Checking 2 pair to induce a bluff on the river

[jtr]

Party Poker ($100 6 max, 6 handed) converter

Villain is UTG, and he is 60% VPIP, 6% PFR, 1.37 postflop aggression, and 28% went to showdown. (But all these numbers have to be taken with a pinch of salt as they're only over 50 hands.)

Preflop: Hero is SB with J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].

4 limpers to me, I complete. BB checks.

Flop: 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(6 players)</font>

Pot now $6 (less some rake).

I bet my two pair for $5. UTG calls, all others fold.

Turn: 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>

Pot now $16 less rake.

It seems likely that UTG has a flush draw, so I bet again, $12, and UTG calls.

River: 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>

Pot is now $40 less rake.

So, his flush didn't arrive. If I'm right, he won't have anything to call with, so let's check to induce a bluff. He may try to represent T9 or 64 for the straight.

Hero checks, UTG bets $50. That's a little higher than I thought he would bet but it looks like he may not want to be called. So I call.

Results unimportant, but I'd appreciate any comments on the line.

Bet sizes on flop and turn OK?

Does anyone prefer a value bet on the river, on the chance he has AK or similar? (Of course, if he's been slowplaying AJ or a set I am toast, but they seem unlikely.)

Does the $50 bet smell like a successfully induced bluff to you? Or should we suspect that he had an OESD with T9 after all? Villain is pretty loose and may have called with all sorts of hands.

Thanks for any comments.

[kongo_totte]

Well, he might aswell have catched his OESD. I don't know what's better, blocking or inducing. Betting for value is obviously wrong. As I see it, it's just a math issue (assuming he's play a flush and an OESD this way), and I'm not the man to make out the numbers.

Since you induced a bluff, you have to call, so nice call.

[ajmargarine]

Most likely villian holding here is Ax, not OESD or flush draw, although both are possibilities. I think a value bet is in order here, but I am still trying to intuit the numbers and that opinion may change.

[ajmargarine]

After thought, I would value bet this. Your read on villian is that he is the kind of player who *could* call you down with a draw and the odds you are giving him. This just adds to the range of hands you can put him on: it doesn't limit him to a flush draw. But I think it is more likely he holds Ax than any other hand.

The checking to induce a bluff isn't going to work enough to make it worthwhile, IMO. Most times, I think they just give up and check behind. Plus, if he does try it, it'll often be what you would have value bet anyway. Which is great, but you want to make sure you get a value bet in yourself if he has Ax.

I think the value bet is safe because if villian held AJ or A8, there's a good chance you hear from him before the river. If he holds A5 or A7, he may call behind, fearing you have A8 or AJ yourself, limiting your loss. A bigger hand than 2 pair you *probably* hear about before the river. I would just value bet this instead of trying to get fancy.

[jtr]

Thanks, guys, for the input. Interesting to see the contrasting advice!

AJ, I take your point about AX being a likely holding. I'm certainly guilty of having too specific a read here -- I put the guy on some unspecified flush draw but didn't particularly put him on an ace.

But if he has AX and X is not a J, 8, 5, or 7, don't you think he checks behind here? OK, maybe a big ace would bet, but I wouldn't have thought $50. The $50 bet looks to me like either a big "don't call me" bluff, or a value overbet that's pretending to be such a bluff.

And another issue that I didn't mention in the original post would be of course the poor pot odds I'm getting on my call when he overbets. As Kongo says, I checked to induce a bluff and so I called without a lot of thought really. Maybe a few moments of thinking time would have turned it into a fold, I am not sure.

Results oriented thinking? Quite possibly. He had 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] for the flush draw (as I suspected) but also a gutshot straight draw that I didn't seriously consider. And if he'd had T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] I would have looked like even more of an idiot.

[chumsferd]

[ QUOTE ]
Bet sizes on flop and turn OK?

[/ QUOTE ]

I play it the same up to the river. I think I lead out for half pot on the river though. 1.37 isn't a particularly high aggression factor so I wouldn't expect this guy to bluff the river that often (unless you have some specific read to the contrary). Because of this, I'd be less inclined to check since I think this kind of player will often check behind not only if he has a broken draw, but also with a number of hands he might otherwise call with (weak aces, maybe even 2nd pair). If his aggression factor was up above 2.5-3.0 I think the check / call line has more merit.

If you lead out the river and get raised, I think you can fold. Somewhat painful, but at the moment the only model you have of this guy is the PT stats over 50 hands... and to me, right now, they just don't suggest he would raise the river here with anything you beat (with the possible exception of 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]).

This is the kind of player you want to be value betting against, not the kind you want to be trapping, IMHO.

I think I've come in to this thread too late in the day to comment on whether to call after you take the line of inducing the bluff (having seen the results). I want to say fold, but I think I'm being results oriented. I don't often see people making overbet bluffs on the river, and when I do it's usually obvious who is doing it within 50 hands and I'd go with that read.

Just my 2p.

[jtr]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't often see people making overbet bluffs on the river...

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. It made me nervous at the time but I didn't have the courage to fold. Usually I think the bluff-the-river guys bet 1/2 to 2/3 pot or so.