The concept of checkraising the river to save bets.

[SpicyF]

The concept of checkraising the river to save bets.


I was thinking it might be fun to join some poker discussions, and lazy I am to browse the entire forum for a thread that is interesting, I figure let's make my own!

Some short info about myself. Plays mostly online these days, mid to highlimit holdem, both limit he and NoLimit he. I have barely read any pokerbooks so I'm not quite sure what to call this concept I wanted to make a post about. But decided to call it "The concept of checkraising the river to save bets", which sounds a bit trivial to me, so if this concept has a better name, let me know!

Also a small disclaimer is that english is not my first language, and I also have hard time to really get my point across and what I mean, when trying to write it down like this.



$100/$200 shorthanded he at pokerstars.com

Seat 1: Spyder44 ($8892 in chips)
Seat 2: The Dream ($4489 in chips)
Seat 3: ambi ($4693 in chips)
Seat 4: SpicyF ($3898 in chips)


ambi: posts small blind $50
SpicyF: posts big blind $100


SpicyF peeks down at Kh Kd, yum!

Spyder44 raises
(Spyder44 who I also know to be a very aggressive player.)

The Dream and ambi folds

I 3bet but contemplated just calling out of the BB, since I rarely ever give up the BB in a 4handed game for 1 raise. Reasoning behind calling only was that I could generate more action later in the hand, but the conclusion I came to is that I will probarly generate MORE action if I play back at him, and that he can put me on a few hands, rather than a wide range.

That itself might seem a bit strange (gaining action by allowing him to know I have a good hand that is), but I'm sure many of you will understand what I mean by it. If not, I will extrapolate my thoughts about it later.


Spyder calls and we see the flop Td 8h 2s.

I lead out which I do 99% of the time while being the aggressor preflop out of position.

Spyder raises.

I feel with that flop I am very certain that my hand is the best, and I dont want to just call, then try to checkraise turn, because he might check and the whole hand will go to waste, so I 3bet him to maintain momentum but he caps it, and I call. At this point I would say I am still in the lead, but like always I can't be 100% sure. I played this hand 2 months ago so I can't remember exactly what hands I did put him on, but most likely I thought he might have 99 or top pair with good kicker. Also JJ is a possibility. And ofcouse he *could* have a hand that beats mine, say AA or any set. I excluded the chances that he had J9, 97 or maybe QJ and wanted to check turn and "save" $100 as opposed to him calling my 3bet on flop and check-calling a blank on turn. Because I haven't really seen him do plays like that. T8 was also a possibility.

Turn brings Jc, and here the concept of checkraising river to save bets starts. Regardless if I'm in the lead or not, I only check-call here, reasoning for this are a few....

1. He might have a hand that beats mine, and will most likely 3bet me, then I'm faced with an autocall-down due to potsize and his aggressivness. And I lose 4 bets on turn/river 99% of the times.

2. He might have a hand I do beat, say QT, KT or AT (might add J9 and T9 aswell) and if I were to checkraise him on turn I most likely only win 3 bets (the 2 on turn and him calling me down on river, which he would with all of those hands I think)

3. He might be on a complete bluff and by checkraising turn he's gonna understand it's pointless to go on and fold. That way I'm not trying to maximize my win in this hand.


The river brings 4d and I check-raise and he calls and I win with KK.

The other scenarios that could have happend is that he folds river, costing me a bet I might have won by 3 betting turn. He might also 3 bet me but then I could actually fold this hand! This is huge part of the point I'm trying to make, because most players almost never make that 3 bet without a hand that beats my KK! Problem is the pot have gotten very large, about 15 big bets, so it's very borderline and playerdependant if you want to call down, because I think he would 3 bet me far less than 1 times out of 20 with a hand that can't beat KK. There is also a chance he will check the river, but he will only do that when I have misread him COMPLETLY, say if he had something like A2 or 33, 44.




So, this whole concept is about to save bets when behind, and to gain when ahead. It is also......

1. A play you should not do to often.
2. A play that only works at certain limits, say 20/40 up to 100/200 (to some extent 100/200, not all games/players, I'm also talking online play). It might ofcourse work at your $3/$6 partypoker game. But for other reasons than the ones I'm trying to make.
I can't say what limits it would apply to in livegames, since I live in Sweden and dont play that much live poker.
3. A play you can only do if you have a "good" read on what your opponent is holding, and if you know to some extent how he plays.




All in all, I hope this will spur an interesting discussion pointing out the flaws in my thinking, or agreeing with what my thoughts. There was some things about the hand that I didnt write down, and/or had a hard time to express what I meant. Those things I'll try and add later, since they might be important when trying to explain this whole point of this post, the "concept". I also want to reserve the right to post follow-ups when people have pointed out my errors saying "oh yeah, that is what I meant", because honestly, it probarbly was!



- Frank Öberg

[SpicyF]

After reading, and getting some input on it by friends, I realize that the hand I chose to write about is maybe to extreme, considering I have such a good holding. It might be better appliable to something like TPTK, like AK on a KT6 flop. So my reasoning might seemed flawed just for the concept, but hey you guys are smart people, cut me some slack here!


-- Frank Öberg

[J_V]

Damn! All the secrets are coming out. Pretty damn good post - for a SWEDE. Do they teach poker in school there or something?

I use a simlar concept (with position) in heads up pots. Let's say it goes 4 bets preflop. If have KK and I fear my opponents might have AA, but think QQ or some random crap is slightly (and slightly is important) more likely. I will often wait to the river to raise, since its much harder to reraise me there - for example if a 10 or a J comes on the river, I can represent a straight, or a low four straight comes, eventhough it seems I could never have that, it's hard to reraise. This saves a bet when I am behind. This type of play can be used in many spots.

[snakehead]

I like the play, fruity, but would you really lay it down on the river for one more bet?

[nykenny]

i like it and think it's a valid play, especially if you think your opponent is capable of laydown on the turn if check/raised and he is behind, but not so capable of laying down on the river since there is no more bets to risk than the one he is paying.

Kenny

[J_V]

It's sad when the crap posts get ten times the action of the great posts.

There's really not much you can say about this one except...SpicyF plays gooooood. He busted me up back in the day. [censored] swede.

[skp]

Great post.

One thing that differentiates the very good players from merely good ones is that the VGP is not afraid of giving free cards (because he knows that there are other benefits to giving free cards and that often the drawbacks of giving freebies are merely illusory). In your hand, on the turn, the good player with your KK simply thinks "Sh*t, gotta bet, can't give him a freebie" when the fact is that the money will probably go in anyway if he checks because the other guy will now be thinking "Sh*t, gotta bet, can't give him a freebie".

The merely good player usually does not engage in the chess-type thinking (i.e. thinking moves ahead) that you talk about.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
It's sad when the crap posts get ten times the action of the great posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I already told spicy that while his posts here would be a real benefit to the forum, I don't mind him staying away.

[ QUOTE ]
SpicyF plays gooooood.

[/ QUOTE ]

So true.

[DeucesUp]

Good stuff. Some questions / comments:

[ QUOTE ]
1. He might have a hand that beats mine, and will most likely 3bet me, then I'm faced with an autocall-down due to potsize and his aggressivness. And I lose 4 bets on turn/river 99% of the times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you feel you can fold to a river 3-bet with a larger pot and only 1 BB to call, but must call a turn 3-bet with a smaller pot and likely 2BB's to see the end? Are your perhaps 2-outs worth this much? Is he 3-betting the turn still on a draw or bluff or with a hand which KK beats?

[ QUOTE ]
2. He might have a hand I do beat, say QT, KT or AT (might add J9 and T9 aswell) and if I were to checkraise him on turn I most likely only win 3 bets (the 2 on turn and him calling me down on river, which he would with all of those hands I think)


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but its very possible you'll only win 1 bet when you check-call the turn and he checks behind on the river. Is he really so aggressive that he'll always bet the river with 2nd pair+weak kicker on coordinated board against an opponent who put in 3 bets pre-flop and 4 bets on the flop? And even if he is, is he always going to call the river CR?

You also miss a bet(s) when he's on a draw. This particular hand doesn't really apply because the most obvious draw (T9) hit on the turn. But when a blank hits on the turn he might check behind the turn for a free card, even if he does bet you miss a bet by not CR'ing. You only get this bet back if he'll bluff the missed draw on the river.

[ QUOTE ]
3. He might be on a complete bluff and by checkraising turn he's gonna understand it's pointless to go on and fold. That way I'm not trying to maximize my win in this hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is where waiting till the river really pays off as well as when he has 99 or 77 or 98 or something which he might've laid down earlier if you kept pounding him on the turn. But I think this scenario has to happen fairly often to make up for the bets you might miss in the other scenarios.

[SpicyF]

I took a poor handhistory to show my example, but for the sake of the argument I would fold.

But using this example instead: you hold KQ, board is KT928, here it's MUCH easier to fold for the river 3 bet.

[SpicyF]

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you feel you can fold to a river 3-bet with a larger pot and only 1 BB to call, but must call a turn 3-bet with a smaller pot and likely 2BB's to see the end? Are your perhaps 2-outs worth this much? Is he 3-betting the turn still on a draw or bluff or with a hand which KK beats?


[/ QUOTE ]

The reasoning behind this is that he can 3bet with more hands that I DO beat on the turn. On the river he will only 3 bet with me hands that beat me.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but its very possible you'll only win 1 bet when you check-call the turn and he checks behind on the river. Is he really so aggressive that he'll always bet the river with 2nd pair+weak kicker on coordinated board against an opponent who put in 3 bets pre-flop and 4 bets on the flop? And even if he is, is he always going to call the river CR?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is why you need to know your opponent, and also have a decent read on what he is holding. The play isn't something you can do vs random opponent. Maybe at lower limits like $15/$30 or $20/$40 it will work in a more general way.

[ QUOTE ]
You also miss a bet(s) when he's on a draw. This particular hand doesn't really apply because the most obvious draw (T9) hit on the turn. But when a blank hits on the turn he might check behind the turn for a free card, even if he does bet you miss a bet by not CR'ing. You only get this bet back if he'll bluff the missed draw on the river

[/ QUOTE ]

This is also why you need to know your opponent, which I stressed to some degree in my original post.

It is also why I think this concepts only apply to $20/$40 and up to about $100/$200, since you play more against the same players, and get a read on their play. When playing lower limits you play vs so many diffrent opponents so it's impossible to have the same information about what kind of player type it is you are facing. Also the opponents are completly random, non-thinking.

[Analyst]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why do you feel you can fold to a river 3-bet with a larger pot and only 1 BB to call, but must call a turn 3-bet with a smaller pot and likely 2BB's to see the end? Are your perhaps 2-outs worth this much? Is he 3-betting the turn still on a draw or bluff or with a hand which KK beats?


[/ QUOTE ]

The reasoning behind this is that he can 3bet with more hands that I DO beat on the turn. On the river he will only 3 bet with me hands that beat me.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your points are very well taken. However, in this example - where you are almost certainly well ahead - don't you want to give him the opportunity to 3-bet his 2nd-best hand on the turn, but not 3-bet his winner on the river? Seems that you may have done just the opposite.

[SpicyF]

[ QUOTE ]
Your points are very well taken. However, in this example - where you are almost certainly well ahead - don't you want to give him the opportunity to 3-bet his 2nd-best hand on the turn, but not 3-bet his winner on the river? Seems that you may have done just the opposite.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason (in this kinda poor example) is that he 3 bets me MORE when he has me beat, compared to when he don't have me beat. Also bear in mind that the whole concept is to save bets when behind, not to maximize the pot or bets. It's about finding the average play that will maximize your EV, and makeing the pot as large as possible isn't always the main thing. It's very hard to explain what I mean by this, so if anyone know what I mean, and can put it into text, feel free to chime in.


There are also other some other less significant reasons behind it, but will save that for later since it might just confuse both me and everyone else hehe.

[tpir90036]

very good post. one thing though...

[ QUOTE ]
He might have a hand that beats mine, and will most likely 3bet me, then I'm faced with an autocall-down due to potsize and his aggressivness. And I lose 4 bets on turn/river 99% of the times.

[/ QUOTE ]
this is the part i don't quite get. against an agressive opponent why are you losing 99% of the time with an overpair? don't we want him to over play his more likely top pair-ish holdings and get 4 bets out of him?

[SpicyF]

[ QUOTE ]
very good post. one thing though...


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He might have a hand that beats mine, and will most likely 3bet me, then I'm faced with an autocall-down due to potsize and his aggressivness. And I lose 4 bets on turn/river 99% of the times.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


this is the part i don't quite get. against an agressive opponent why are you losing 99% of the time with an overpair? don't we want him to over play his more likely top pair-ish holdings and get 4 bets out of him?

[/ QUOTE ]


This is the part where I say you gotta know your opponent pretty good. In most cases I will only get 3 bet by a hand that beats mine. But just the few times that he does 3 bet me justifies that I have to call him down every time.

I can't tell you why he has me beat so often when 3 betting turn. It's just the way it is /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Anyways I can understand that you want to go 4 bets on turn if you think you are ahead, but capping the turn (if he 3 bets) will have the win/lose ratio per bet to diffirentiate from the increased longterm EV by doing the above concept.

I really have no idea what the above sentence means, but it sounds good enough to scare most people of from replying atleast.... /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[J_V]

good luck getting four bets on the turn. That's more dreaming than anything. The player in this hand is a winning, thinking player, even if he is on the aggressive side.

[tpir90036]

[ QUOTE ]
good luck getting four bets on the turn.

[/ QUOTE ]
my bad... that isn't what i meant. i meant:
3 bets on the turn + one bet on the river = 4 bets.

[DanZ]

this type of play is discussed in HPFAP, and also in Poker Essays III. It does not have a name I don't think, but the concept is that river raises are taken much more seriously and are a way to overrepresent your hand in cases where you weren't goint to get more than on raise in from that point on anyway if you were ahead, but you may save money by waiting in cases where you are behind but not against the nuts.

Dan Z.

[PassiveCaller]

This is going to end poorly more then it ends in your favor for this many bets for sure. The idea is just to average out the situation here and make sure you get your 3 bets when you are ahead and only lose your 3 bets when you are behind. On average you save a bet and you've hedged your bets in a mannerism where you were least likely put in more bets behind.

[jfresh]

So lets say your opponent 3bets your checkraise. do you fold there with this hand?

basically, are you saying a river checkraise that is 3bet means you are beat for sure?

This is an interesting idea, i've never thought of it before....

[jfresh]

[ QUOTE ]
There is also a chance he will check the river, but he will only do that when I have misread him COMPLETLY, say if he had something like A2 or 33, 44.

[/ QUOTE ]

not to be nitpicky, but he wouldn't check the river if he had 44 right?

[theBruiser500]

I don't like SpicyF because he keeps banning me on IRC.

[SpicyF]

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre> not to be nitpicky, but he wouldn't check the river if he had 44 right? </pre><hr />

I would think he will bet 44 in that spot the way the hand has been played out more than he would not. This is somewhat of a FPS that many likes to do at PS. Trying to valuebet and getting called by AK or possibly AQ. I know I would probarbly bet 44 /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Although the the bet itself with 44 isn't so bad, its going towards the fancy play, but it's marginal in terms of expectation I would believe. I have no numbers to back this up tho, so if someone know how to calcualte EV and stuff just jump right in and let us know!

[SpicyF]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like SpicyF because he keeps banning me on IRC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then we're even because I dont like it when you are on IRC!

[Ray Zee]

very good spicy. not many players think about these things. your example is bad but concept is right. player dependent of course but can be used alot of times.

[swimfan]

Hi SpicyF,

Could the following be an example of your concept? It's a post I made a month and a half ago. In the back of my mind, it was one of the things I was thinking when not check-raising the turn (or so I'd like to think)...the exception is that I didn't have a strong read on the player...

Bellagio 8-16

I'm in BB with K /images/graemlins/heart.gif J /images/graemlins/spade.gif . I have been on the table for 5 hours at this point, my hands at showdown have been very strong. Open raise in early MP (hasn't been there long, not too much of a read), button (calling any piece of the board all the way down, has been getting crushed) cold calls. SB (solid player) and I complete.

Flop:
J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif

SB checks, I bet, MP raises, button cold calls, SB folds, I call. Quick note, I usually bet out on draws in early position, a couple hands I've won have either a straight or flush where I've bet out.

Turn:
J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 2
/images/graemlins/diamond.gif
I check, MP bets, button calls, I call. (check-raise or fold here?)

River:
J /images/graemlins/heart.gif 7 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 5 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif

I check, MP bets, button calls, I raise.

I don't know if I have the best hand...I'm not worried about the button, since in prior hands button has called many hands cold showing down second pair or worse.

At the time, thought it was more of a value play, since I was positive once the button just called MP, I was at least ahead of the button, and was 50-50 sure ahead of MP. The end result was MP folded same hand I held and I beat the button. Like to know your thoughts, the move is something I rarely make. Thanks in advance.

[SpicyF]

Hi swimfan,

I'm not sure you could say that your hand is played out to save bets on the river, or to find an average win/lose ratio like I tried to illustrate in my example. It has some resemblance given the strength that MP is showing, but since you are up against 2 opponents I dont think it's the same thing.

My play on this pot would be to either 3bet the flop and lead turn/river, or check-raise the turn, since there's alot of draws on that flop.

Either way I guess the hand played out pretty optimal for you. It also shows that a river check-raise gets more respect than a turn check-raise (since I think MP would call your check-raise on turn and crycall river, but I'm not sure).

[swimfan]

Thank you very much for the advice. I think my line was atypical here because of the button, and the non-read on MP. After reading your post and reviewing said hand, thought there was a stronger chance MP may 3-bet the turn if check-raised, but doubted he would 3-bet the river (though in reality, at the time thought it was a thin value check-raise). So I guess that's the resemblance, as you said. I've re-read your posts and think I understand it more clearly; pertains more to aggressive heads-up type play with good reads. Thanks again, really good stuff that haven't given much thought to before.