Value bet or induce a bluff
 

short handed 80/160 UB

game is going kind of aggressive and you're not hitting your hands very well tonight, though you *think* you may have a decent if not good reputation over the past couple of sessions.

the button open raises. sb folds. you call in the bb with Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]T [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

board comes out:

Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]5 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

you check. he bets. you checkraise. he 3-bets. you call.

turn: 3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

Check. check.

What rivers are you betting? What rivers are you checking?

Re: Value bet or induce a bluff
 

Ranges here are wide, not just flush draws, pocket pairs less thn queens would do this, as would AK and sometimes, correctly, A,>Q. I would only induce BLUFFS on the aces, i may fold, but i would def. induce value bets for c/r's on rags against some opponents.

I would have lead the turn.

Re: Value bet or induce a bluff
 

If i'm checking the river, often I will check-raise.

Re: Value bet or induce a bluff
 

I bet all rivers. Checking twice is too clear a signal that you intend to call. He's unlikely to make a mistake. Bet the river and hope to be called by AK, JJ, TT...

-Eric

Re: Value bet or induce a bluff
 

[ QUOTE ]
I bet all rivers. Checking twice is too clear a signal that you intend to call. He's unlikely to make a mistake. Bet the river and hope to be called by AK, JJ, TT...


[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, checking twice is unlikely to induce a bluff on blank rivers, but A-high hands are unlikely to call a bet. The types of hands that will call the river will also probably value bet if checked to twice, and may pay off a checkraise cause the line looks so wonky.

Re: Value bet or induce a bluff
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I bet all rivers. Checking twice is too clear a signal that you intend to call. He's unlikely to make a mistake. Bet the river and hope to be called by AK, JJ, TT...


[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, checking twice is unlikely to induce a bluff on blank rivers, but A-high hands are unlikely to call a bet. The types of hands that will call the river will also probably value bet if checked to twice, and may pay off a checkraise cause the line looks so wonky.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience, people call with ace-high unimproved all the time, feeling that they have induced a bluff from you, the "busted flush draw".

Check-raising blanks is an intriguing concept, but I feel the missed bets from ace-high don't make up for the extra bets from JJ.

my 2 cents.
Eric

Re: Value bet or induce a bluff
 

If he put the OP on a flush draw/thought A-high was good, why didn't he bet the turn and take the free showdown? Checking behind the turn with what you believe to be the best, but very vulnerable hand in order to induce a river bluff from a potential 15-out hand is just terrible poker. The only A high hands he has a decent chance of getting a call from are busted nut flush draws.

Also, it's not just JJ that will value bet a blank river if checked to here, it's JJ, TT, 99, A8, K8, J8 and any other 8 if he's tenacious.

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky
 

Re: Value bet or induce a bluff
 

Fair enough. I haven't played in this game recently. But the question remains: How often does he have an A-high that he'll call with vs. How often does he have a hand that will value bet when checked to and pay off a checkraise?

It seems to me that given the board and the action, A-high certainly isn't an automatic call for him on the river, and even if does call with it more often than not, he's not going to have an A-high that he intends on calling with anymore than 20-30% of the time here, so he only needs to have a hand that will value bet and call a checkraise more than 10-15% of the time to make checking a superior play.

Re: Value bet or induce a bluff
 

[ QUOTE ]
If he put the OP on a flush draw/thought A-high was good, why didn't he bet the turn and take the free showdown? Checking behind the turn with what you believe to be the best, but very vulnerable hand in order to induce a river bluff from a potential 15-out hand is just terrible poker. The only A high hands he has a decent chance of getting a call from are busted nut flush draws.

Also, it's not just JJ that will value bet a blank river if checked to here, it's JJ, TT, 99, A8, K8, J8 and any other 8 if he's tenacious.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not that he puts him on a flush draw exclusively. He mostly puts him on a pair and was hoping to catch an ace or a king. Now though, getting over 6:1 on the river call, he thinks, hey, maybe ace high is good. In the games I play, calling the river after the board draws have missed with ace-high is not just common, it's correct. A missed draw will frequently bluff the river after the turn goes check-check.

I agree with you that check-raising is interesting. You suggest though that you'll get called by an ace 30% of the time, meaning you only need to successfully check-raise JJ et al 15% of the time. I find two flaws in this logic. First, I think ace-high calls much more often than 30% of the time. Second, a check-raise only wins you 1 bet vs JJ, assuming he calls, not 2. Therefore, you must believe that gaining a bet from a hand like JJ is more likely than gaining a bet from the ace-high call.

Working in favor of the check is the occassional induced river bluff, but I think getting a call from ace-high outweighs these. I could be wrong.

good luck.
Eric