A simple situation I may be misplaying

[shant]

Party 10/20 (10-handed)

CO is a loose-passive player. He likes to cold-call and limp, even big hands with Aces and pretty cards. SB is unknown.

I have 7/images/graemlins/club.gif8/images/graemlins/club.gif in the BB.

Preflop: Folded to CO who limps, Button folds, SB completes, I check.

Flop: 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif2/images/graemlins/spade.gif6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif (3SB)
SB checks, I bet, CO calls, SB calls.

Turn: J/images/graemlins/spade.gif (3 BB)
SB checks, I bet, CO calls, SB folds.

River: Q/images/graemlins/heart.gif (5 BB)
I check, CO bets, I fold.

Is this the right river line? Does your answer change if the turn is the J/images/graemlins/heart.gif?

[Klepton]

i c/r this flop, i know the CO has nothing and he'll usually fold the turn UI.

[W. Deranged]

Shant,

My first thought is that if the river were the J /images/graemlins/heart.gif it's definitely a bet-fold.

The problem with the Q is now there are more than twice as many cards villain could have in his hand that I'm worried about him having. Basically, there are two ranks above our 7 and 2 below, but villain could also have two pair, a flush, a better 7, or a pocket pair. (It's tough to put him on that narrow a range because he's so loose-passive). Unless we think he's calling a whole lot with no pair, I think it's hard to construct a reasonable range for villain where we're ahead more than 55% of the time when we bet and he calls the river, so I don't find a value-bet here. Hence I have to check. Since I check, and he's passive, I find it pretty hard to call once he bets, as I find it hard to believe (since he's passive) that he's betting a hand worse than mine any significant amount of the time.

So you're sort of stuck. You can't bet for value. You can't call to snap off a bluff. The only way you can really hope to win this hand is if villain checks behind you and you can showdown, which sucks because the outcome of the hand is totally out of your control. Unfortunately, I don't see anything else to do, and so I play the hand exactly as you did.

[ghostwriter]

[ QUOTE ]
i c/r this flop, i know the CO has nothing and he'll usually fold the turn UI.

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you think he'll bet?

How passive is CO post flop?

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
i c/r this flop, i know the CO has nothing and he'll usually fold the turn UI.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a really hard time check-raising here against a passive opponent who I have no confidence will bet.

[shant]

[ QUOTE ]
My first thought is that if the river were the J /images/graemlins/heart.gif it's definitely a bet-fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, I was asking about the turn though, which would change the amount of draws out there. I like the rest of your post.

[bakku]

[ QUOTE ]
i c/r this flop, i know the CO has nothing and he'll usually fold the turn UI.

[/ QUOTE ]

passive players usually don't bet the flop with nothing

[W. Deranged]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My first thought is that if the river were the J /images/graemlins/heart.gif it's definitely a bet-fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, I was asking about the turn though, which would change the amount of draws out there. I like the rest of your post.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the J /images/graemlins/heart.gif on the turn just makes the river fold easier, since obviously now there are many fewer reasons why he'd get to the river in the first place.

Basically, I think since the pot is small the river check-fold can never be horrible against this type of opponent. While he may be bluffing a missed draw, and even passive players will sometimes try to run a bluff, I think the percentage play is to fold.

I personally find playing loose-passive players out of position in short-handed pots to be pretty frustrating in many situations, as the hand ranges you have to deal with are so broad and hence all the calculations/reasoning that goes in is so much more imprecise. This is a great example of that phenomenon, in my opinion. The nice thing is that, while it's sometimes tough to play against these opponents with marginal hands, it's very, very easy to play against them with good hands.

[ghostwriter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My first thought is that if the river were the J /images/graemlins/heart.gif it's definitely a bet-fold.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, I was asking about the turn though, which would change the amount of draws out there. I like the rest of your post.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the J /images/graemlins/heart.gif on the turn just makes the river fold easier, since obviously now there are many fewer reasons why he'd get to the river in the first place.

Basically, I think since the pot is small the river check-fold can never be horrible against this type of opponent. While he may be bluffing a missed draw, and even passive players will sometimes try to run a bluff, I think the percentage play is to fold.

I personally find playing loose-passive players out of position in short-handed pots to be pretty frustrating in many situations, as the hand ranges you have to deal with are so broad and hence all the calculations/reasoning that goes in is so much more imprecise. This is a great example of that phenomenon, in my opinion. The nice thing is that, while it's sometimes tough to play against these opponents with marginal hands, it's very, very easy to play against them with good hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

CO could have 2 spades or 45 and bet his missed draw on the river.

[Klepton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i c/r this flop, i know the CO has nothing and he'll usually fold the turn UI.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a really hard time check-raising here against a passive opponent who I have no confidence will bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

even passive players get the idea that when checked to them, they should bet.