Should I cap the River?

[Burnt Toast]

Tight Aggressive 5-10 Online

Only one other player (OP) involved in this hand. I thought he was a descent player but, I had only played a few orbits when this hand came up. I had made a number of preflop raises already.

I raise 1st in MP with AsTs. OP is on my immediate left and cold calls. Everyone else folds.

Flop: AQT rainbow

I bet, OP calls

Turn: AQTA rainbow

I bet, he raises, I re-raise, he caps.

River: AQTA3

I bet, he raises, I call.

Comments appreciated.

[Burnt Toast]

He turns over KJo

Damn it. I guess he wasn't that descent after all.

1st clue - he cold called my raise
2nd clue - he played against my raise with KJo
3rd clue - he didn't put me on a probable full house by the river.

Since the 1st clue was the only clue I had before the hand was over I like to think I would have capped the hand if I thought he wasnt descent.

Anyway, here is what lead me to my weak play. By the time he caps the turn and I bet the river a descent player would put me on a full house. A descent player would have reraised with preflop with QQ and TT (if he were to play them). AsQs is the best cold calling hand that would give him a full house.

Is it ludicris to put someone on this hand and not re-raise without knowing them for years?

[Louie Landale]

You are beat if he has AQ, of which there are #6 combinations left in the deck. It doesn't matter if he has AT. So far he seems assertive, and may very well have 3-bet with AQ before the flop. Compare that to the chances he's over-playing his hand and he's got AK (#8), QQ(#6), TT(#6), or KJ (#16).

If you are wrong you are laying 2:1 (he'll cap it with AQ), and you end up with #8+6+6+16:6+6 =36:12 =3:1. So basically if he's a 3:1 favorite to be a "reasonable" player compared to the chances that he's over-playing his hand, then go ahead and call, otherwise 3-bet.

I think the key issue is this: few low-limit players really compare the actual "value" of their hands with the likely value of the opponent (you). In this case, his "straight" is just as valuable to him when its AAQT3 as when its TT863. Just because YOU know the first is MUCH more dangerous against a tight pre-flop raiser, doesn't mean the general population knows.

Should you actually 3-bet? Well, you begged the player as a 'reasonable' player so flat calling was certainly correct. Should you have pegged him as a 'reasonable' player? That's the key issue here. At 5/10, few players are this "reasonable", so I'd advise you to presume he's somewhat unreasonable until you actually SEE him making a good play based on reasonable nuance.

Also, THIS player is very likely to continue to be "unreasonable" at least in regards to this sort of situation.

- Louie

[Tyler Durden]

Only one hand beats you...

[Ed Miller]

Only one hand beats you...

And any reasonable player will have exactly that hand given the action...

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

There are only 3 AQ combinations left in the deck. The board has 2 As & 1 Q, our hero holds the 3rd A.

[Louie Landale]

Some of us apparently cannot count, even given lots of minutes to do so...

Anyway, there is a pretty good rule-of-thumb I go by: the chances that a given player is out-to-lunch is almost always higher than the chances that he has a very unlikely hand played very well. The obvious exception is when you KNOW this player is NOT out-to-lunch.

- Louie

[Binkus]

It was played well, but depending on your read on the the other player (if you think he might just call your preflop raise isntead of reraseing with a AQ0) just calling on the river was a little safer. I still would have raised it though. If he did have AQ he probably would have raised you on the flop becouse he would have been woried about you making a straight