call? I dunno, how often do weak-tight types call to this river with a worse hand and fold a pair or an A? That's all I am saying - in a 2-4 game I don't expect a better or the same hand to fold and a worse hand to call often enough to justify betting here. I haven't told you to go read TOP or any poker text, I am just trying to get to the bottom of your reasoning, and to express the question in a mathematical manner.

If you fail to see why betting is superior to checking (and giving the initiative to your opponent),

I am sorry, but this is the river, and you are in position. How do you give up the intiative if your check ends the hand?

[CinnamonWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Your first post implied this was a 2-way bet- you could both fold better hands and get worse hands to call. In a subsquent post you said you are not getting a better hand to fold. So it seems you now advocate betting solely for value and with the chance of getting the same hand (an A) to fold?

I am aware that you want to induce your opponent's to make a mistake, but against loose passive opponent (I haven't played 2-4 at paradise lately but assume it is, somewhat loose passive, and the original poster described him as loose), isnt it likely they are passively calling with a pair and folding no pair other than perhaps an A? I supppose you think not. That is all my point is.

If a player is loose, their big mistake is calling when they should fold and not folding when they should call, so if the opponenet's are loose, should you expect them to fold when they should call? I dunno, how often do weak-tight types call to this river and fold a pair or an A? That's all I am saying - in a 2-4 game I don't expect a better or the same hand to fold often enough to justufy betting here. I haven't told you to go read TOP or nay poker text, I am just trying to get to the bottom of your reasoning.

If you fail to see why betting is superior to checking (and giving the initiative to your opponent),

I am sorry, but this is the river, and you are in position. How do you give up the intiative if your check ends the hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Woops, didn't see that it had been checked to Hero. No initiative, so strike that comment.

As for betting, it's really pretty simple. Here are my reasons:

1. There is a small, but significant, chance that you will get a better hand to fold. 77 or 88 might fold in the hands of a very weak player. Highly unlikely, yes, but not impossible. Some people chase a set to the river and fold to the raiser if they don't hit. I have actually heard some players say things like "when X raises I always think he has aces or kings!" and then proceed to act like they do indeed believe this.

2. There is a significant chance that you will be called down by a weaker hand, gaining one more bet.

3. There is a significant chance that an ace high hand, in the hands of a weak or extremely tight player, will fold, saving you half the pot. You may also get a very dumb player to fold an ace.

4. There is little chance you will be raised. If you are, I would still call, as a tricky ace may raise you. But there is no strong reason to believe that this bet will cost you money (other than the negligible rake).

5. Following through on your aggression is almost always a good thing, imho. When you convince other players that when you raise and bet you effing mean it and you're going to keep pounding them, it makes reads easier later on and ultimately wins you a lot of money. I'll make a post on my theory on this one day fully explaining it. It's too late now to do it.

6. Finally, what's likely to happen? It's likely you'll get called by an ace and split. But there is a good chance that your bet will cause something better to happen, and the range of those good things I have given above. Sometimes you'll get called down by a better hand and lose 1 BB. At worst, you're going to get raised and beaten, losing 2 BBs if you call. But over 1000 hands against typical 2-4 competition, I firmly believe that a river bet will be a +EV play because for every time you are beaten for 1-2 BB, you will gain more than this from the times you are called down by K high or save yourself half the pot against a weak or stupid player.

[nothumb]

David -

One reason I think mine is so high is that I've been very good lately at getting checked to on the river when I have marginal hands. Thus I do less calling of one bet and more betting (+ aggression) or checking (neutral aggression).

Free showdown plays have been +EV for me in the micros fo sho.

NT