Would you call this river bet?

[Scuba Chuck]

Party Poker No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t15 (9 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Button (t1865)
SB (t785)
Hero (t785)
UTG (t800)
UTG+1 (t800)
MP1 (t785)
MP2 (t800)
MP3 (t580)
CO (t800)

Preflop: Hero is BB with A/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP1 calls t15, <font color="#666666">3 folds</font>, Button calls t15, SB completes, Hero checks.

Flop: (t60) Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks, MP1 checks, Button checks.

Turn: (t60) 5/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, Hero checks, MP1 checks, Button checks.

River: (t60) 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">SB bets t300</font>, Hero ...

What would you do?

How much does MP1 and Button affect this decision?

[lorinda]

Just a follow up to the reply you got earlier about concentrating on different things.

The answer to a lot of your questions seems to be "Do you really need to do this".

If you were in the 200s, a lot of them would be closer decisions, but in the mid-low limits, you're trying for one huge pot where you have a massive edge.

This isn't that pot.

Lori

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]


What would you do?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fold

[ QUOTE ]


How much does MP1 and Button affect this decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

None.

I may be missing something here, so hopefully somebody will come along and teach me a cool new level 1 weapon... but this does not appear to be a prudent example of how to bust a bluff. (Very unlikely to be a bluff, by the way. You'll probably split the pot if you call, but his chance of having the stone coldies is at least as good as your chance of winning.)

Irieguy

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
I may be missing something here, so hopefully somebody will come along and teach me a cool new level 1 weapon... but this does not appear to be a prudent example of how to bust a bluff. (Very unlikely to be a bluff, by the way. You'll probably split the pot if you call, but his chance of having the stone coldies is at least as good as your chance of winning.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? This reads exactly like a LAP with nothing. In fact, I would for sure fold to a 30 chip bet. The part that concerned me were the two yet to act behind me.

[ QUOTE ]
Just a follow up to the reply you got earlier about concentrating on different things.

The answer to a lot of your questions seems to be "Do you really need to do this".

If you were in the 200s, a lot of them would be closer decisions, but in the mid-low limits, you're trying for one huge pot where you have a massive edge.

This isn't that pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lorinda, point well taken.

FWIW, I did call. And collected my 300 chips. But I do see how waiting for edges is wiser than "reads."

[ColdestCall]

Very nice read, but for me this is one of those situations where I feel the risk of being wrong outweighs the reward for being right....

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]

Really? This reads exactly like a LAP with nothing. In fact, I would for sure fold to a 30 chip bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the opposite of solid post-flop play. It's a pretty easy call for 30 chips. For a good explanation of why, see Mike Caro's law of loose wiring in his book of tells.

A common mistake by inexperienced players is to solidly put their opponents on a bluff and then make enormous ill-advised calls. It's not enough to have a "read" that your opponent is bluffing. You have to have a sound line of reason for what he actually has... you have to have a hand that can beat his hand... and the cost of making the call has to make sense in the context of the situation in which you find yourself (MTT, SNG, ring game, early, late, etc.)

At least once a night I will get called on a bluff by a player who cannot beat my bluff. They invariably type in "I KNEW you were bluffing." They actually believe they made a good call. Don't be that dude.

[ QUOTE ]

FWIW, I did call. And collected my 300 chips. But I do see how waiting for edges is wiser than "reads."

[/ QUOTE ]

That's great that you were able to win chips from that pot. If you call there 100 times, you would only win about 15 of them. Nice opportunity for a cheap lesson.

Irieguy

[Awesemo]

This is a clear fold. Not only did the river complete possible straights and flushes, but at the river any pocket pair would be pretty sure they had the best hand. Overbetting the pot is well within the realm of possibility if he has a very strong hand, however most players would not be 300 to win a 60 chip pot.

[Scuba Chuck]

Irie, I deeply respect your opinion.

One question that I have to you is in regards to the 2+2 book Psychology of Poker. Have you read it? It is in direct conflict to your Caro comments. In this book, it states that its profitable to call bets against LAPs even if its with bottom pair.

OK, now that it's post play, it seems very obvious this applies far more to a ring game than an SnG. Sometimes as you're *learning* the game, situations arise where you tend to think you notice things. So you test them. Regardless if I am correct, this is not the right situation to apply. I know now.

[willie24]

huh? you're thinking about calling this?
why?

[willie24]

[ QUOTE ]
Really? This reads exactly like a LAP with nothing. In fact, I would for sure fold to a 30 chip bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

this reads nothing like a LAG bluff. i'm not saying bluffs like this never happen, but to make this bet with something worse than A5, a player would have to be absolutely out of his mind. I can't think of the last time i saw a bluff like this. he would have almost exactly the same chance of taking down the pot had he only bet 100.

to me this looks "exactly" like one of the following:
1. an inexperienced player trying to get too cute with a flopped full-house, or a queen
2. somebody value betting a flush, or rivered fullhouse, hoping that he will get called by a worse flush or straight.

nice pot, but I can assure you that this is not a winning call. (unless you had some unbelievable read that this player only makes huge overbets when bluffing, and does it all the time).

[jedi]

I would have made a bet on the turn in an ill-advised attempt at taking the pot, but since you didn't do that I fold.

I'll be risking 300 in a 360 pot with 2 left to act behind me. There are better situations than this one.

[Scuba Chuck]

Yeah, the player reminded me of myself before I read that book. That was something I used to do.

[adanthar]

If the river card was the 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif, you were in last position and this was a $200 against a specific opponent I would say 'nice call'.

In this &lt;$50 tourney with the running flush and two people behind you this is really bad x47.

BTW, betting 30-40 on the turn is a decent play since even at this limit 66 will often fold.

[willie24]

i dont understand why this would be a better call at a higher buyin. I don't think a $200 player is more likely to make this kind of ridiculous overbet bluff for a meaningless pot.

[stillnotking]

You should call to see exactly how big his flush is, thus gaining valuable information.

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]
Irie, I deeply respect your opinion.

One question that I have to you is in regards to the 2+2 book Psychology of Poker. Have you read it? It is in direct conflict to your Caro comments. In this book, it states that its profitable to call bets against LAPs even if its with bottom pair.

OK, now that it's post play, it seems very obvious this applies far more to a ring game than an SnG. Sometimes as you're *learning* the game, situations arise where you tend to think you notice things. So you test them. Regardless if I am correct, this is not the right situation to apply. I know now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have read it. The whole book pertains only to ring games. Why does that make such a difference? I believe the psychology of SNGs are different.

Even if it wasn't, the concept that's most important I think is to imagine that a LAG was making a play at you in a $1-2 game for half your stack. You know that in 5 minutes the casino is going to double the stakes, and the LAG isn't going anywhere. Would that affect your decision? What if he only bet 1% of your stack on the end? Would you fold if you thought it was close?

Irieguy

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
i dont understand why this would be a better call at a higher buyin. I don't think a $200 player is more likely to make this kind of ridiculous overbet bluff for a meaningless pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some do. Others have quads. Notes help.

[lorinda]

Not neccessarily this hand, but at the higher buyin you have to push small edges to get your ROI above 0.

At this limit there is simply no need, long term this move will take you away from the theoretical maximum, not towards it.

Lori