Can This Be Right?

[Lestat]

I have a friend who according to PT, has a fold to a river bet of 52%!! At first, I thought this was WAY too high! The pot will certainly be offering 2 to 1 most times, so he is making it correct for opponents to bluff him 100% of the time.

However, he disputes this on several counts...

One, he claims that this figure is skewered because he is the one who is usually betting the river when he gets there. Other than the rare occasions where he's trying to induce a bluff or planning on check/calling with top pair, if he doesn't bet the river himself, he's on a busted draw. So he says this is a big reason why it *looks* like he's folding too much.

The other thing is that he has an ultra-aggressive style of play. Routinely 3 and 4 betting the turn often with top pair types of hands. So he claims it would take an incredibly courageous bet or raise on the river to bluff him out of a pot. He definitely doesn't think this is happening too often and when it does, he figures the guy made a great play and deserves to win it sometimes.

I'm not so sure... If he's playing that aggressively, the pots will be big by the time the river card arrives and he should NOT be folding anything with showdown value. But he insists that he is quite sure he is not folding too many winners.

He normally doesn't read 2+2, but I told him I'd post this subject here to see what some of the best online players think (sorry that this relates to the party 30-60 online and I'm not sure this qualifies as higher limit, but I wanted opinions from the best of the best).

So what do you guys think? Is it possible that 52% folding to a river bet is Ok? The guy beats the games pretty good (well over 1/100 6-tabling through 400k hands). I'm just wondering if he could be doing better. Most of the good players in my database have a fold percentage in the thirties. I'd appreciate comments on this. Thanks.

[Lestat]

75+ views and no opinions yet? Maybe 52% is not so out of line after all. ??

[Paluka]

I'm waiting to get home so I can look at my 30/60 pokertracker.

[phish]

Another very important issue is that if is super-aggressive and raising with such thin hands on the turn, his opponents will know that and may well be underestimating his true strength. Hence his opponents may be betting a mediocre hand for value on the river (top pair [censored] kicker or worse) and getting him to lay down a split pot or better hand.
There appears, from your description, a huge mismatch between how he plays the turn and how he plays the river. Such mismatches in play is usually not healthy.

[DpR]

I'm at 30% and I call a lot. I play a little more passive then I used to, when I would fold to river more like 36%. 52% seems high, but not so much so that I think it is impossible to win that way.

I think it will be a problem when people notice however. If I knew your buddies name, those stats would certainly encourage me to break off some river bluff raises - something I almost never otherwise do.

[Lestat]

Thanks guys-

I've seen his database (as well as watched him play). He is NOT folding top pair hands on the river regardless if he's bet into or raised. In fact, he claims (and I've never seen), him fold any legitimate hand to a bet or raise on the river.

So maybe what I'm really asking is: What does the "folded to a river bet" entail? And how accurate of a barometer is it in determing WHEN you're folding? Again, if he's betting (or calling) most of the time he gets to the river, and mostly folds only when he has a very bad hand or a busted draw, do you think it's possible that the 52% number might be misleading?

[ike]

I'm at 40% and feel like if anything I pay off too much on the end. IMO, he's right that you can play the turn in such a way that your opponents won't bet the river against you very much. Its not that when you 3bet the turn alot you can fold to a river donk, its just that when you 3bet the turn alot you will face fewer river bets and a much larger percentage of the river bets you do face will be in multiway pots where you have no hand and were drawing or whatever.

[lil feller]

How often does he call a river donk w/ UI AK type hands, or 2nd pair TK? I think a lot of folks that are in that 32% range play AK UI passively on the turn when in position, or on the river when out of it, and call a river bet against most the laggy opponents.

Just a guess.

lf

[ QUOTE ]
He is NOT folding top pair hands on the river regardless if he's bet into or raised. In fact, he claims (and I've never seen), him fold any legitimate hand to a bet or raise on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does he also take alot of hands to the river that most players wouldn't? I guess we are headed towards this: what are his fold numbers on the turn, flop, and preflop?

[Paluka]

My last 9000 hands in the full 30/60 games(which has been a good run) I'm at 39%.

[Lestat]

Thanks Paluka. So I seem to be right that most good/winning players fold less than 40%. The question is, is it possible to fold a higher percentage of time without giving up much?

Again, I think I need to know what that 52% is entailing. If he's betting most rivers and folding mainly his busts and very bad hands, then 52% doesn't seem too out of line. However, if this 52% figure is due to him folding when he's NOT in the lead and/or if he's check/folding, then clearly it would be a problem. What do you think?

IronFly wants to know what his fold percentages are. I'll have to call him and post those. I'm interested because I also felt I was folding the river too much (43%). When I saw his stats I was floored. Thanks for your time.

[Lestat]

Fold:

pf - 79.99

flop - 17.24

turn - 13.10

river - 13.57

But his aggression stats seem off the charts (hope he won't be pissed I'm posting this -lol)....


Agression:

pf - 1.39

flop - 3.31

turn - 4.72

river - 3.35

His fold percentages aren't TOO far off from mine, but his aggression factors (especially the river) is WAY higher than mine!

[DpR]

[ QUOTE ]
Fold:

pf - 79.99

flop - 17.24

turn - 13.10

river - 13.57

But his aggression stats seem off the charts (hope he won't be pissed I'm posting this -lol)....


Agression:

pf - 1.39

flop - 3.31

turn - 4.72

river - 3.35

His fold percentages aren't TOO far off from mine, but his aggression factors (especially the river) is WAY higher than mine!

[/ QUOTE ]

Those aggression stats are sick. My river aggression is <2. He is betting or raising the river over 75% of the time (that he doesnt fold). I think with those stats 50% + makes a lot of sense.....

[bicyclekick]

wow I feel like I've been folding a lot more lately (and my sd stats are 3% less going to sd and 3% higher winning or something than they were before. I can't imagine how low my % was before.

aggression by streets:
2.8
2.1
1.5

Edit and my fold to river bet was 31%

[Lestat]

Wow are you good! I had to have him read me all the river stats and you're correct (except that it's +75% of the time he doesn't fold OR CHECK the river). I could never have figured that out from the I gave (bad at math).

But total post-flop aggr. is just under 3.7 and I've seen higher. Like I said, I've watched him play online (and many times live), and he's not a total maniac. And I don't think I've ever seen him make a "weak" fold on the river. It sure seems like he just folds when he's supposed to and clearly beat. But I've also seen him pick off some incredible bluffs.

That's why these stats in PT are so dangerous for someone like me. I don't really understand how all these numbers are derived. I think there are many underlying factors and I have to be careful when trying to match other people's numbers. There is more than one way to skin a cat and if I simply start folding more on the river (given my style of play), it could adversely affect my game, even though it seems correct for my friend and I know for a fact he is an extremely strong player.

[Lestat]

Thanks for the input. Your aggr. stats seem normal. I'm slightly higher on the turn and river, but I don't think that's important.

[baronzeus]

2.31, 1.91, 1.52. fold to river bet 31.54%

this is over a 40K hand sample at party 30/60.

wtsd 37.79 w$sd 52.24

ive been playing mostly shorthanded though, 6.36 players on average, not sure how it affects my #s. my vpip is definitely higher (26.24/18.97) so im sure that lowers my aggression.

[Tommy Angelo]

I don't think a 50% river-fold percentage is inherently bad. And I'd say the same about many other stats that seem extreme. Everything depends on everything.

Here's something along the same lines, something I've felt for a couple years now: I think I can win at limit hold'em without ever raising on the turn.

The conditions would be:

1) No rake or tips (or else the amount of the rake and tips is added back to my score).

2) I have total control over game selection, seat selection, and quitting.

3) As to duration, I guess a few thousands hours would be enough to determine if the feat was accomplished.

4) The penalty for failure would have to be death by torture.

I just realized how much fun unfalsifyable claims are! I can see why they are so popular.


Tommy

[stoxtrader]

I must say tommy, it's been a pleasure reading your posts lately. I've always enjoyed the prose, but must admit, I used to be in the "he stinks at poker or intentionally posts mistakes to stir the pot camp".

Your posts over the last few weeks have been as well written as always, and the content has been awesome. thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
Fold:

pf - 79.99
flop - 17.24
turn - 13.10
river - 13.57


[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't seem unreasonable. He folds to a bet on the river 52% of the time, but most of the time he is putting in a bet or the hand is checked down, so the total amount of folds he makes on the river is just 14%. I would not try to push a player with these stats off a hand... but maybe I should take a closer look at how I set up my stat display, since this guy apparently would fold 50% of the time to a river donk bet.

[DpR]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow are you good! I had to have him read me all the river stats and you're correct (except that it's +75% of the time he doesn't fold OR CHECK the river).

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to be a nit, but him checking doesnt enter the calculation. AF is (Bet + Raise)/Call. So when he checks the river the AF doesnt change (i.e. a check-call adds 1 to the denominator of the AF ratio and a check-raise adds 1 to the numerator)

[obi---one]

If people are paying attention, his folding will be taken advantage of. If people are playing 10 tables and just playing their cards, his aggression factors should deter them for the most part.

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
If people are paying attention, his folding will be taken advantage of. If people are playing 10 tables and just playing their cards, his aggression factors should deter them for the most part.

[/ QUOTE ]

But what we've learned is that this stat is very deceiving and he really isn't folding too much at all. Out of 100 instances, he is seeing a showdown well over 75% of the time.

[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If people are paying attention, his folding will be taken advantage of. If people are playing 10 tables and just playing their cards, his aggression factors should deter them for the most part.

[/ QUOTE ]

But what we've learned is that this stat is very deceiving and he really isn't folding too much at all. Out of 100 instances, he is seeing a showdown well over 75% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, because his turn aggression is causing free showdowns for him in position if he wants it, many people will just check-call any decent holding (therefore never trying to bet it themselves) because they fear a raise. Therefore, the river is probably not bet all that often "by the opponent" and when someone does bet, it is probably an extreme situation than when a "normal" player gets bet into on the river.

Out of curiousity, if one gets c/r or raised on the river, and they fold, does this count as a "fold to river bet" or would these be a "fold to river raise" situation?

[Lestat]

"Out of curiousity, if one gets c/r or raised on the river, and they fold, does this count as a "fold to river bet" or would these be a "fold to river raise" situation? "

I believe (although I am not 100% sure), this would count as a "fold to river bet". I'm sure someone else could provide a definite answer.

[phish]

All these stats have got my head spinning. I use pokertracker, but mainly for the hand playback feature and just to look at very high level stats. All these w$sd, etc stats, I don't quite know how to interpret or compare.

In fact, I no longer even boot up PokerAces HUD when I play since I find the statistics more distracting than helpful. Anyone else feel the same? Tho I do miss being able to see my opponent's hand without looking at 'instant hand history'.

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fold:

pf - 79.99
flop - 17.24
turn - 13.10
river - 13.57


[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't seem unreasonable. He folds to a bet on the river 52% of the time, but most of the time he is putting in a bet or the hand is checked down, so the total amount of folds he makes on the river is just 14%. I would not try to push a player with these stats off a hand... but maybe I should take a closer look at how I set up my stat display, since this guy apparently would fold 50% of the time to a river donk bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necessarily. I think the point is that he is playing the turn such that he rarely gets bet into the times he is planning to call. That is, he is so aggressive with his showdown hands on the turn that he usually gets to bet them or check them on the river, and rarely gets to call with them. This doesn't mean he'll fold when he shouldn't, just that his turn play sets things up so that he doesn't get the chance to call when he should. If that's true, there's no way to take advantage by betting into him. His stats reflect that his opponents don't bet the river enough, not that he doesn't call enough.

[Lestat]

I think you're 100% right. But I also think Ironfly was saying pretty much the same thing. That is, he needs to adjust the way he looks at his stats because it would APPEAR that donking the river would be a good play to make against him, when in fact, it would probably be a mistake.

What I learned from this thread is that it's more important to look at the "folds river %" than the "fold to a river bet" percentage.

[LearnedfromTV]

Ok. I read Ironfly as saying the reverse (that he looks at folds-on-river but thinks he is missing an opportunity that he would see if he looks at fold-to-bet-on-river). No matter.

Good thread. I don't even play much limit but I love this forum for its theory threads.

[ QUOTE ]
His stats reflect that his opponents don't bet the river enough, not that he doesn't call enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. You did interpret my statement correctly, I was thinking of donking this guy to "take advantage" of his high fold to bet number on the river, but as Lestat said, he's not folding legitimate hands. My error.

Getting a good read through stats is often pretty tricky. I've recently been trying to get a better handle on my opponents play with stats, but its still tough. I wish I had better wisdom to offer on this subject.

[MarkD]

[ QUOTE ]
All these stats have got my head spinning. I use pokertracker, but mainly for the hand playback feature and just to look at very high level stats. All these w$sd, etc stats, I don't quite know how to interpret or compare.

In fact, I no longer even boot up PokerAces HUD when I play since I find the statistics more distracting than helpful. Anyone else feel the same? Tho I do miss being able to see my opponent's hand without looking at 'instant hand history'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Phish,

You can do that - use PokerAce just to see the hand. Just go into your layout and click each of the stats that are visible and make them invisible. You will have a layout with no stats at all but you will be able to automatically see your opponents hand at showdown. This should take you about 5 minutes to set up.

If you think you may want to use the stats in the future simply save the layout you have now before you make everything invisible.

[Lestat]

<font color="blue"> Getting a good read through stats is often pretty tricky. </font>

Looks like I'm having a hard time getting a good read even from people talking about stats! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[obi---one]

[ QUOTE ]
All these stats have got my head spinning. I use pokertracker, but mainly for the hand playback feature and just to look at very high level stats. All these w$sd, etc stats, I don't quite know how to interpret or compare.

In fact, I no longer even boot up PokerAces HUD when I play since I find the statistics more distracting than helpful. Anyone else feel the same? Tho I do miss being able to see my opponent's hand without looking at 'instant hand history'.

[/ QUOTE ]

feel the same

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All these stats have got my head spinning. I use pokertracker, but mainly for the hand playback feature and just to look at very high level stats. All these w$sd, etc stats, I don't quite know how to interpret or compare.

In fact, I no longer even boot up PokerAces HUD when I play since I find the statistics more distracting than helpful. Anyone else feel the same? Tho I do miss being able to see my opponent's hand without looking at 'instant hand history'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Phish,

You can do that - use PokerAce just to see the hand. Just go into your layout and click each of the stats that are visible and make them invisible. You will have a layout with no stats at all but you will be able to automatically see your opponents hand at showdown. This should take you about 5 minutes to set up.

If you think you may want to use the stats in the future simply save the layout you have now before you make everything invisible.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd also recommend leaving VPIP and PFR just so that you at least have an idea of their preflop range.