Strange river AQs

[Danenania]

Villain is loose and passive preflop. Postflop he is very predictable. Numbers are 40/5/1 after >400 hands. What do we think?

Party Poker 10/20 Hold'em (6 max, 5 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
UTG calls, MP calls, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG calls, MP calls.

Flop: (7 SB) 6/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 2/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG calls, MP calls.

Turn: (5 BB) Q/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets</font>, UTG folds, <font color="#CC3333">MP raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero 3-bets</font>, MP calls.

River: (11 BB) J/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks, <font color="#CC3333">MP bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, <font color="#CC3333">MP 3-bets</font>, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 16 BB

[daryn]

what do you put him on, precisely QJ?

call the river

[Danenania]

[ QUOTE ]
what do you put him on, precisely QJ?

call the river

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, QJ. I nearly called but I felt certain I was behind. What do you put him on?

[ggbman]

This is horrible. Don't raise if you can't call a 3 bet. He could have QK. You if you think you're behind, check call and invest 1 bet to see a showdown instead of investing 2 bets and giving yourself NO CHANCE to win.

[kapw7]

I don't get this. How can you be that sure he holds QJ and fold? You have 16:1 pot odds and the best kicker. Isnt there a 6% chance he dosn't have a full-house?

[Danenania]

Um, I don't think we're on the same page here. I wasn't worried about being behind going into the river.

[krishanleong]

How did you decide to cr the river here? It make no sense to me given the turn action. And folding to the 3-bet here seems ludicrous.

Krishan

[Danenania]

Think from a relatively passive, predictable player's point of view. You think he's 3-betting KQ or Qx after being 3-bet on the turn and checkraised on the river? We don't have to talk in percentages here because my read is reliable. Either he will do this with KQ/Qx or he won't. If he won't, then it's a waste of money for me to call.

[Danenania]

Why not c/r the river? It's obvious he has a Q and who can resist betting trips?

[RunDownHouse]

Why not c/r? Because you're spending 2BB on the river to find out if, according to your read, he has QJ, and then folding, when you could spend 1BB for the exact same info AND give yourself a chance at the pot.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]

Think from a relatively passive, predictable player's point of view. You think he's 3-betting KQ or Qx after being 3-bet on the turn and checkraised on the river? We don't have to talk in percentages here because my read is reliable. Either he will do this with KQ/Qx or he won't. If he won't, then it's a waste of money for me to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he will because you humiliated him. A river CR after a turn 3-bet will make enough of a % of fish angry enough that you have to call the 3-bet.

I like the logic behind the 3-bet. It's tricky but real nice.

Krishan

[Danenania]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not c/r? Because you're spending 2BB on the river to find out if, according to your read, he has QJ, and then folding, when you could spend 1BB for the exact same info AND give yourself a chance at the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

??????

[Danenania]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Think from a relatively passive, predictable player's point of view. You think he's 3-betting KQ or Qx after being 3-bet on the turn and checkraised on the river? We don't have to talk in percentages here because my read is reliable. Either he will do this with KQ/Qx or he won't. If he won't, then it's a waste of money for me to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he will because you humiliated him. A river CR after a turn 3-bet will make enough of a % of fish angry enough that you have to call the 3-bet.

I like the logic behind the 3-bet. It's tricky but real nice.

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

I like the way you are thinking here. I think you bring up a good point about humiliation but I'll say that just based on the feel of the hand and timing of bets this didn't seem like a pissing match situation. It felt a lot more like a blind squirrel that just slammed headfirst into a nut, if you know what I mean. It was all fairly detached.

[DrGutshot]

I would also checkraise, but call the 3bet. Simply because I give myself the excuse of how sometimes I see passive players get crazy out of line in random spots.

I think this fold isn't nearly as bad as people are making it out to be though.

-DrG

[B00T]

I dont like check raising the river here. Just lead the damn thing. You already established a strong Q or even a high pocket pair in disbelief of him holding a Q based on your non-stop aggressiveness. Maybe he tried to blow you off the pair not knowing you have a Q to begin with.

You 3 betting the turn establishes you are not letting go of your hand. Leading the river makes the most sense to me. If he didnt catch his J assuming he has QJ he is going to check behind you how often do you suppose?

Personally I think the (go + stop) strategy here is not optimal. Firing the river and calling a raise isnt awful and costs just as many bets as the line you took, plus you're the aggressor.

Think if he didnt catch the J, and he checks behind. How many times are you going to lose that 1 river bet by checking when he calls with QJ to your AQ on a blank.

[chio]

i would have bet the river, although a c/r attempt seems ok

i would never fold the river getting 16-1 HU with trips top kicker with no straight or flush on board. i think there are easier ways to save 1 BB than trying to distinguish whether i'm behind here 94% of the time or 100% of the time.

this is what i'm talking about when i say reads are important, but a 400 hand database on a player would never make me change basic decisions like this one. even if your read is spot on, and he has QJ or better here 99% of the time, you save a fraction of a big bet. the one time that he has KQ or QT or something else costs you 16 BB, all b/c you put your full faith in pokertracker. how long will it take you to make up an extra 16 BB just based on reads from pokertracker?

[chio]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you bring up a good point about humiliation but I'll say that just based on the feel of the hand and timing of bets this didn't seem like a pissing match situation

[/ QUOTE ]

that's great, but the problem is you have to be &gt; 95% sure, and even then you're only saving a fraction of a BB

[Danenania]

If calling is right, it's not going to be winning me much more than a fraction of a BB either.. Of course I certainly admit it's a close decision. Normally I just call the river to avoid headaches but I felt like playing some poker in this hand.

I will say however that I think anyone not checkraising this river against all but the most comatose victims is missing out on serious dough.

[Danenania]

[ QUOTE ]
even if your read is spot on, and he has QJ or better here 99% of the time, you save a fraction of a big bet. the one time that he has KQ or QT or something else costs you 16 BB, all b/c you put your full faith in pokertracker. how long will it take you to make up an extra 16 BB just based on reads from pokertracker?


[/ QUOTE ]

This is just illogical. If I save a bet 15 times then lose the whole pot once, that doesn't mean I lost 16 BB's.

[chio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
even if your read is spot on, and he has QJ or better here 99% of the time, you save a fraction of a big bet. the one time that he has KQ or QT or something else costs you 16 BB, all b/c you put your full faith in pokertracker. how long will it take you to make up an extra 16 BB just based on reads from pokertracker?


[/ QUOTE ]

This is just illogical. If I save a bet 15 times then lose the whole pot once, that doesn't mean I lost 16 BB's.

[/ QUOTE ]

yah you're right. i just don't think you're saving a bet 15 out of 16 times here. i'd rather "save the headache" as well, esp if it's close between losing a fraction of a bet or gaining a fraction of a bet. plus you get more info if you always call as opposed to always fold.

[daryn]

anyway, like i was saying, ewww

[Danenania]

Okay well I'll just take your word for it then.

[B00T]

Can you tell me why your thought process and why you decided to check on the river? I am no expert and you didnt write anything in response to my post but I can't see any logic or line of play that would make this a viable option. I just want to know for a learning experience of my own.

[Danenania]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not c/r the river? It's obvious he has a Q and who can resist betting trips?


[/ QUOTE ]

[Jeff W]

I would call the river. I definitely think you're good here &gt;1/17 times.

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
Okay well I'll just take your word for it then.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you did this for everything i ever said, it would not only help your poker game but it would improve your life.

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
We don't have to talk in percentages here because my read is reliable. Either he will do this with KQ/Qx or he won't. If he won't, then it's a waste of money for me to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is fundamentally flawed thinking.

[sam h]

I love the river checkraise but hate the fold.

[NLSoldier]

I don't understand how so many people are so confused by this river check raise.

This is the second time today that I have seen people question a river CR that is pretty SOP imo. If you guys dont understand why he CRed this river then I can gurantee you are not CRing enough rivers after being the last aggressor on the turn.

[drudman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Okay well I'll just take your word for it then.

[/ QUOTE ]

if you did this for everything i ever said, it would not only help your poker game but it would improve your life.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most priceless post ever.

[captZEEbo1]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how so many people are so confused by this river check raise.

This is the second time today that I have seen people question a river CR that is pretty SOP imo. If you guys dont understand why he CRed this river then I can gurantee you are not CRing enough rivers after being the last aggressor on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

elaborate for those who suck at poker.

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand how so many people are so confused by this river check raise.

This is the second time today that I have seen people question a river CR that is pretty SOP imo. If you guys dont understand why he CRed this river then I can gurantee you are not CRing enough rivers after being the last aggressor on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

elaborate for those who suck at poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically, when you are in a pot in which you are able to put you opponent on a pretty specific hand that is strong, but weaker than yours, you have the opportunity to try to CR the river even if you were the last aggressor on the turn. Any somewhat aggressive player will not be able to stand the thought of checking through on the river with a hand like TPTK or better. Keep in mind that they only have to bet slightly over 50% of the time for it to be a profitable play for you, because they will pay off almost every single time when you raise.

Also note that river CRs can be very powerful for metagame purposes because after you have CRed a few rivers, people will start giving you more free showdowns after you have been betting the whole way and give up when you miss (with hands like AK). The fact that they are giving you more free showdowns also results in you being able to more confidently check/fold the river the times that you miss and they do bet. Some common times when river CRs work well would be with an overpair vs a hand that you are pretty sure is TPTK (think Aces on an uncordinated K high board vs an opponent who has raised one or more previous streets) or when you have an even more disguised hand like a set, and think your opponent improved on the river as shown in this thread (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Number=2062536&amp;page=0&amp;view=colla psed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=14&amp;fpart=1).

[Danenania]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We don't have to talk in percentages here because my read is reliable. Either he will do this with KQ/Qx or he won't. If he won't, then it's a waste of money for me to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is fundamentally flawed thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? My feeling is that more than the thinking being flawed, you simply aren't used to thinking in this way. And for good reason: there isn't a whole lot of use for it at on-line 6-max where you generally have only a vague sense of how an opponent will respond to your actions. But that doesn't make it flawed.

[idavid]

I kept waiting to find out the river fold was some kind of April fool's joke. If not, this is a ridiculous fold. You can never be so sure of a specific read that you should lay down trips top kicker for one more bet. The pot is big.

[Danenania]

Okay, in an attempt to take this thread somewhere useful: all those in favor of a river call, how big of a mistake is my fold? I'm looking for a number here, in BB's.

[cjx]

Great reply to a really good question (even if it was obvious to so many of you). I definitely don't check raise enough (on any street) and will look to make this play in the future.

I'm always looking to place a point of emphasis on my game whether it be value betting a slightly scary river against an idiot, walking away from a bad table down (don't be stubborn!), or making more check raises. Now, specifically the tricky river check raise.

cjx

[mistrpug]

[ QUOTE ]
If calling is right, it's not going to be winning me much more than a fraction of a BB either.. Of course I certainly admit it's a close decision. Normally I just call the river to avoid headaches but I felt like playing some poker in this hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the decision is all that close at all. Easy call.

[sam h]

[ QUOTE ]
How so? My feeling is that more than the thinking being flawed, you simply aren't used to thinking in this way. And for good reason: there isn't a whole lot of use for it at on-line 6-max where you generally have only a vague sense of how an opponent will respond to your actions. But that doesn't make it flawed.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, your thinking is flawed because in all circumstances we can only assign probabilities to opponents actions given certain holdings. This is not only because we cannot perfectly know our opponents but also because they are often liable to do different things given the same circumstances depending upon a whole host of factors. So you always have to "talk in percentages" because it is a probabilistic world. Whether the chance of him playing KQ in this way is so small to make your call good is another question entirely, but it should be analyzed in this probabilistic fashion rather than just saying that he either will or won't.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, in an attempt to take this thread somewhere useful: all those in favor of a river call, how big of a mistake is my fold? I'm looking for a number here, in BB's.

[/ QUOTE ]

First: While no doubt you felt like "playing some poker", as you said in a previous post, making a huge laydown for one bet with trips, top kicker, probably isn't the place to do it, Mr. FPS /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

I think you're good here 1 in 11 times or so. People have 3-bet me on the river in the 10/20 game with two pair on a four-straight board -- I am NOT folding trips, top kicker here. I mean, wow. Not even a flush or straight possibility, too.

So if your odds are 10:1 (minimum, I think), and you've got 16:1 odds, you're leaving about a half BB on the table after your fold. Not a disaster for the ages, but still, pretty bad.

EDIT: Do you still think this was a good fold? Curious as to what % of the time you think you're good here. Would you have called if you were getting 19:1? 24:1?

[spider]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We don't have to talk in percentages here because my read is &lt;b&gt;reliable&lt;/b&gt;. Either he will do this with KQ/Qx or he won't. If he won't, then it's a waste of money for me to call.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is fundamentally flawed thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so?

[/ QUOTE ]

I see two potential flaws:

(1) A guy you see as 100% reliable/predictable is not really that way. 400 hands is a lot, but I'd still hesitate to be this confident online. For example, any decent player who is seen as tight and predictable will show a huge gain going from zero bluffing to infrequent bluffing. You might not see one of his bluffs exposed over 400 hands b/c he is doing it infrequently and his bluffs would naturally get a lot of respect.

(2) It's possible he is not putting you on AQ. For example, your combo of 3-betting the turn and check-raising the river may have confused him and looked like a bluff. And some folks go overly-bayesian with trips and think you probably don't have a queen since there is only one other queen out there. Granted, neither of these seems particularly likely, but they don't have to be with the odds you were getting.

[Noodles]

when i was saw the river check i wondered what the hell is that for? when i saw the river fold i was completely bamboozled,
you play makes no sense at all,well not to me anyway,i think you are trying to be too fancy and that fold is awful in a pot that size

[kurosh]

As everyone else has said, this is horrible FPS. Bet and call a raise.

[Danenania]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, in an attempt to take this thread somewhere useful: all those in favor of a river call, how big of a mistake is my fold? I'm looking for a number here, in BB's.

[/ QUOTE ]

First: While no doubt you felt like "playing some poker", as you said in a previous post, making a huge laydown for one bet with trips, top kicker, probably isn't the place to do it, Mr. FPS /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

I think you're good here 1 in 11 times or so. People have 3-bet me on the river in the 10/20 game with two pair on a four-straight board -- I am NOT folding trips, top kicker here. I mean, wow. Not even a flush or straight possibility, too.

So if your odds are 10:1 (minimum, I think), and you've got 16:1 odds, you're leaving about a half BB on the table after your fold. Not a disaster for the ages, but still, pretty bad.

EDIT: Do you still think this was a good fold? Curious as to what % of the time you think you're good here. Would you have called if you were getting 19:1? 24:1?

[/ QUOTE ]

Grisgra,

I still think it was a good fold but only because of the strong "table feel" aspect going into it. I was pretty tuned in here and based on the timing of the bets and just the general way things went down I felt certain I was behind. That said these aren't very great arguments for a messageboard because there is no way anyone can really support or dispute how reliable by table feel is.

So I guess what I'm saying is that if someone else posted this hand I would reply "call the river" too but from my own perspective I'm glad I had the discipline not to.

That said I probably would have called in spite of my intuition at around the 25:1 point.

Also I think it's ridiculous that people are trashing the river c/r. If they don't like it that's fine but this is clearly a good opportunity. See NLSoldier's posts for a more complete explanation.

[Grisgra]

I have no problem with the river checkraise, I just have problems with the not-calling-the-3bet /images/graemlins/smile.gif. But hey, that's what reads are for . . . just saying that people have gone to war on the river with less than a boat.

[grinin]

It seems you did not even consider that this could be a split pot, which is a definite possibility considering his PF raise is only 5%. Given that and the possibility of QTs and KQ, I think your fold was horrible.

Also, keep in mind that trips is like manna from heaven for a loose player. This fact alone would force me to call here. You are probably not good 50% of the time but I would take 10-1 (as mentioned previously) all day long and twice on Friday and Saturday nights between 10:30pm and 1:30 am. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, in an attempt to take this thread somewhere useful: all those in favor of a river call, how big of a mistake is my fold? I'm looking for a number here, in BB's.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd guess about 2BB.

[krishanleong]

I vote for 3BB

Krishan

[kurosh]

8BB. You're good here at least half the time.

[kurosh]

Er changed my mind. At least 4BB.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
Er changed my mind. At least 4BB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you guys are a little nutty here -- I don't think Hero is good more than maybe 1 in 7 times at best. I still think it's around 1 in 10, but that could be a little pessimistic. But you really think it's 1 in 3?

[B00T]

Hero is good at least 1 in 10 like you said Grisgra.

400 hands on a person is not enough to make a flawless read. Naphand could go on a 6 paragraph rant about this.

I am sold on villian making this play with any Q based on your entire line. You raised PF, which I will go on a limb and say dictates that you DONT have a queen more often than you do. 2 are out on the flop, what hands does he put you on? You pumped the pot at any opportunity.

Do you give credit to villian being able to see this? Your play and line may be identical to a typical player with TT-AA. I know if I have Q8 and see this kind of aggression non-stop I am more inclined to think a high pair and would play it the same way he did.

Obviously we are all not discounting your read as nothing, and you are a proven excellent player, but there are way too many scenarios where AQ is the better hand more than once in 15.

[Wally]

1.3 BBs. Seems like a small mistake, but actually a massive mistake.

[NLSoldier]

I think, given your read, you played this hand perfectly. Including the fold.

I do not think this is FPS whatsoever. It is simply the correct way to play this hand.

[BreakEvenPlayer]

This thread makes me want to put my fist through the wall. Is Danenania some new forum anti-hero here to espouse weak-tight, fancy play?

Not seeing a showdown in this hand against a guy who voluntarily donates money into 40% of pots is a crime against humanity.

[flawless_victory]

i think the river play is expert. i estimate the guy has precisely QJ 98% of the time

[mistrpug]

[ QUOTE ]
I think, given your read, you played this hand perfectly. Including the fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Villain is loose and passive preflop. Postflop he is very predictable. Numbers are 40/5/1 after &gt;400 hands.

[/ QUOTE ]


Maybe I'm missing something here, but from that read, do you really think you can be over 90% sure that villian has a boat? He's obviously not a very good player. You don't think it's possible he's overplaying trips? I hate this fold more every time I look at the hand. I can't imagine you're hand is good here any less than like 1 in 5.

[hypermegachi]

i can't think of any situation where it's proper to fold trips for one bet on the end.

even when the board is 4 flush your hand is still good often enough for it to be profitable.

[Huhmare]

OH MAN! I think this is HORRIBLE! Come on! You got tricky and confused the fish. Now he might think you've got an overpair and raise KQ for value. I bet he has KQ at least 10% of the time.

[naphand]

I am trying to limit my rants, and my paragraphs.

I do like the description "6-paragraph rant". I guess once you get used/immune to the screeching from me, you need to scale the level of screeching to determine just how serious I am....nice take. You get a gold star... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Oh, and I am with the group who say the fold is horrible for most of the reasons they give.

[girgy44]

I don't know about the fold, I probably call, but the river C/R is perfect for 10/20.

[Danenania]

[ QUOTE ]
Is Danenania some new forum anti-hero here to espouse weak-tight, fancy play?

[/ QUOTE ]

Please note that my weak-tightness in this hand was post-weak-tight weak-tightness, the cool kind.

[Pressedun]

Love it.