Check or bet the river?

[andyfox]

1): MP, TAG, decent player openraises. You 3-bet with TT. Folded around, he calls.

Flop is Jh-2h-Jx

Check-bet-call.

Turn is Kc

Check-Check.

River is a blank. He checks.

Do you bet your pocket tens?

2) Andy Fox open-raises UTG+2. Folded around to you and you 3-bet with pocket jacks. All fold and he calls. Flop is 3 rainbow rags. He checks and you bet. Turn is an Ace, no flush possible. He checks and you check. River is a blank. He checks. Do you bet or check?
[list]

[Paluka]

Hand 1 is a much clearer bet than hand 2. hand 2 is tricky tricky.

[TStoneMBD]

i dont think i would always bet or always check in either of these situations. i think it comes down to whether i think the villain is capable of checkraising the river, whether he is capable of paying off with a marginal hand, and whether or not he would have bet the river with a hand that beats mine. the description of TAG or andyfox isnt enough for me as i dont know too much about your game, and a TAG player may or not be capable of any or all of those 3 things.

[andyfox]

Fair enough. I suppose one could assume one knows nothing about the players except that in hand i, the guy appears to be a TAG, and in hand 2 your opponent is a known 2+2er. Kind of an "all things being equal, what would you do?" question.

[roy_miami]

Usually I'll bet the turn in hand 2 and kick myself for not taking a free river when checkraised. I don't play against many Andyfox's (if any) though so its hard to say, maybe I would check the turn. Nah, I bet.

[James282]

You have to bet the turn in hand 1. Having failed to do that, I would almost certainly value bet the river.
-James

[SCfuji]

from the mind of a micro-er,

if i didnt bet the turn i will bet the river. i think showing weakness on the turn may get some looser calls on the river even from TAGs. the only difference seems that we know the TAG in hand 2 and we know him to be a better than average TAG.

[MarkD]

Why are we checking the turn in either of these hands? I especially don't understand the turn check in hand 1.

[roy_miami]

[ QUOTE ]
You have to bet the turn in hand 1. Having failed to do that, I would almost certainly value bet the river.


[/ QUOTE ]


What do you think a TAG would just call the flop with in hand 1? Weakly played middle pocket pairs maybe, AQ is possible but not likely. Everything else either just caught up or he was planning to checkraise the turn with and the middle pocket pairs he'll likely fold to the turn bet. IMO checking behind in hand 1 on the turn is clearly the correct play.

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are we checking the turn in either of these hands? I especially don't understand the turn check in hand 1.

[/ QUOTE ]

My thoughts exactly. The only reason I could see is if you had a specific read on an opponent as a known turn raise bluffer.

[MarkD]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you think a TAG would just call the flop with in hand 1? Weakly played middle pocket pairs maybe, AQ is possible but not likely.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why is AQ not likely? Does Andyfox have to have AK, AA, QQ, or a Jack in his hand to bet the flop? If Andy could have any other hand then AQ should be calling the flop bet. Middle pairs are especially possible (although I would think that they would check raise this flop), but it appears that you are forgetting about flush draws. Villian could quite easily have a flush draw here and it doesn't have to have a king in it.

[ QUOTE ]
Everything else either just caught up or he was planning to checkraise the turn with and the middle pocket pairs he'll likely fold to the turn bet. IMO checking behind in hand 1 on the turn is clearly the correct play.

[/ QUOTE ]

What range of hands do you specifically give the MP TAG that he has to of either caught up or was planning to check raise us?

I think the flush draw aspect of this board dictates a bet on the turn.

Before you ask, I don't know how I would handle being checkraised here. I would probably fold but wouldn't like it a lot.

I still do not think that checking the turn is clear here and will take more convincing (I am willing to be convinced as this may be a significant hole in my game if my reasoning is off in these situations).

[James282]

Your analysis is very inconsistent. There are many hands - 66-99 and AQ specifically - that would peel the flop but are still behind on the turn. That said, if you assume they would fold to a turn bet, then what makes you think they would call the river? You are essentially giving them a free card with no potential gain for yourself. If you bet the turn and get check-raised, you can usually fold unless he is tricky, and you really don't lose much besides your own longshot draw to a 2 outer. You are giving free cards FAR more often than getting them once you get to the turn.
-James

[roy_miami]

[ QUOTE ]
Why is AQ not likely? Does Andyfox have to have AK, AA, QQ, or a Jack in his hand to bet the flop? If Andy could have any other hand then AQ should be calling the flop bet

[/ QUOTE ]

AQ should realize that he is most likely drawing to 3 outs if not already drawing dead. Remeber, Andyfox 3-bet preflop. He doesnt have the pot odds to draw to a 3 outer, so he should fold.

[ QUOTE ]
but it appears that you are forgetting about flush draws

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't forget about it, I just didn't notice it. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[ QUOTE ]
What range of hands do you specifically give the MP TAG that he has to of either caught up or was planning to check raise us?


[/ QUOTE ]

AA, KK, QQ, JJ, AK, KQ, AJ, KJ, QJ, a few other unlikely ones like TJs maybe.


[ QUOTE ]
I think the flush draw aspect of this board dictates a bet on the turn.

Before you ask, I don't know how I would handle being checkraised here. I would probably fold but wouldn't like it a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I admit I missed the 2 hearts on the flop and the presence of a flush draw is a good reason to bet the turn. At the same time it would also make me hesitant to fold to a turn checkraise if he's the type to semi-bluff raise.

Once again, it looks like we'll have to do some complicated math to figure this one out all hinged upon how likely it is he has 2 hearts in is hand without the K.

[roy_miami]

[ QUOTE ]
Your analysis is very inconsistent. There are many hands - 66-99 and AQ specifically - that would peel the flop but are still behind on the turn. That said, if you assume they would fold to a turn bet, then what makes you think they would call the river? You are essentially giving them a free card with no potential gain for yourself. If you bet the turn and get check-raised, you can usually fold unless he is tricky, and you really don't lose much besides your own longshot draw to a 2 outer. You are giving free cards FAR more often than getting them once you get to the turn.
-James

[/ QUOTE ]

I would expect a hand like 88 to fold to a turn bet because of all the hands andy would 3-bet with there are only a couple that he is still ahead of. I expect that same 88 will call the river quite often because of the combined weakness andy showed on the turn with the fact he will only have to call 1 bet for a showdown as opposed to 2. I would guess middle pairs fold the turn here 95% of the time but call the river more than 90% of the time if the turn gets checked. He may also bluff a fair amount on the river.

[Ryno]

Dan Rather says I should wait for Ohio before conceding on this one. The river decision in each case is a direct application of the Sklansky 55% rule - I did not think I was ahead 55% of the time if called. I say it was like 45% in the first one, 35% in the second one (to pull numbers out of thin air).

Even if it's 60%, and I gave up $3, I think that's ok. If I give up $3 every time a TAG has an EP-MP raising hand, and I have a 3-betting hand, and it's headsup on the river and he can put be in a really bad place by checkraising, I'm not giving up much. I can get it back (and more) by feeling relaxed and showing that I am not one-dimensional.

[andyfox]

I wasn't picking on you (or Dan Rather). Your read in both cases was correct. I was curious what percentage of 2+2ers would bet behind here. My guess is, in both cases, that 80% of non-2+2ers would bet.

[na4bart]

I've read all the responses and it seems everyone is focused on the turn. Andy gave two specific situations in neither of which the turn was bet and asked for input concerning the river play. How about returning to what Andy asked?

[ike]

Hand 1 is a very clear bet, I just don't see how you're losing.
Hand 2 is closer but seems like a check. You're ahead of TT, 99, and I guess 88, as well as no pair hands which clearly aren't calling. You're behind KK, QQ, any ace. I don't know how often he fails to bet the hands that beat you, but there are just a lot more hands that beat you than that you beat.

[Ryno]

Ah, poor Dan...I will miss his election night coverage. If you drink while watching, it's like you're losing your marbles together.

Something critical to the decision in both cases was the fact that the table had plenty of people I'd be happy to play in position on big bet streets, and my opponent wasn't one of them. Also, in both cases, I sensed the same feeling from my opponent - even more so as they were OOP to a 3-bettor nit who probably had Aces. In those situations, it's supposed to go check-bet-fold, and it didn't. So that had to mean something - neither you nor the other guy are calling flops because "folding would look bad".

You are probably right about the 80% of non-2+2ers, and of the other 20%, most are checking in response to a keno-style "let's see who wins" impulse.

[na4bart]

Thank you

[andyfox]

I think mike l's. comments, that you shouldn't get out of line against 2+2 types, play straightforward, makes sense. It's not that there are better spots (not that you said that) because playing a different hand against a different player is a separate issue; one has to maximize one's profit (which may come by minimizing one's loss) against this particular opponent in this particular hand. And certainly your table presence and "feel" about what I and your other opponent might have, and what would happen if you bet the river, are of paramount importance. Plus your comment to me "what would you call with, pocket tens?" shows you had thought specificially about what I might have, not just "I have a hand of value, he's checked, I'll bet."

Having said all that, note that 70-75% of the 2+2 respondents are betting the rivers.

[sfer]

In Hand 2, I don't see what a middle-aged pseudo-rock is calling with that I beat nor do I see him folding a better hand.

[andyfox]

I resemble that remark. Literally.

[tpir90036]

Disclaimer: I am not as good as any of you guys.

But, I am struggling to come up with parlays of hand ranges that we are beating that are also calling our river bets a high enough percentage of the time to make betting correct.

"My hand must be good here... so I bet" seems like pretty bad value betting strategy to me. Mark me down for checking both rivers.

-tpir

[snakehead]

it seems to me that the two situations are very different. in the first case, there is a pair on the board which could keep a reasonable player from betting a better hand, or he could be slowplaying trips or better. I don't see the upside to betting.

in case 2, andy has had several chances to bet if he has a better hand than JJ. I say bet the river and hope he pays off with 88.

[Ryno]

"what would you call with, pocket tens?"

The flop was 6-high, if I remember correctly. I think when I said this, I was refering to the flop call. I assumed you would checkraise with 88-TT, or at least that you not checkraising made those hands less likely. So if I put you on 88-AA, AT,AJ,AQ,AK,KJ,KQ before the flop, and you check-call a 6-high flop, and the turn is an Ace, there was no way I was betting. The pot was big enough that I had to call a river bet if it came. If you had led the turn, hmm...don't know what I would have done.

[hogger]

hand # 1 - i bet and get called by worse hands or don't have to show my hand b/c he folds a worse hand!
hand # 2 is totally player dependent. If you play like me Fox, I wouldn't bet against my twin! I could easily check the river again with an ACE against a variety of good players!
I did it to well known 2+2er less then a week ago! I don't think he will be betting the river against me or some others in this type of spot anymore!
I am surprised this many people bet the river but I think they are use to making what looks like a simple value bet but in this case I think it's not!
Mike