30/60 River Raise/Fold-to-3bet

[PokerMike]

Yes or no?

Villian is 29/5/1 after 102hands(filtered for 7-10players)

Party Poker 30/60 Hold'em (4 handed) converter (http://www.selachian.com/tools/bisonconverter/hhconverter.cgi)

Preflop: Hero is Button with T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, J/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG calls, Hero calls, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: (4 SB) K/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, K/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 9/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, Hero checks.

Turn: (2 BB) 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, Hero checks.

River: (2 BB) Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, BB checks, <font color="#CC3333">UTG bets</font>, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises</font>, SB folds, BB folds, <font color="#CC3333">UTG 3-bets</font>, Hero folds.

Final Pot: 7 BB

[Jgents]

I feel my advice will be seen inferior by higher limit players as I only play up to 10/20, so I'll withhold from any suggestions. But I have to say, when I read this hand I said to myself "Oh. Gosh. No."

[PokerMike]

The other 2 players aren't even going to call a single bet, so calling for overcalls has no merit.

Villian will call a raise with a K though, but will only 3bet a high flush/full. This is why i think this line is right, because you don't risk getting pushed off the hand often enough(against a guy with these stats anyway). The argument for calling is so that you don't want to get pushed off a better hand. So if you agree with the above points, why call?

[Tall Kitchen]

Assuming you were testing for a full house or high flush to avoid a pointless chip race, and thinking his river bet might be a bluff and that you might take it down on the end (if I'm off base, smack me), I have a question: Does that work? And if it does, how does it work? I mean, I try it all time holding a high card or small pair, and it seems to work sometimes. But when I do it, I'm just going on gut and I'm not sure if I'm winning or losing on it - is there a better way? It seems you had some history on your opponent. Is historical data on an individual opponent the only way to estimate the profitability of that move? Or am I missing the flick in all it's subtleness, as usual. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Jgents]

If villain had a King, you wouldn't have made it to the river in the first place.

[PokerMike]

I think you can judge the opponent on stats. I just feel that an opponent with these stats wouldn't get out of line on the river for a 3bet very often, so thats not much of a worry. In any case, if you thought he was bluffing, the move is calling not raising , because your hand can beat a bluff and only a better hand will 3bet.

I think this works because of my opinion of his river 3betting range + his river 3bet-bluff frequency + he will probably call with a Q. If i'm off base on those assumptions then raise/fold is probably wrong.

[PokerMike]

[ QUOTE ]
If villain had a King, you wouldn't have made it to the river in the first place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry i meant a Q

[Trix]

I think I pay off here, but it doesn´t look like that big a deal.
A8h-^6,J8-6h^2,JTh^1,T8-7h^2,87-6h^2,76-5h^2,65h^1, making it 16 hands you are beat by, though they prolly should be discounted a bit since he may not play all and he may bet some on the turn, you will know better. Since you are getting 7:1, you must be able to find 16/7 hands hands you beat: around 2.5 roughly and you split with 8 JT hands, the ones without both in hearts, so thats 4 right there, meaning you are at worst a 16:4 or 4:1 dog, which is plenty.

Edit: If he hardly ever 3bets JT on the end, then you can fold, I just can´t read that from the stats alone.

[PokerMike]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I pay off here, but it doesn´t look like that big a deal.
A8h-^6,J8-6h^2,JTh^1,T8-7h^2,87-6h^2,76-5h^2,65h^1, making it 16 hands you are beat by, though they prolly should be discounted a bit since he may not play all and he may bet some on the turn, you will know better. Since you are getting 7:1, you must be able to find 16/7 hands hands you beat: around 2.5 roughly and you split with 8 JT hands, the ones without both in hearts, so thats 4 right there, meaning you are at worst a 16:4 or 4:1 dog, which is plenty.

Edit: If he hardly ever 3bets JT on the end, then you can fold, I just can´t read that from the stats alone.

[/ QUOTE ]

He isn't 3betting with most of those flushes, do you disagree based on your *feel* of his stats?

[Jgents]

I'm embarrassed to say I didn't notice that you had a straight in this hand when I first commented. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif So you can understand my initial reaction to this.

Will have to say that I find your justification for this line intriquing. I do think though that if this is the type of opponent who doesn't 3-bet unless he has a flush or better, then he likely is also the type to fold to a re-raise in a small pot while facing possible trips or better when he himself has a Q or worse.

[Trix]

When it goes check all the way till the river I´m not really sure what he 3bets and what he doesn´t just from stats, so I pay off here as I´m in pretty good shape vs his range if he 3bets anything. There are lots of guys you can fold to the 3bet from though, just dont think 30/5/1 is enough to tell, but if you are saying that he wont 3bet the weaker flushes, then I guess that means that he wont 3bet JT either, so you can just fold, but I wouldn´t be too surprised to see some awfully played AA sometimes here either and given that noone has shown any strenght at all it could very easily look like you are raising just a queen.

[billyjex]

i think once he 3-bets you are chopping here nearly all the time, so I would call. he could have a flush but I would still expect him to bet it on the turn (the draw he picked up.)

[Surfbullet]

Hey Mike,

If this is your read (that he won't 3bet less than a big flush or full house) then I think this is an easy fold.

I do, however, question the validity of the read. Is this based on stats alone? Because if so, I daresay it is a far too specific read, and narrow hand range, given how oddly he played his hand.

IMO the type of player that will check the flop + turn with a K will gladly 3bet the river because it is obvious your hand was improved by the Q, and he knows a player like you would have bet a K along the way. I think there are enough Kx hands (KT, KJ, K8, even a super-slowplayed KA) to call this river 3bet, not to mention the times we chop to JT.

Again, if this is a table read, from many hands with villain, then go with it. But if you are making assumptions this specific about a player with an AF of 1 then I think you are doing yourself a disservice.

Surf

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
I think there are enough Kx hands (KT, KJ, K8, even a super-slowplayed KA) to call this river 3bet, not to mention the times we chop to JT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Krishan

[Tall Kitchen]

I'm glad you brought this up. Without the nuts, I always fold to a 3-bet on the end. It's part of my philosophy of avoiding a chip race (even a "good" one) in preference of nickel &amp; diming my opponents. However, I did a little reading this morning that may change how I get into this situation, and I think:

1. It would have been 7/1 to call and you may have had at least half a chance to win between the likelihood of villain bluffing (maybe 50% with no action till the river?) and yours being the better hand (maybe &gt;50%?).

2. According to your assessment of villain, he could be the underdog after calling your raise, assuming he necessarily would 3-bet a high flush or full house.

That said, if you're right about how villain feels about kings, raising may have been the way to go. But, knowing what you do, and with the possibilities of both a flush and full house existing, why'd you take it there?

I stand by to be violently corrected. /images/graemlins/smile.gif