50NL: AA I'm completely lost

[Wondercall]

Villain has been limping scs and suited 1-gappers but isn't overly active post flop and has folded to a couple of my continuation bets and checked a couple hands down where he has bottom pair. I expect him to limp small pairs as well. My image is very very tight as I am 1-tabling trying to work out some leaks.

Also, is ANYONE checking this turn?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (5 handed) internettexasholdem.com (http://www.internettexasholdem.com)

MP ($55.70)
Button ($14.75)
Hero ($74.35)
BB ($16.10)
UTG ($70.90)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A/images/graemlins/heart.gif, A/images/graemlins/club.gif.
UTG calls $0.50, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, Button calls $0.50, <font color="#CC3333">Hero raises to $3</font>, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, UTG calls $2.50, Button calls $2.50.

Flop: ($9.50) 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 7/images/graemlins/spade.gif, K/images/graemlins/spade.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $9</font>, UTG calls $9, Button folds.

Turn: ($27.50) Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $20</font>, UTG calls $20.

River: ($67.50) 9/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>

Hero...

Final Pot: $67.50

My immediate thought was to check the river to induce a bluff. In retrospect, I think this is completely wrong at 50NL.

[prodonkey]

no, not checking the turn very often.. unless I want to stack a donk him.

I'd check sometimes to induce a bluff.. other times I'd just shove. All depends on how agressive he is.

[Panic__NL]

Checking river is not completely wrong and I see bluffs here all the time with a missed FD.
Then the question is, will he call a bet with TP, will he bet TP when checked to, will he bluff a missed draw, and how big of a calling station is he. So will he call 2 streets with a naked FD.
Most players dont, they have at least something when they call 2 big bets on flop and turn. So he could have TJs and catched a OESD on top of his FD on the turn, or he has TPWK.
You showed strength preflop, on the flop and again on the turn, so he must at least put you on something like AK for TPTK.
But every bet you make on the river makes you committed.
I would check to induce a bluff, considering potsize it is likely Villian will attempt a bluff. I think there is more value in checking to induce than betting and being committed when villian shoves his rivered straight.

[Wondercall]

[ QUOTE ]
Checking river is not completely wrong and I see bluffs here all the time with a missed FD.
Then the question is, will he call a bet with TP, will he bet TP when checked to, will he bluff a missed draw, and how big of a calling station is he. So will he call 2 streets with a naked FD.
Most players dont, they have at least something when they call 2 big bets on flop and turn. So he could have TJs and catched a OESD on top of his FD on the turn, or he has TPWK.
You showed strength preflop, on the flop and again on the turn, so he must at least put you on something like AK for TPTK.
But every bet you make on the river makes you committed.
I would check to induce a bluff, considering potsize it is likely Villian will attempt a bluff. I think there is more value in checking to induce than betting and being committed when villian shoves his rivered straight.

[/ QUOTE ]

So your action on villain shove is...

[Panic__NL]

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

[prodonkey]

Yep.. pot control went out the window with the near pot bet on the turn. the 9d only helps if he had TJ.. which is probably only possible if he has TJs, or some abomination like Q9 or K9

[DaycareInferno]

i usually only c/c in cases where my hand can't stand a raise and i get bumped off the pot by bluffs. in this case, you really can't be moved off after you bet, and villain knows that, so i bet like 40 and reload.

[Spurious]

I don't like to be OOP in this spot.
Villain could have two pair here. I think the best case would be a missed FD or KJs.
Make some sort of blocking bet.

Second question:
Probably call, but he could have us beat.

[ama0330]

He has like $35 left, so either way its going all-in. In this case its easier to bet it yourself cause you don't want to give him the chance to check behind with AK. If you are beat, meh. He would have raised the turn with something really good. I shove

[prodonkey]

oh i thought more was left than that.. I can't to the maths at this time in the morning.. I shove too in that case.

[Splossy]

I wouldn't bet so large on the flop. I know everyone is always saying bet pot when there are draws out there but many players will call a pot bet with a FD anyway. I think you can get the same done with a smaller bet and get a pair or paired K to call. On the turn I'm not all that worried about the diamond since he doesn't appear to be calling for a diamond draw. It's possible it puts him on a FD but probably not. Yes I'd bet but smaller - c.13 into a c.23 pot.

[fees]

shovel

[ReptileHouse]

You're ahead here very, very often. If you're losing, it's usually to KQ. At this level, villains will show up here with KT, KJ quite often and not be able to fold even to huge strength. Stuff like As7s is also very possible. He's shown zero strength so far and given you no reason to believe your hand is no good.

If you have a read that he's aggro with missed draws, a check/call to induce is fine, but "isn't overly active post flop" doesn't much sound like the bluffy sort. Don't get tricky unless you have a good reason to do so. Just play straightforwardly and value bet your hand.

Just shove it in the middle and get called by worse hands. If he shows up with better this time, good for him.

edit: your bet sizing is fine as long as you intended to get it all in by the river.

[Wondercall]

Thanks for the replies. I checked the river after going with my read and putting him on a busted fd. He pushed so I got what I wanted. I snap called and he showed 777. I never expected him to limp 77 so well played by him I guess.

[monkover]

shove and c/c are pretty close imo...

[ReptileHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
shove and c/c are pretty close imo...

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they're really not. Villain is far more likely to check behind with hands we beat and only bet hands that beat us. On the other hand, he's very likely to call with hands he would not bet. By betting, we lose the same amount when behind as with a c/c line, but we win more when ahead. If we check this river, it should not be with the intention of calling a shove.

[Capone]

I like the shove here.

[Wondercall]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
shove and c/c are pretty close imo...

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they're really not. Villain is far more likely to check behind with hands we beat and only bet hands that beat us. On the other hand, he's very likely to call with hands he would not bet. By betting, we lose the same amount when behind as with a c/c line, but we win more when ahead. If we check this river, it should not be with the intention of calling a shove.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good post reptile. My only argument is that if we go with our read and put him on a busted draw, hes never calling any sort of bet on the river. Checking gives him a chance to bet at a pot he can only win if he bets. Is this line of thinking wrong?

[ReptileHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Checking gives him a chance to bet at a pot he can only win if he bets. Is this line of thinking wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's read based. You characterized this villain as relatively passive. To me that says he's not going to be bluff shoving with his missed draws often enough.

Specifically, he'll need to have and bluff with his missed draws more often than he has a calling hand that we beat for c/c to be better than just betting. I generally need a pretty strong read on villain that he both plays his draws passively and that he's bluffy when checked to.

In other words, your thinking was good, but not against this opponent.

[infinite_loop]

I think I have to check. Though I'm not sure it's really ever inducing a bluff.