Hand Vs Good Player

[HiatusOver]

Button 17/12/2.6 Opens, I call with red JT

Flop Q94 with 2 spades. I check-call.

Turn offsuit 3. I check-raise, he calls

River Offsuit T I bet with intention of folding to a raise

[HiatusOver]

I was going to bet the river if I missed

You are sb or bb? It doesn't matter much but I am curious.

I think the hand is fine, very villain dependent. I play this the same way sometimes, particularly against opponents who like to fold. I agree with your river plan, you can safely fold to a raise.

[HiatusOver]

I was BB sorry

[Clarkmeister]

I prefer playing it faster on the flop.

[HiatusOver]

I usually do that also, so just the standard line here? Bet until we get more resistance and then usually shut down if we miss? I think I have been raised so often on the turn in this spot lately that I tried to do something different. Back to the basics.

[steveyz]

If the only information you have is that your opponent is a good thinking player, I think just about any line here is fine as long as it's not the only line you'd take.

If you had more specific information on your opponent, then that should be used to alter the percentage of times you take each line.

Agreed w/ the fast play on the flop. Gives other hands an easier opportunity to get away. Seems like my opponents get stubborn when i raise on the turn.

[J.A.Sucker]

I like it, a lot, though there may be some merit to check-calling the river if you think he'll bet a bust or a 9 on the river, which I think is quite possible, though I don't really know what the aggression numbers really mean.

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
If the only information you have is that your opponent is a good thinking player, I think just about any line here is fine as long as it's not the only line you'd take.

If you had more specific information on your opponent, then that should be used to alter the percentage of times you take each line.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this.
Here is what I'm really interested in. Assuming we checkraise the turn and miss on the river, does everyone think it is worth it to follow through with a bluff on the river? To clarify, I mean does everyone bet the river when we don't make a straight or a pair?

[catlover]

Yes. But this river bet is not a bluff. That said, it's a perfectly reasonable value bet.

Regarding a river bluff. I see a lot of guys calling the turn checkraise with high cards that they will fold on the river. In this situation, I am not sure what the villian's turn-call means. If he will frequently turn-call high cards, I think that a bluff is warranted. If he is folding high cards on the turn and is not folding the river more than he should, then I really don't see how the bluff is worth while in this hand.

[flawless_victory]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the only information you have is that your opponent is a good thinking player, I think just about any line here is fine as long as it's not the only line you'd take.

If you had more specific information on your opponent, then that should be used to alter the percentage of times you take each line.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this.
Here is what I'm really interested in. Assuming we checkraise the turn and miss on the river, does everyone think it is worth it to follow through with a bluff on the river?

[/ QUOTE ]
im not big on following through on the river, but here i suppose youd have to because of the definite possiblity of hands like KJ...

[Bolivia]

I like the bet on the river as long as you don't think the player would bluff raise the river. Given that it is a draw heavy board and the size of the pot on the river, I think your opponent may call with a number of hands that you beat.

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the bet on the river as long as you don't think the player would bluff raise the river. Given that it is a draw heavy board and the size of the pot on the river, I think your opponent may call with a number of hands that you beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am asking about the times when we don't make a pair or a straight on the river.

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes. But this river bet is not a bluff. That said, it's a perfectly reasonable value bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but I'm asking if you would bluff.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
I like it, a lot, though there may be some merit to check-calling the river if you think he'll bet a bust or a 9 on the river, which I think is quite possible, though I don't really know what the aggression numbers really mean.

[/ QUOTE ]

With his numbers any aggression over 2 I think is going to bet the river with lots of hands that we beat such as most pocket pairs maybe even AK AQ. Especially if we can narrow it down to aggression by street.

I would prefer check/calling this river because of this fact instead of possibly being raised.

[ALL1N]

CR'ing the turn sucks cos you gotta bet the river to get KJ/KT to fold (although it's still not _bad_).

CR'ing the flop sucks because there's a flush draw out and he'll put you on a draw too easily.

Find another (trickier) line if it works for you /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[AceHigh]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but I'm asking if you would bluff.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bluff if the river is a spade.

[mike l.]

"there may be some merit to check-calling the river if you think he'll bet a bust or a 9 on the river,"

or check a Q.

Just a hunch:

I believe in betting the river if we miss and check/calling the river in the actual hand.

If he's a "good" (but not world class) player, won't he value bet almost any pair if we check to him + maybe some bluffs?

[Ray Zee]

whats wrong with check calling on all the streets here.

[elindauer]

Against players with TAG stats who take this WA/WB line, I raise the river with anything I'd consider calling with and some things I wouldn't. Good luck with that.

This river bet means 1 of 2 things:

- I have a weak made hand and recognize that you may be even weaker, so I'm betting intending to fold to a raise

- I have a weak made hand and recognize that you may be even weaker, so I'm betting intending to fold to a raise only to chicken out at the last minute and payoff a raise anyways

So I raise the river to figure out which category you fall into, and proceed accordingly. I also value raise top pair etc aggressively against this line, since so many people are in camp 2.

Personally, I see virtually no one donk bet-3-bet strong hands on the river, which is the play you need to make to keep me honest.

Yeah, your opponent can't possibly raise AK, because he'll get called by better hands and fold bluffs. So you use this information to bet/fold middle pair. But that means he can now raise AK against you as a bluff, so I do.

good luck.
-Eric

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
CR'ing the flop sucks because there's a flush draw out and he'll put you on a draw too easily.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't that give us an additional 7 outs then? And aren't you assuming that we always check-raise draws and such? What if our style is to frequently check-call flush draws, and check-raise made hands, only attacking with straight draws like this? Is he really going to call down with a middle pocket pair or a weak ace high here?

Essentially, your argument is that you should never check-raise a draw unless the board seems to be draw-free. That's silly.

-Eric

[etizzle]

at no point in the hand could he have been WA/WB. your post has thoroughly confused me.

[HiatusOver]

[ QUOTE ]
whats wrong with check calling on all the streets here.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is nothing wrong with it. I think the new breed of hold'em players get it in our heads that when we flop a garden variety draw like this vs a steal raiser we are entitled to the pot. I admit that I am often guilty of this. I do think there is some real value in making 33 fold or A7 fold if they are willing to.

Would u usually just check-call every street here Ray or were u just offering it as an alternative?

[baronzeus]

c/c, c/c, c/c is good...another line you might want to think about is c/c, b/c.


Donking the turn puts him in a real rough spot with overs. It looks like a weak pair that you didn't want to check raise the flop with but you also don't want checked through.

[HiatusOver]

U are confused etizzle, Elindauer's post is a gem and makes perfect sense.

[etizzle]

[ QUOTE ]
U are confused etizzle, Elindauer's post is a gem and makes perfect sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont see how the following sentence makes any sense.

[ QUOTE ]
Against players with TAG stats who take this WA/WB line

[/ QUOTE ]

who took a WA/WB line?

[mc1023]

this is an expensive semi-bluff or bluff if you intend to bet the river unimproved. Your putting 2 BBs to win 4.5BB if he is to fold the turn which won't be likely for a broad range of hands.

So essentially your really putting in 3BB to win 5.5BB. I tihnk against a good player I would not checkraise this board on the flop since he may pop you on the turn when led into with a wide range of hands since there are lots of draws out there.

but I don't think checkraise on a blank on the turn is a very good line in this spot either. Your representing a monster and hoping he folds a very weak hand.

Why not lead the flop or donk the turn? and call down if he shows aggression.

[PokerBob]

i am folding this river never.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer playing it faster on the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. i like bet/3bet. there are lots of cards that can come on the turn that will scare him off of a better hand if you take this line imo.

Looks fine.. but since you flopped an open ended straight draw you should played the hand a bit faster

[elindauer]

[ QUOTE ]
who took a WA/WB line?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi etizzle,

What I'm trying to say is that from my point of view, it appears that the villain has a mediocre hand where he thinks he is WA/WB and is betting the river to get a call from AK and fold to raise. Maybe the villain has pocket 7s or something. I don't know when the river bet comes that he had plenty of outs, and it doesn't matter. The point is, his hand reads like an open book when he chooses the check-call check-call bet-a-blank river line, and I think I play my hand very well against this line.

If I've figured out how to handle this, then I'm sure others have as well and that makes using this very exploitable line dangerous, especially a good thinking player.

I'm not trying to say that his OESD is WA / WB. Sorry for the confusion.

-Eric

[Ray Zee]

and how much do they bleed off a year to those that always seem to have something when they are pushing hard everything that looks like it deserves the pot.
did anyone think about folding on the flop or 4th street. is that a bad play, and is it so much better to build a big pot with a hand that most of your cards you are looking for can make him a little better hand.

and yes to your question. i would in this kind of spot, try to put as little in this pot i can until i thought i had the best hand.

[DcifrThs]

i dont think most people on this board, or in general consider folding a clean 8 out draw HU on the flop or the turn. in terms of why that is, its because its a clear +EV play from an effective odds perspective on the flop to the river.

just doing the calculations in my head and assuming its a 1chip2chip blind structure, we're looking at calling 1.5bbs to win a 4.75bb pot if he calls the river when we hit. in that case, we're getting over 3:1 for a 2and change:1 effective draw (looking at the flop + turn and not just the flop and then the turn). if he doesn't call river when we hit, then we're looking at a much smaller gain but still +EV. odds against 8 out on flop to hit river is something like 2.2 or there abouts. if he didnt call river we'd be getting around 2.5:1 effective odds.

but ray, you definately do have a point in that if you look at the turn in isolation, you're getting 4.25:1 on a draw that needs closer to 5:1 to be +EV.

its interesting b/c nobody looks at the turn individually. we all look at the flop and take the effective odds from the flop, which look good. but if you look street by street, then on the turn it does look like a check fold from an EV perspective (assuming Js and Ts are no good, which isn't right 100% of the time).

anyways, making me go through the math of this again shows an interesting point. looking at bets you have to win from an effective odds standpoint, it's a positive expectation to call flop and turn and bet river. but if you look street by street, taking into acct all the bets that went in on the previous street, it doesn't look as good (i.e. no longer do we have a positive expectation on the turn).

its a funny paradox that arises in this case and you're post brings that out.

Barron

[HiatusOver]

[ QUOTE ]
its interesting b/c nobody looks at the turn individually. we all look at the flop and take the effective odds from the flop

[/ QUOTE ]

OK Barron now I am confused. I for one always look at things street by street, and u as an obvious math guy must also do this. I assume u just mispoke here? This is a huge oversight if not...

It is very obvious that each individual effective/implied odds decision on a particular street has its own set of decisions which only take into account the later streets and the size of the pot.

[HiatusOver]

You might be on to something here, this fad has probably gone a little too far at this point in hold'ems evolution. I know these aggressive lines started because the chance of winning the pot were much better 4 years ago so these moves probably showed a profit. Now everyone calls down so it might be time to switch gears again.

[ QUOTE ]
and how much do they bleed off a year to those that always seem to have something when they are pushing hard everything that looks like it deserves the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am gonna look more into it and try to report back. One thing taking this aggressive line does is make u less predictable and more likely to get paid off when u have the goods. Also as I said before it allows u to steal some whole pots with an extra bet that u wouldnt have won in a showdown.

I am gonna go out of my way and really try observe how the big current hold em winners play this spot.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
its interesting b/c nobody looks at the turn individually. we all look at the flop and take the effective odds from the flop

[/ QUOTE ]

OK Barron now I am confused. I for one always look at things street by street, and u as an obvious math guy must also do this. I assume u just mispoke here? This is a huge oversight if not...

It is very obvious that each individual effective/implied odds decision on a particular street has its own set of decisions which only take into account the later streets and the size of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

im talking about the general decision making on the flop about when to continue. on the turn the decision may change. im saying that its rare that the turn individually gets taken into account on the flop. the turn decision gets to be made based on more prior information and current pot odds etc... i guess my wording was bad. sorry.

Barron

[J.A.Sucker]

When playing against top players, there's generally a few rules that you should apply:

1. Don't give excessive action, because usually if the money is going in, it's not good for you.

2. You won't get excessive action, because they know the same.

3. Keep pots small, especially when out of position.

4. Do a few things to mix it up. That's why I like your line a lot (though check/calling the river is better). You sometimes just check/call all the way (unless you improve), sometimes, you might jam the flop, and sometimes you just hit them on the turn. I would tend to not jam the flop, since that's "so obviously a draw" but it is important to do this because you can get big action later, of course. There's a lot of guys online who are giving way too much action; they play better than me, but I still win a lot. Think about how much money they'd make if they stopped going crazy when they shouldn't. I know this is what Zee is talking about here and he's right. It's amazing, really how good the games are, even though they shouldn't be.

[Steve Giufre]

[ QUOTE ]
and how much do they bleed off a year to those that always seem to have something when they are pushing hard everything that looks like it deserves the pot.
did anyone think about folding on the flop or 4th street. is that a bad play, and is it so much better to build a big pot with a hand that most of your cards you are looking for can make him a little better hand.

and yes to your question. i would in this kind of spot, try to put as little in this pot i can until i thought i had the best hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do most of these card we want make him a better hand? Most of the good players I know have a really big range on the button, and I think both his overs to the 9 are good here a lot more often then they arnt. Folding the flop does seem really bad to me. Assuming he does just call the flop, he is getting 4 1/2 to 1 to try to make his hand on the river. Thats enough right there assuming he gets paid when he makes his hand, even if we assume the J and the 10 are dead, and they wont be a lot of the time.

Most of the good players I know could open with a ton of hands there, and its also not that out of the ordinary for him to follow through again on 4th with a lot of those hands after Hiatus just calls that flop. I dont have a problem with just check calling the flop and turn, but folding before the river seems bad to me.

I also think its important to checkraise the flop at least some of the time in these spots. Always check calling here and rarely pushing one seems like it would make you too readable, and would lead to having trouble getting action with strong hands. I think being more passive here is good agaist somebody who isnt gonna put the bet in on 4th without a strong hand. It seems to me that the default for most guys on the button in that spot is to bet the flop and follow through again on the turn with most hands in his range, at least in the online games that Hiatus plays in. I just dont see it going check check on the turn all that often in those spots.

[Saborion]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
who took a WA/WB line?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi etizzle,

What I'm trying to say is that from my point of view, it appears that the villain has a mediocre hand where he thinks he is WA/WB and is betting the river to get a call from AK and fold to raise. Maybe the villain has pocket 7s or something. I don't know when the river bet comes that he had plenty of outs, and it doesn't matter. The point is, his hand reads like an open book when he chooses the check-call check-call bet-a-blank river line, and I think I play my hand very well against this line.

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you miss that Hero check-raised the turn as well as bet the river, or are you just giving a general example?

[Renaud Desferet]

I find this debate fascinating.
Folding is insane, and playing passively is wrong in a vacuum, because his range is so large with a button raise.
Now it might sometimes be right to call down if bluffing history is high and opponent has become ultra tenacious against you.
I am not a fan of raising the turn, as long as you often check raise the flop with made hands, because you don't usually gain much more folding equity. Your main target folding hands are the one folding the flop check raise or the turn for one bet (Ax,Kx type hands). Obviously, if you have been raising the turn a lot recently with made hands and have been called down, because you thought he was too much of a flop turn pounder, then check raising the turn might become preferable.
It is funny you almost posted the same hand one or two years ago when facing an early raise, I was in the check call camp because the raising range was so much narrower then.

[HiatusOver]

Thanks for your input Renaud, good post. I am not sure what else to add. Now that you mention it I remember that hand from a while ago too. Maybe I will try to hunt it down in the archives and see what people had to say.