Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

I don't understand why your not leading that flop. I call the river and expect to see a strong made hand fairly often and a straight sometimes. - A 3 bet is fine and for value if the villian does not have it in him to cap with less than the nuts.

when HU on the flop you should be leading alot of your hands except for the 20% BEST (c/r with those) and the 20% WORST c/f with those. Especially with the uncoordinated nature that the villian is so unlikely to have hit. Your c/r has emotionally committed him to that pot.

Another question - this 20% rule is from HEPFAP HUSH section any one have any other times they c/r a flop HU?

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

I probably call the river (because I am a wuss) but a three-bet seems like a better decision. QJ is possible, but without a solid read I have to think that this is likely to be more likely to be KQ/KJ...

(A fitting ennding: Villain calls and shows you that hand that you don't want to let your friends no you're playing?)

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think a big factor that hasn't been mentioned is the rank of the two middle cards. Villian is essentially unkown. KT/K9 could very possibly be limping hands UTG for this unknown player.

I think you need to just call here. If the other cards on the board were lower than your second pair I think it would be closer to a value 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was mentioned earlier [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] by me.

I will say it again... Unless villain is a blufftard, his river raise beats hero's KK77 (though T9 being counterfeited was some thing that I missed originally).

Can someone help me understand the logical argumnent that I appear to be missing?

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OK... I going to say it, I would fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

You see Hero has 2 pair here right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I see that Villain has called down to the river so far. Why is he raising the river? Did he call the flop and turn with no pair or no OESD?

What do you see as villain's likely holdings?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think KQ/KJ are possible... even 89s... there are many non-pair hands here we could beat. Some people love their over cards... (particularly when they pick up a gutshot on the turn). Do you think there is less than a 12% chance that you are ahead? Without a very good read, a fold is nuts (and way worse than a call).

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
QJ is possible, but without a solid read I have to think that this is likely to be more likely to be KQ/KJ

[/ QUOTE ]
KJ is probably the most likely hand here, w/ QJ a close 2nd (QJ is just less likely to be played UTG). I don't imagine you're looking at KT very often since only a total wuss would call to the river with KT.

You'd have to be ahead about 2/3 of the time to 3-bet, unless you're willing to fold to a cap (which is not unreasonable, IMO). I would guess you're ahead a lot, say slightly less than 50%, but not enough to raise.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]

I think KQ/KJ are possible... even 89s... there are many non-pair hands here we could beat. Some people love their over cards... (particularly when they pick up a gutshot on the turn). Do you think there is less than a 12% chance that you are ahead? Without a very good read, a fold is nuts (and way worse than a call).

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. I get it (I guess). I suspect, and this very well be a leak, that I tend to give villains too much credit (especially, if reasonably tight). I need to think more about this.

And to clarify... I would sooner fold then 3 bet the river. Call is OK. Sometimes I type bad.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]

I will say it again... Unless villain is a blufftard, his river raise beats hero's KK77 (though T9 being counterfeited was some thing that I missed originally).

Can someone help me understand the logical argumnent that I appear to be missing?

[/ QUOTE ]

If I am villain and I have KQ or KJ, I am calling the turn with my overcards and gut-shot, getting 4:1 on 10 outs.

Since I expected that these 10 outs are clean, I'm going to raise the river when I hit. Given W's flop c/r, I put him on a T or 7, and no way do I expect that his kicker kills my outs.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]

If I am villain and I have KQ or KJ, I am calling the turn with my overcards and gut-shot, getting 4:1 on 10 outs.

Since I expected that these 10 outs are clean, I'm going to raise the river when I hit. Given W's flop c/r, I put him on a T or 7, and no way do I expect that his kicker kills my outs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look... I don't see KJ, KQ as limping hands UTG. I may very well be wrong. KTs, K9s, seem more probable to me.

Probable limping hands that could play thru the turn as villain played include

KQ?, KJ?, KTs, K9s, QJs, JTs, T9s, QTs

You ought not pull out the only hands that make your argument for your case. KQ and KJ are the least likely, IMHO, hands for villain, though they are possible.

Again, my math sucks.. I mean sucks. But my gut tells me that we are behind to the likely range of hands that villain may have.

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

I would only call his raise.

- Jim

Re: A River Play Question... Very Thin Three-Bet?
 

[ QUOTE ]
KQ?, KJ?, KTs, K9s, QJs, JTs, T9s, QTs

You ought not pull out the only hands that make your argument for your case.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not exactly sure what OP means by "villian is on the tightish side" but tightish players don't limp UTG with stuff like K9, T9, and QT. They do limp with KJ and often they limp with KQ, especially offsuited.