40-80 Hand #4

[Clarkmeister]

Button is the same player as my major opponent in Hands #1 and #2, the full ring player who is IMO more than just a little too loose and too aggressive in SH games. Let's just call him Player X.

3-handed. Player X raises on the button. SB folds, I call in the BB with Ks8h.

Flop: Kc 7d 5d. I check, Player X bets, I checkraise, Player X calls.

Turn: 2h. I check, Player X bets, I call.

River: Ts. I check, Player X bets, I call.

[ALL1N]

Interesting line. I take it you thought he'd 3-bet mediocre holdings inferior to yours (ace-high or a lower pair), meaning that the best value came in saving bets and inducing bluffs by checking and calling.

[Stork]

Your flop c/r combined with your turn check looks like you were raising for a free card with a diamond draw or a straight draw. Check-raise the river. Btw, I put villain on A7.

[That guy]

That was surprisingly unagressive from the Clarkmeister. I almost fell out of my chair when I you called the turn...

Isn't leading the turn an automatic after a check/raise and a blank?

[Victor]

I think I would lead the river thinking that A-high calls.

[dave44]

I find it hard to believe you think you're not ahead, so you must be thinking player x has a better chance of taking shots at this pot than calling bets you'll make on the turn or river. Flop check raises forcing him into submission, perhaps? What gave you this read?

[turnipmonster]

what's wrong with leading the turn and river?

[Sporky]

you mention that he is too loose and too aggressive. is this the reason for letting him bet your hand for you?

i would think that once he called the checkraise he has part of the board or a draw. why not continue to bet the turn in case he is drawing on the diamonds?

perhaps since he is too aggro you check and let him bet the hand in order to not be checkraised yourself and put into a tougher spot on the turn?

do you have a good enough read to assume he would bet a draw on the turn if checked to?

once the diamonds miss and he bets the river, why not raise here? since he continued to bet even the river did you think you were beat for some reason?

since he is over aggro it seems he would have re-raised any diamond draw, king, or 7 unless he really hit the board hard. do you think that he is letting you take the lead to raise you on the turn?

this is a very interesting hand. it would be cool to know what's going on here since i obviously don't get it. please help me understand.

[ISF]

I like the turn check call. I do this sometimes against over agressive players, but I cant see a reason not to bet this river. I tend to think that an ace high low pp will call but may not bet.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
Button is the same player as my major opponent in Hands #1 and #2, the full ring player who is IMO more than just a little too loose and too aggressive in SH games. Let's just call him Player X.

3-handed. Player X raises on the button. SB folds, I call in the BB with Ks8h.

Flop: Kc 7d 5d. I check, Player X bets, I checkraise, Player X calls.

Turn: 2h. I check, Player X bets, I call.

River: Ts. I check, Player X bets, I call.

[/ QUOTE ]

In one of your other hands here, you talked about opponents who think it's standard that the PFR will 3-bet many flops with just overcards but smooth-call with overpairs (or top pair), waiting to raise the turn. Didn't you describe Player X as this type of opponent (one who recognizes this play in his opponents)? So wouldn't it make sense that you're assuming he's doing the same thing back to you? If so, ni han.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Button is the same player as my major opponent in Hands #1 and #2, the full ring player who is IMO more than just a little too loose and too aggressive in SH games. Let's just call him Player X.

3-handed. Player X raises on the button. SB folds, I call in the BB with Ks8h.

Flop: Kc 7d 5d. I check, Player X bets, I checkraise, Player X calls.

Turn: 2h. I check, Player X bets, I call.

River: Ts. I check, Player X bets, I call.

[/ QUOTE ]

In one of your other hands here, you talked about opponents who think it's standard that the PFR will 3-bet many flops with just overcards but smooth-call with overpairs (or top pair), waiting to raise the turn. Didn't you describe Player X as this type of opponent (one who recognizes this play in his opponents)? So wouldn't it make sense that you're assuming he's doing the same thing back to you? If so, ni han.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was exactly my thought process. With the draws on the board, I could sell that I was on a draw by checking. His flat call on the flop indicated to me that he either had a big hand (KQ or better), or nearly nothing. By checking, he's not only going to bet the big hand, he's going to bet the "nothing" hand since it appears I might be on a small flush/straight draw. And with a top pair of Kings, I'm not worried about overs.

Anyways, I called the river, he said "I can't win", made a mucking motion, I flipped up my hand and he mucked.

[Michael Davis]

I got all of this but I still think the river checkraise has value. Maybe he fell into a T, maybe he pays you off with an ace because your play on the flop and turn look like a draw. If this guy is really playing so obviously that he can't have something like QQ or JJ or something else payoffable here than probably not, but he can't be that plain, can he?

-Michael

[Trix]

Why would he bet the river if he has a hand that can call a check-raise if he thinks clark is on a draw ?

[Clarkmeister]

I think the river checkraise idea has merit, especially if he won't 3-bet with AA.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
full ring player who is IMO more than just a little too loose and too aggressive in SH games.

[/ QUOTE ]

that, and its not that opponent puts clark just on a draw when betting the river, but rather when he gets check-raised he could put clark on a last ditch stab at the pot with a busted draw often enough to perhaps justify paying off the check-raise.

[Stork]

You don't think AA would 3-bet the flop? I know you said he would smooth-call with KQ or better, but why? Don't most people 3-bet AA here?

And I SO called river check-raise first.

[Michael Davis]

Because it's shorthanded, you should never assume 100% that your opponent is on a draw. You have to give some possibility that they have something they will pay off with. And if he has a draw, maybe he paired the river, and then you just lost a bet. That's if you could somehow be 100% certain he's on a draw but don't know his exact cards.

And because in limit you should pretty much bet all of your reasonable holdings on the river even if the most likely action is your opponent folding, because maybe he doesn't have a draw.

-Michael