How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb [Archive]

View Full Version : How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb

11-12-2005, 11:44 AM

Overbetting to induce a call on the river, your thoughts please...

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em Tourney, Big Blind is t20 (9 handed) FTR converter on zerodivide.cx (http://www.zerodivide.cx/converter)

MP2 (t840)
MP3 (t1610)
CO (t1470)
Button (t1440)
SB (t1480)
BB (t1280)
UTG (t1500)
Hero (t2380)
MP1 (t1500)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with 6/images/graemlins/spade.gif, A/images/graemlins/spade.gif.
1 fold, Hero calls t20, 5 folds, SB completes, BB raises to t60, Hero calls t40, SB folds.

Flop: (t140) 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/spade.gif (2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks.

Turn: (t140) 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif (2 players)
BB bets t40, Hero calls t40.

River: (t220) 3/images/graemlins/spade.gif (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets t300, BB calls t300.

Final Pot: t820

Results in white below: 
BB has 9h Ts (flush, ten high).
Hero has 6s As (flush, ace high).
Outcome: Hero wins t820. 

Thoughts?

dmk

11-12-2005, 11:51 AM

bet every street, if he has a set or lower flush you're probably stacking him. if he doesn't, you're not gettng anything anyway.

nath

11-12-2005, 03:52 PM

Preflop is a little strange. Why are you limping early with that and calling a raise? (Did you know BB would pull crap like that useless raise? If so the call is not so bad.)
You should play this flop aggressively when he checks to you. I wouldn't be afraid to get all my chips in here. It hits you pretty hard.

illegit

11-12-2005, 03:57 PM

Bet this flop every damn time.

As for the river bet I almost always make a standard value bet in this spot but I get called so often by such weak hands I've started to bet bigger in such spots.. though not as big as you did. I like it if I read my opponent as a bad player.

11-12-2005, 04:24 PM

I had a good read on him, he was super aggressive, but didn't usually call someone who raised preflop. I felt like betting that flop, but I felt like he would probably try to take it away from me on the turn if I checked, and I figured I had at least 12 outs if not 15.

On the turn, I felt like raising him, but knew unless he had a face spade card, he probably wouldn't call, and on the river, I figured he would think I was trying to steal the pot since he checked to me.

11-12-2005, 04:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Bet this flop every damn time.

As for the river bet I almost always make a standard value bet in this spot but I get called so often by such weak hands I've started to bet bigger in such spots.. though not as big as you did. I like it if I read my opponent as a bad player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Normally I would, but I had a read that this guy was a gus hansen wannabe without the skill, he played 70% of hands up to this point, and would fold to any aggression, but would usually be aggressive when faced with weakness. I figured against someone like him, my hand was much stronger than normal, and a check might induce a bluff by him on a later street, while a bet will get him to fold most of his hands.

I almost felt like the river card was a kill card for what I was trying to do, I wanted a non spade there so he'd bluff at it thinking I was chasing the flush on the turn, but when he checked to me, I figured he would either fold to any bet I'd make, or I could try overbetting it, and if he had a spade/2 pair/set, he would call thinking I am just trying to take a pot with air. I made sure to pause for about 5 or so seconds before I made the bet also.

Also, the limp preflop, its something I sometimes do with drawing hands early when the blinds are miniscule to the stack sizes, and I can see flops for cheap and decide what to do from there. His raise didn't worry me because I'd have position on him, and it wasn't big at all compared to my stack size.

11-12-2005, 07:08 PM

I like overbetting for value against a particular type of player, one who doesn't have a good understanding of pot odds. Even players who understand that they need certain odds to draw to flush on the turn or something don't always understand the way pot odds function on the river. They don't get that if the pot is 150, they have to be right at least two out of every three times to call a bet of 300.

Instead, they base their decision solely or primarily on whether or not they think you have the goods. This means that this guy will either convince himself you have a big spade and fold to even a bet of 100, or he will decide you are stealing and call whether you bet 100 or 300 (though maybe not if you do something crazy like move all-in).

I've started taking notes on river calling standards: have I seen this guy fold to a blatant value bet? Have I seen him call an overbet with top pair when the flush hits on the river?

It can also be helpful to see how he value bets the river. Does he like to push the nuts or peddle them? He'll probably expect you to do the same, so if he always makes a very callable bet with a big hand on the river, he may get suspicious and decide you are stealing when you overbet, since he doesn't think that is the way to play the nuts. Conversely, he may may check-fold to a small bet when a scare card comes on the river, since that is how he expects you to play the nuts.

11-12-2005, 08:20 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I like overbetting for value against a particular type of player, one who doesn't have a good understanding of pot odds. Even players who understand that they need certain odds to draw to flush on the turn or something don't always understand the way pot odds function on the river. They don't get that if the pot is 150, they have to be right at least two out of every three times to call a bet of 300.

Instead, they base their decision solely or primarily on whether or not they think you have the goods. This means that this guy will either convince himself you have a big spade and fold to even a bet of 100, or he will decide you are stealing and call whether you bet 100 or 300 (though maybe not if you do something crazy like move all-in).

I've started taking notes on river calling standards: have I seen this guy fold to a blatant value bet? Have I seen him call an overbet with top pair when the flush hits on the river?

It can also be helpful to see how he value bets the river. Does he like to push the nuts or peddle them? He'll probably expect you to do the same, so if he always makes a very callable bet with a big hand on the river, he may get suspicious and decide you are stealing when you overbet, since he doesn't think that is the way to play the nuts. Conversely, he may may check-fold to a small bet when a scare card comes on the river, since that is how he expects you to play the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good post.

I'd also like to note that this is not normally how I'd play the hand, on the flop I'd definitely make a bet with that gutshot+flush+possible overcard with multiple callers, or against a calling station, or against someone who is a loose caller.

Against someone like this though, who I figured for superaggressive, I fully expected him to bluff at the pot on the turn, but it was so small of a bet, that I figured that seeing another river card could induce another bluff out of him (I've seen alot of people make small bet on one street, then go for a huge bet on the next cuz they think their opponent was weak, was trying to go for that from him). Since he checked to me, I decided that I'd either get nothing more out of him (fully expected him to fold) or he would make an assumption that this huge bet I made was one saying "I got nothing, please don't call and let me take this pot" and in this case, it worked. He might have still called a smaller bet, in fact, given his hand, I'd expect him to call a 100 buck bet based on odds alone.

Normally I never overbet unless I got a made hand and there are some dangerous cards that could hurt me (see top flush on a board with straight and flush possibilities), but in this case I figured the worst thing that would happen is he would fold. I knew there was no way he had a set anywhere on here, because given my reads, he would have been pumping up that pot and would have lead into me on the river too, so I was not scared of the board pairing.

With my normal play, I'd pick up a miniscule 140 pot most likely, and while that wouldn't be bad because I had a great draw with plenty of outs, I was probably a favorite there to about anything but a set or 2 pair (or tptk, which I'd be close to a coinflip against), so I figured even though I don't have a made hand, against 1 opponent I could slow play this and try to induce action by acting weak. Limping preflop induced action, I fully expected checking behind to induce some too.

Now should I have limped pf with that? Some people say no, I like to mix it up early on limping with hands that have possibilities to stack someone if I hit (see suited connectors, suited aces, suited one gappers, and low pairs, occasionally connectors if there are a few limpers in already) because I figure if the pot gets raised alot preflop, then I can fold without committing much at all of my stack.

I doubt this move has any value whatsoever against anyone with basic understanding of odds, but against weaker players I think this move would work sometimes. Against the players who make this move when they have the goods, they would probably fold to this but call a smaller bet, it would only work when the player thinks that this is how someone would bluff at the pot.

I might never use this move again, but somehow my poker instincts told me that this is the move I needed to do here, call me crazy if you will.

illegit

11-12-2005, 08:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Against someone like this though, who I figured for superaggressive, I fully expected him to bluff at the pot on the turn, but it was so small of a bet, that I figured that seeing another river card could induce another bluff out of him (I've seen alot of people make small bet on one street, then go for a huge bet on the next cuz they think their opponent was weak, was trying to go for that from him). Since he checked to me, I decided that I'd either get nothing more out of him (fully expected him to fold) or he would make an assumption that this huge bet I made was one saying "I got nothing, please don't call and let me take this pot" and in this case, it worked. He might have still called a smaller bet, in fact, given his hand, I'd expect him to call a 100 buck bet based on odds alone.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why are you trying to induce a bluff when your hand is A-high? Yeah, the flop is nice but if you brick out you might end up having to fold to the bluff you induced. People are setting traps with draws now? Get money in on this flop regardless of the type of player you're against. Every time.

Exitonly

11-12-2005, 08:38 PM

very nice post. i'm gonna start paying attention to that kinda stuff

11-12-2005, 08:44 PM

I have 9 outs to the flush, 3 outs to the other 3 non flush 5's, and 3 possible outs with the 3 other aces. Thats 15 outs, which would make me a favorite to win the hand by the river against a pair without an ace. If I bet there, I get no more out of someone who completely bricked the flop, and the only draw that I am letting someone see for free would be either a gutshot straight with them holding the 5 with a 6 hitting, or a lower pocket pair that whiffed this flop, or possible overcards.

If a card that I didn't want hits the turn (which happens 2/3 times, I am about a 32% chance of hitting one of my cards on the turn, and about a 54% chance of hitting by the river), then they will have to bet enough to not give me correct pot odds, which would be 3:1 for 1 card to come (since my chances go down from 54% to 33% with a blank), and most cards that come are not going to scare me into thinking that I am behind.

I am willing to take a risk of losing a small pot which I wouldn't call if the pot odds aren't right to try to induce a bluff to get an even bigger pot that I never would have got had I bet out.

Unconventional, yes. But I don't think this is a bad strategy.