Routine BB situation - 94o

[StellarWind]

5/10 6-max (5-handed)

Hero is BB with 9 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 4 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].

Preflop: UTG (46/8 LP post) calls, SB (50/10 LP post) completes, and Hero checks.

Flop (3 SB): 3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 9 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets, and only MP calls.

Turn (2.5 BB) T [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets and MP calls.

River (4.5 BB) 5 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (2 players)
Hero bets ...

[ArturiusX]

I prefer a check-call. Often a heart draw will bet when checked too, when they would normally fold. Some hands that have you beat are checking through too (namely betters 9's, T's). Pockets may also take a swipe.

[27offsooot]

[ QUOTE ]
I prefer a check-call. Often a heart draw will bet when checked too, when they would normally fold. Some hands that have you beat are checking through too (namely betters 9's, T's). Pockets may also take a swipe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would rather c/f then c/c against this opponent. Give me a more aggro opponent and i like c/c but it would be weird to get to the river like this vs. someone more aggro. Anyway, b/f > c/f > c/c IMO.

[GTSamIAm]

Yeah, and if you get called, you're probably not winning 55% of the time or more since you played the hand so aggressively.

[Spicymoose]

I am torn between this and check call. He is passive, so you do save money with some of the hands that have you beat, but won't bet. He may bluff a busted flush draw if you check, but not often since he is passive; passive players do take shots sometimes though. On the other hand, you do get value from 44-88 and hands with a 3 or 5.

I think this is probably close, but I also think it is solvable with math. Just come up with some reasonable estimates of how often he will do certain actions with his different hand ranges. The only problem is that his range is quite big, so it would take some time to lay it all out.

My guess is that check calling would be better though. I think saving money when he doesn't value bet is the biggest factor.

[xwillience]

ill tend to check-call to prevent having to pay 2 bets to see a SD. Realistically you dont want a call on your river bet, and you may induce a bluff is you check. thats not a really scary river card tho so i can see betting out and folding to a raise.

[27offsooot]

[ QUOTE ]
ill tend to check-call to prevent having to pay 2 bets to see a SD.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would u ever call a raise?

[Spicymoose]

[ QUOTE ]
ill tend to check-call to prevent having to pay 2 bets to see a SD. Realistically you dont want a call on your river bet, and you may induce a bluff is you check. thats not a really scary river card tho so i can see betting out and folding to a raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt this is getting raised. This guy is passive, and if he had something to raise with, he woulda done it on the turn. If he does, no way in hell I call the raise.

Thinking over it some more, I could see bet/folding. If he does bet, I think we are behind too often considering how passive he is.

[Wynton]

First of all, I'm confused by the hand history. Is UTg the same as MP?

Assuming that the villain is the 46/8 guy, I don't see the point of the river bet. He does not seem the type to fold a better 9 or any other better hand. Nor does he seem like the type that you can assume would raise with an Ace or ten in his hand.

Only way this makes sense is if you think he might call with something like 8s.

Unless I'm misinterpreting the stats, I prefer c/c against this guy.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, I'm confused by the hand history. Is UTg the same as MP?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, my bad. He is Button+2 at a 5-handed table.