River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

Foxwoods 5-5 nl. The game is a very good (read: loose) must-move. I usually play the smaller NL game and beat it soundly so tonight I'm rolling the dice and taking a shot at the bigger game. I'm kinda intimidated by the stakes so I buy in for only $500, which is a little bit below average for the table.

This hand is early in the session (only about 7-8 hands in)

44 on the button (still have about $500), 3 limpers to me, I toss in an abe lincoln and the blinds check. We take the flop 6-handed.

Flop (pot $30) : Q 4 3 rainbow (Shweeeeeeeeet)
BB leads for 20, folded around to me. I make it 60, SB passes and BB calls pretty quickly. He has me covered and seems to be an average player (no really reliable read because only a couple hands into session)

Turn (pot $150) : 9 (rainbow now complete, double shweeeet)
BB checks. I bet $75 and BB calls again, fairly quickly.

River (pot $300) : Deuce (hmmmmm...)
BB thinks for a couple seconds, fingers his chips, then checks. I...

What do you folks think should I do on the river here? Also, any thoughts on all other streets appreciated. I'll post my thoughts, what I did, and the results later.

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

bet half to the full pot. Whatever you think he'll call. The fact that he fingered his chips means he doesn't really wan't you to bet but he may still payoff a bet. bet the pot on every street so bet less on the flop and more on the turn.

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

I think your about half-pot raise on the flop is fine. But I'd probably bet a little more on the turn. Maybe $100. I don't think there's anything too wrong w/ half-pot on that board, though.

On the river, he either had 56 or he didn't. With about $350 left, if you bet say $150 on the river and he pushes, I think you're committed. Unless I had a fantastic read that he had 56 (or A5, I guess), I'd bet $200 on the river, planning to call an all-in.

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

FWIW, the chip-fingering thing at the end was not the standard lame posturing that many mediocre players do so that I wouldn't bet. It just felt different, in the category with the unconscious impulse to look at one's chips after nailing a huge flop. I actually believed he wanted to bet here, but checked instead. Thusly, I felt like a check-raise was a distinct possibility. The duece was certainly a card that could have helped him given the play of the hand.

As to my flop bet, I made it 60 to go in a pot of 50, which is barely more than the pot. Just fine imo. Plus a raise of 30 more after a bet of 20 is dangerously close to a min-raise, a play I hate to make under most circumstances.

Turn bet: I tried to price it so that he wouldn't quite be getting odds to call for a straight draw, but not so much that he'd fold that draw (if he has one) or a queen. I want more of his money in the pot here.

I'll describe my river play later after more responses
thanks for the words

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

FYI, a pot-raise on the flop is a raise to 90.

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

I'd bet whatever I thought he'd call. He might have a straight, but might not. Probably not... too often I psych myself out in situations like this, I'd bet and if he raised, call (you'd be pretty pot comitted).

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

You can always overbet the pot and push all in as well, sometimes players sense this as a weak move trying to steal the pot, and will call with a lot worse than if you make a pot sized bet. It might be worth a try.

Results
 

Thanks for the replies. Sounds like I played the flop and turn ok for the most part. My bets may have been a little high or low for you fellas but no real mistakes.

My river play: I thought for a bit and then checked. Before I start to get flamed for being weak, I'd like to explain my reasoning.

Argmuent for a check here: First of all, I don't see much value in a bet here. As I see it, there are only two hands that this player (an average player) could have given the play of the hand, either 56 or a mediocre queen. He didn't come after me on the flop or turn so two pair or a set is highly unlikely (unless the 2 hit for a Q2?). So my final read was either a mediocre queen or a rivered straight. If I make a decent sized value bet ($150-$200), I feel like an average player would not call with just a queen (perhaps this is where I'm mis-judging his play?). Perhaps he may call an all-in with the queen as TCollins suggested but given I had no line on his play at this time I didn't think that move woul be prudent. So, he would muck the hand I beat. And if he check-raises all in, I'm beat nearly every time (what else could he possibly check-raise me with?) but I'm still committed enough where I have to call with my short stack. Not my favorite situation. Plus, like I said in my intro, this game was a bit out of my comfort zone, so I was playing a bit more of a stack-preservation midset than usual and not pushing edges as hard as I usually do.

Results: I checked, roll over my set o' fours, and they're good. He flashes a queen as he folds.

Aftermath: The table is shocked I didn't bet the river. They figure I must only bet the nuts. (which I guess isn't too far off given my play of the hand [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]). I manage to steal a couple decent sized pots in the next hour with large turn and river with semi-large value-looking bets, and book a nice win for the session.

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

wait, are you saying 20+20+50 is NOT equal to 70?!?!?!

Denominator... carry the 6... cube it... take the second derivative...

Ah dammit... I'm a moron. Thanks for pointing that out.

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

if he puts 60 on the flop he'll give you more than 75 on the turn. You need to bet 100+ on the turn he'll call it to

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

[ QUOTE ]
wait, are you saying 20+20+50 is NOT equal to 70?!?!?!

[/ QUOTE ]

Heh, indeed. I was actually responding more to the initial responder who said you should bet less ("closer to pot") on the flop.

As you pointed out, if you raise any less on the flop, you'd be approaching min-raise territory.

Re: Results
 

I think you psyched yourself out here a little bit, which happens to most of us at times. Against this opponent, perhaps value-betting $100 on the river was an option? But given the fact that you don't think this opponent would call with one pair (though, given the speed of his calls on the flop and turn, are you sure?), your decision is not that bad. One thing to consider is that one pair will often call a half-pot bet in spots like this, hoping you're on a busted flush draw.

Here's a hand w/ a somewhat similar river decision (a much weaker hand, but similar principles apply): Another river decision

Re: Results
 

yeah, i think i may have gotten a bit psyched out by the stakes here. I'd hate to lose my entire buy-in only about a half dozen hands after I decided to try a bigger game. In a lower stakes game I'd bet here nearly 100% of the time. I was playing ultra-cautious, which ended up working out well against a weak field, but the game is still a bit out of my comofort zone. Thanks for the link and the thoughts.

As for the smallish value bet, I'd say he definitely would have paid off with a mediocre queen based upon what I saw of his later play. I guess against an unknown player in a higher stake game I just assume that every player is better than average until proven otherwise. Had this hand happened an hour later, I would have made more money but dems the breaks.

Re: Results
 

Don't overdo the re-thinking. You made a read at the table and you acted on it. I firmly believe that your reads will not get better unless you trust them. If you had second-guessed yourself at the table, and decided that A5 or 56 were just too unlikely, you really would have been kicking yourself when he check-raised.

Consider that this move also gave you an image that you were later able to exploit. All-in-all, I think you did the right thing, even though it may not have worked out for the best this time.

Re: River Play (live 5-5 NL)
 

Hey Ocho,

Betting a little more on the turn will make things clear-cut. I bet $100. If he calls $100, and the deuce comes on the river, things are easy, and here's why...

Anyone who would call $100 there with 65 would also be dumb enough to call on the river with a queen and a bad kicker. So, you bet... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

As the hand played, I'd still take my chances and bet, but your thought process was fine. I know you'll bet it next time. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

ML4L

Re: Results
 

I think that if you are worried about being beat, you should bet more in the earlier rounds to get information. Your betting represents a Q with a questionable kicker. You're trying to find a Q with a good kicker to give you some money. (I don't think you can put him on an overpair here, but as you have mentioned, it's early in the game.) When you find your customer you need to milk a little more out of him on the river.

I'd hate to lose my entire buy-in only about a half dozen hands after I decided to try a bigger game.

Since losing your buy-in was a concern, I think you should consider smaller NL games where you'll have more bullets. If you play NL in a buy-in-preservation mode, it can be detrimental to your EV. Another thing you might consider is not playing 44's; they're really not that profitable unless you extract a maximum return from them.

Just some thoughts,

Mack

Re: Results
 

[ QUOTE ]
All-in-all, I think you did the right thing, even though it may not have worked out for the best this time.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok mr. rogers, that was a fun trip down gumdrop lane, but let's not be counterproductive. back to reality. he did the wrong thing. and even if it would have worked out this time, it still would be the wrong thing.

with only 75-80 BBs to lose there is no excuse for not getting max value out of this hand. there is nothing more crucial to big bet poker than getting your strong hands paid off.

Re: Results
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All-in-all, I think you did the right thing, even though it may not have worked out for the best this time.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok mr. rogers, that was a fun trip down gumdrop

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL! I deserved that. Maybe I was just a little pollyannish.

Re: Results
 

Thanks for the words fellas. I know I played the hand like a bit of a Nancy, and I fully expected (and hoped, maybe?) to be chastized a little bit for it. Usually I'm a bit loose aggressive (I've been called a maniac on multiple occasions), so this hand was a bit out of character for me.

I never woulda played in this game if not for a 3 hour waitlist on the smaller game, so I wasn't quite prepared for it, and intimidated by what I thought would be excellent players at this level. And AJo, I know I'm a new guy around here, but I like your style, so feel free (not that you want or need my permission) to let me have it anytime you wish.