Bet This River?

[ActionBob]

Its a pretty clear check-call situation IMO. There's just not much you can beat that will call you here. Possibly a hand like AsQs, AsTs, or QQ. But even the QQ here may even fold much of the time that you bet which takes away some of the value to your bet. And theres virtually no chance a better hand will fold here. I'd check, call, and pray.

-ActionBob

[The Vegan]

Here's the deal on this river, and it's a pretty important point to consider when deciding on whether to bet a river out of position.
What hands can you imagine in his hand that you can beat at this point that will call your river bet? There aren't a lot. There are several that can beat you that might just call, but depending on the person they may very well raise you instead and now you have to call with your sick 2 pair.

But...checking on this river makes great sense. If you check and he checks behind, it's unlikely you lose, and you think maybe you lost a bet, but wait, he might not have even been able to call that bet, so it wasn't lost.
If he bets, he could be bluffing at this point or wrongly value betting with a weaker hand. You then call and get that bet.
He would also bet a stronger hand, which you would call and then only lose one bet.

One final variable that pushes this even further towards a strategic check-call situation is the fact that this is online. It's rather silly, but it seems online, people can't help but bet when it's checked to them heads up. So you are getting this extra bet so many times when you are ahead that you might miss if he folds because he had a weaker hand and didn't feel he could call.

[SoBeDude]

If he 3-bets you and you can't decide if he is ahead of you or is on a flush draw, have you really accomplished "seeing where I stand?"

Once he's 3 bet me, yes I assume I'm behind, but I'm getting 9.5 to 1 to call and see the turn. So I have acquired the information I seek, and will act accordingly. If I don't improve on the turn I check-fold. But I have the odds to draw to my 5 outer, especially considering implied odds.

-Scott

[tsarrast]

first let me critique the hand:

probably should have folded preflop, especially if you respect him, but calling isn't too aggregious an error.

Flop: I'd have bet it to see how he reacted, if he raises (you put him on overpair), call, then intend on check-calling the rest of the way (Unless you know for a fact he's got an overpair then fold on the turn if a blank hits). the way you did it, you check raise, then you get reraised if he does have the overpair, so you have to put in 3 bets instead of 2 (first mistake), and secondly - it didnt narrow down what he had, because he could be playing a flush draw strong for the cheap bets, hoping you check to him on the turn.

Turn: when your kicker hits, check-raising was right... it goes with my play just as well though (on flop: bet, raise, call... then check raise turn). when he just calls on turn, i'd put him on either JA, or AA... if he's solid he'd have folded KQ... he might also have AsKs or AsQs or AsJs (although a really solid player would usually call with AQs or AJs UTG)

when the ace hits on the river you have to check it - the only hands he could have that you beat (if he played the hand well) are AQ of spades, which he would fold at that point, so you shouldn't bet ANYWAYS. so you should check with the intention of calling (due to pot size), though if he bets it, I'd say you probably have a 10% chance of winning (if he's any good).

[tsarrast]

in the Turn paragraph, i meant to say: "if he's solid he'd have folded QQ"... as in, when you check raise on the turn, he should fold two queens... or if he's a little loose and calls, he'd fold them on teh river when the ace hits anyways, so you shouldn't bet into it... namely, there are very few hands he could have that he would call you with on the river that you'd beat, and the odds are he doesnt have them.... i'd put really good money on him having had AJ or AA... (and if he's aggressive, an outside chance he has AK of spades)

[SoBeDude]

Its clear now the river bet was a mistake.

thanks again!

-Scott

[rigoletto]

namely, there are very few hands he could have that he would call you with on the river that you'd beat, and the odds are he doesnt have them.

so you should check with the intention of calling (due to pot size)

Make up your mind! If the odds are against you the answer should be check fold. But if you plan to call the best play is a river bet (provided you can fold to a raise), this way you win 1 BB every time he would have checked behind!

[ActionBob]

Make up your mind! If the odds are against you the answer should be check fold. But if you plan to call the best play is a river bet (provided you can fold to a raise), this way you win 1 BB every time he would have checked behind!

I just don't buy this. The chance of the player checking behind with a hand that beats KJ is almost nil. Now *IF* you know the player is such an idiot he will check a hand like AJ or AK behind you then sure you can save that bet, but do you really think a player will check behind with that? I just cant see it being remotely possible in this spot.

As for the "odds against you", sure its very unlikely you are winning this hand, but getting 10-1 on the river call I'd think you have to call in case he is bluffing a hand like QQ or KsQs, or betting AsTs.

-ActionBob

[rigoletto]

The chance of the player checking behind with a hand that beats KJ is almost nil.

I suggest you read my posts again. I never said he would check behind with a better hand. I said: You win 1 BB when he calls with a worse hand that he would otherwise have chekked behind. I admit that the difference between check-calling and betting is marginal, but betting is better.

[ActionBob]

Sorry, my mistake... I misinterpreted what you said.

-ActionBob