LO8 - BVB - River decision

[donger]

BB is 25/1/1.7

9-handed 2/4 game, I am SB, folded around.
Dealt to Hero [4[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 10[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]]
I raise, BB calls.

*** FLOP *** [5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]]
I bet, BB calls.

*** TURN *** [10[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]]
I bet, BB calls.

*** RIVER *** [J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]]
Which is more profitable?

A) check-calling and snapping off bluffs from busted low draws and mistaken bets from worse high hands?

B) betting out & picking up all kinds of calls, hoping it looks like I'm pushing a busted low way too hard

I don't have much history with BB, but I have been playing aggressively at this table, pushing my low draw-plus type hands really hard.

[chaos]

It depends on your opponent. Is he more likely to call to keep you honest or to bet if you check?

There is also the definite possibilty you are beaten. By either an Ace-high straight, Kings up Jacks or a set. I would check and call.

[Buzz]

Donger - Pretty difficult to put BB on anything here, so let's assume BB is as likely to hold one two card combination as another.

If your opponent would not call a bet from you with anything less than two pair, you stand to gain nothing unless your opponent has a worse two pair than you.

There are 47 two-card combinations your opponent could be holding that would make a worse two pair than you have. I'd guess your opponent might call a bet from you with any of these two pair.

Coincidentally, there are also exactly 47 two-card combinations that would make your opponent a better hand than you. (32 for straights, 9 for sets, 6 for kings and jacks). Your opponent will almost certainly call and might raise with any of these.

47 to 47 with 4 ties. Interesting. On that basis, whether to bet or check seems dead even.

However, if you bet, your opponent might raise. And if he raises, his hand is more likely than not to be better than yours. Yet because of the money already in the pot, since your opponent could raise with a worse hand, I think you have to call the raise.

There's one more significant factor. If you don't bet, your opponent may bet. Just as you can't put your opponent on cards here, neither can your opponent put you on cards. Thus if you check, BB may put you on a busted draw and bet with almost nothing. And you'd have to call this bet.

If your opponent has you beat, you're stuck. But if you check, your opponent may bet a hand worse than yours, a hand he might have folded to a bet.

This is a place many opponents are likely to bluff. By all means, give them the opportunity to do so!

Check/calling is not guaranteed to earn you more than betting, but it's the option I would choose on the river here.

Buzz

[donger]

[ QUOTE ]
Donger - Pretty difficult to put BB on anything here, so let's assume BB is as likely to hold one two card combination as another.

If your opponent would not call a bet from you with anything less than two pair, you stand to gain nothing unless your opponent has a worse two pair than you.

There are 47 two-card combinations your opponent could be holding that would make a worse two pair than you have. I'd guess your opponent might call a bet from you with any of these two pair.

Coincidentally, there are also exactly 47 two-card combinations that would make your opponent a better hand than you. (32 for straights, 9 for sets, 6 for kings and jacks). Your opponent will almost certainly call and might raise with any of these.

47 to 47 with 4 ties. Interesting. On that basis, whether to bet or check seems dead even.

However, if you bet, your opponent might raise. And if he raises, his hand is more likely than not to be better than yours. Yet because of the money already in the pot, since your opponent could raise with a worse hand, I think you have to call the raise.

There's one more significant factor. If you don't bet, your opponent may bet. Just as you can't put your opponent on cards here, neither can your opponent put you on cards. Thus if you check, BB may put you on a busted draw and bet with almost nothing. And you'd have to call this bet.

If your opponent has you beat, you're stuck. But if you check, your opponent may bet a hand worse than yours, a hand he might have folded to a bet.

This is a place many opponents are likely to bluff. By all means, give them the opportunity to do so!

Check/calling is not guaranteed to earn you more than betting, but it's the option I would choose on the river here.

Buzz

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the analysis. I came to the same conclusion. At first blush, I thought I shouldn't have checked (which I did in the actual hand), because he will check behind a large percentage of his range that I beat.

However, you make a great point, when I *am* losing to a straight, I'm going to get popped and have to pay off.

Therefore, the times he calls with a worse hand need to outweigh the times he raises me with a better one by 2:1 for betting just to break even.

Then you factor in the extra bets I pick up when he bets a hand he never would have called with:

His hand is basically random. My hand isn't. Since I raised before the flop, I'm more likely to have a low-oriented hand that will miss this board completely. This makes him more likely than normal to try to bluff at a busted-low board.

All in all, checking is better than betting here, I think.


P.S. - Do you have some sort of fast method for whipping out those cominations, or do you just do it the old fashioned way?

[benwood]

You say thar you have been pushing low draws very hard. This is another reason to check & induce a bet from a weaker hand. Hopefully, he will think that your betting was caused by a low draw & a weak high.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
the times he calls with a worse hand need to outweigh the times he raises me with a better one by 2:1 for betting just to break even.

[/ QUOTE ]

Donger - Seems a good way to think.

[ QUOTE ]
His hand is basically random. My hand isn't. Since I raised before the flop, I'm more likely to have a low-oriented hand that will miss this board completely. This makes him more likely than normal to try to bluff at a busted-low board.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. As I think about it, exactly.

[ QUOTE ]
P.S. - Do you have some sort of fast method for whipping out those cominations, or do you just do it the old fashioned way?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think I have any particular systematic method. I thought of the forty sevens involved here sort as a collection of clumps, kind of collecting some of them on my fingers. Didn't take long. Then I reflected for a while. I thought it was very interesting that Villain somehow coincidentally had about the same number of hands involving two pair or better that win as lose.

You have top and third top pair. I'll think about this scenario some more while I do my walk, but off-hand it seems like that's probably always the case when there are two ways of sixteen each for an opponent to make a straight and when you have top and third pair. Then we can go up and down from there... da da da. Whatever. I think this might turn out to be a very practical reference post for me.

As Chaos opines, what to do depends a lot on your opponent.

Just my opinion.

Buzz