88 on the Button

[mscags]

I play it the same, but I think you can safely fold on the river. If this guy hasn't gotten out of line you can almost be positive that you are beat. This is usaully an easy value bet. Villian can be calling you down with just about anything including middle pair bottom pair, a small pp, Ace high. Don't assume he has the T until he raises.

[coolhanded]

Betting and being check-raised, you're saying don't call and possibly folding the best hand. Betting and him folding means you didn't earn another bet. Checking through means you pay nothing more to know. I think betting here is negative EV. Check.

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
Betting and being check-raised, you're saying don't call and possibly folding the best hand. Betting and him folding means you didn't earn another bet. Checking through means you pay nothing more to know. I think betting here is negative EV. Check.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is an absolutely atrocious analysis. what range of hands do you put villain on? what hands will he call? raise? or fold?

if the number of hands that he will call with that you beat is greater than the number he will raise or fold it is a VALUE bet.

imo he will call with any pair including, 2,3,5 66 or 77. you beat all those hands. the hands you lose to are trip 10's, 99 and maybe jj. you can see there are far more hands that you beat.

[Derek in NYC]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I'd check the river, but I play bad. Actually, I may bet. I think this OK.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think whether you should value bet this depends on the opponent. There are plenty of passive villains who will call down with any pocket pair or part of the board to make this +EV.

[alta_chuttes]

[ QUOTE ]
if the number of hands that he will call with that you beat is greater than the number he will raise or fold it is a VALUE bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

assuming you fold to a check-raise, right? I agree this is an easy value bet.

[sammy_g]

[ QUOTE ]
imo he will call with any pair including, 2,3,5 66 or 77.

[/ QUOTE ]
Right, and I would even add stuff like AK and AQ to the list.

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if the number of hands that he will call with that you beat is greater than the number he will raise or fold it is a VALUE bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

assuming you fold to a check-raise, right? I agree this is an easy value bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

no. you dont have to fold to a checkraise so long as you estimate that he will checkraise bluff (maybe with a missed flush draw in this situation) a large enough percentage of the time. this, of course, is based on reads. a passive player means you should fold but a tricky or laggy player means you should call down. also, history can serve as a good indicator if you have seen villain make some river bluffs.

also, he could be overplaying some ands like a5 or 66, 77. as pokerbob said earlier, you will see all kinds of siht at 5-10.

[colgin]

Villain had KTo and MHING.

The river bet seemed like a really easy value bet to me. However, the decision to call the C/R was tough because I did not have a solid read. Against a non-tricky player I would have folded.

[coolhanded]

Read my earlier post. With what hand do you think villain is calling a 3-bet pre-flop and seeing the turn and river? Heart draw folds river, so hero bet mostly likely earns nothing. I don’t think some x2, x3, or x5 hand is all that likely to call a 3-bet from SB (with no read, you shouldn’t assume that the player is some wacko LAG, though I’ll agree there are plenty that play short-handed tables). Pocket pairs are believable---including sets (22, 33, 55). 44, 66, 77 would likely call, I agree. So would 99. His decision to not check-raise the flop with a T is interesting, though the 3-bet helps explain that as he could have put hero on AA, KK, QQ, or JJ. Given these considerations, checking seems best.

How's that analysis?

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think I'd check the river, but I play bad. Actually, I may bet. I think this OK.

[/ QUOTE ]

gross. you realize you are getting called by ANY pair here.

[/ QUOTE ]

uh, i play bad.