Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Limit Texas Hold'em > Micro-Limits

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-13-2005, 08:39 PM
DavidC DavidC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 292
Default Capping the river vs a three-bet

Could someone please tell me when I should be raising the river in position and then calling vs a three-bet?

--Dave.

I understand that it's probably not a simple answer. Here's my thoughts so far:

[ QUOTE ]
Because people who three-bet the river can count on being called almost all the time, it would make sense that people would commonly three-bet without the nuts, and that therefore you dont' have to have the nuts to cap it, since you'll almost always get called by any hand that three-bet. I'm not sure of the validity of this theory...


[/ QUOTE ]

Edit: to make things easier, let's start with the assumption that the river is to be played heads-up.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-13-2005, 09:47 PM
crovax4444 crovax4444 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Unable to wake up from my dream
Posts: 13
Default Re: Capping the river vs a three-bet

when you are very sure that you have a better hand than villian, or your very very sure that he's bluffing and you can beat it.

Edit:
If I understand your question correctly, on the river, villian raised, you reraised and he 3 bet. You obviously didn't reraise because you have a crappy hand. He 3 bet so he obviously doesn't, therefore it's simply a matter of judgement if you believe villian is behind.

Crovax
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-13-2005, 10:47 PM
milesdyson milesdyson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 197
Default Re: Capping the river vs a three-bet

you should raise a river bet when you are ahead of villain's range often enough to make this for value, including the times he 3-bets a better hand and you pay off his 3-bet.

also consider another thing that always must be the case: there will be hands he can 3-bet in his range that you beat. however, the added information we get from his 3-bet means that our equity is too low to cap for value.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-13-2005, 11:52 PM
DavidC DavidC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 292
Default Re: Capping the river vs a three-bet

bump...

Cro:
If you're very sure that he's bluffing, I think you shouldn't raise unless you have the nuts. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
therefore it's simply a matter of judgement if you believe villian is behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Miles is a bit closer to the answer here. Poker's not a game where "common sense" is commonly good. I think Miller points out something like bet if they'll call you with more hands that lose than that win, and HOH points out that you shouldn't try to put an opponent on a bluff before making a call with a marginal hand (you look at his range then make your decision).

--
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-13-2005, 11:58 PM
DavidC DavidC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 292
Default Re: Capping the river vs a three-bet

I guess basically my question should be something like "When should you cap the river without the nuts?"

---

[ QUOTE ]
also consider another thing that always must be the case: there will be hands he can 3-bet in his range that you beat. however, the added information we get from his 3-bet means that our equity is too low to cap for value.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the part that I'm focusing on...

When he three-bets the river, he has a range of hands much smaller than when he bets the river. However, he is also sucked in to calling almost every single time you cap, because of the inflated pot, because he (at a live game) can muck if you win, and because he has to defend his image and folding here can hurt him for weeks if he plays the game regularly.

So... he's got incentive to call. You can cap and be almost guaranteed that he'll call.

Therefore when should you cap the river?

What would a typical river three-bet mean from a typical opponent? Does it almost always mean the nuts? Does it depend on what the board's like? Does it depend on how crazy they are?

I know that there are some players out there who wouldn't even raise without the nuts... obviously, if they three-bet the river, you have to look really carefully at the board before you go ahead and cap it.

Anyways, we're scratching a bit of the surface here... this is mostly useful in very rare circumstances, as these days it seems like there are few times when there's more than 2 bets on the river. Way different than a year ago, way different than three years ago...

--Dave.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-14-2005, 12:53 AM
AdamL AdamL is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 407
Default Re: Capping the river vs a three-bet

Whenever you hit your uno card on the river, always cap it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.