Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

Fishsticks,
I pretty much agree with everything you're saying, very good post.


kei,
I don't really see why one of the oesd hitting should make me more inclined to b/f the river. In general b/f will lose about the same vs the straight, I think what's more important is how the different lines does vs the rest of his range (busted draws and very weak made hands).


jc,
I don't think the stacksizes should be a concern, we're so rarely facing a push on the river and I'm happy to call a psb. I think calling overbet shoves on the river is good (less bad) if the board drawy and lots of draws have missed, calling on less drawy boards is probably worse.

[ QUOTE ]
I have just found in my experience that an overbet this large to a check on the end on this board is usually nuts more than air.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is my experience too, but I have a very limited experience of overbet shoves on the river so I wanted some input. This hand seems like an almost ideal situation to call an overbet push though (except 98 hit on the river).

[ QUOTE ]
DO you ever check to induce here then fold if he bets this big? is that the best play then, to check call any reasonable bet and fold to something this big or you call them all?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that the overbet changes the situation a lot, so yeah I think you should be capable of folding in a spot like this even though your intention was to induce a bluff. Not saying this exact spot is a fold, but it might be.


Tony,
I'm definately not expecting to beat any of his v-betting hands here.



I think checking the river to induce a bluff is clearly better than bet/folding for reasons I've already stated. And as said before I'm snapping a bet up to, well maybe $120. And I think his riverbet with be within this range 99% of the time.

When villain pushes the river it changes the situation a lot. In my limited experience this is a monster more often than air, but with this board and vs this villain I think calling is close.


[ QUOTE ]
Results ?


[/ QUOTE ]
<font color="white"> I called, villain showed Tc6c and mhing. Not the hand I'd expect when behind and probably a pretty retarded push by him (or really brilliant if he had great read). </font>

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

I still think this is a fold, but wtf kinda hand is that to be pushing the river?!?

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

[ QUOTE ]

It's a limped pot and we only have invested 1/6th of our stack. Again, it's a sick overbet and I like that you induced the bet on the end, but not for that much. In the end I think this is a fold, but I might be compelled to call it in the heat of battle....


[/ QUOTE ]
This decision pretty much boils down what frequency he overpushes air/monsters. My experience is that overpushing air is unusual at ssnl, if that's what the rest of ssnl thinks too I'm going to agree this is a fold. My limited experience of overpushes made me want to get some input about this frequency, even though I agree this is a very read dependant spot.

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It's a limped pot and we only have invested 1/6th of our stack. Again, it's a sick overbet and I like that you induced the bet on the end, but not for that much. In the end I think this is a fold, but I might be compelled to call it in the heat of battle....


[/ QUOTE ]
This decision pretty much boils down what frequency he overpushes air/monsters. My experience is that overpushing air is unusual at ssnl, if that's what the rest of ssnl thinks too I'm going to agree this is a fold. My limited experience of overpushes made me want to get some input about this frequency, even though I agree this is a very read dependant spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh I agree completely. That said, I think the VAST majority of overbet/pushes in these type spots are for value, not bluffs. If it were a bluff, you would think he would bet less, trying to make it look less suspicious.

Then again, maybe I'm weak tight as I'm looking for a reason to fold here as opposed to a reason to call, given the ratio of money invested:size of overbet. That said, I usually muck and think if I got bluffed, so be it, I'll get it back w/ interest in due time if he's doing this with air [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

Surely his overbet REALLY REALLY looks like a missed draw?

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not the hand I'd expect when behind and probably a pretty retarded push by him (or really brilliant if he had great read).

[/ QUOTE ]


Wait, what? That's the perfect move. If ahead, he has a funky two pair or 89cc.

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

Sample size would be nice to know. River AF 17 is really worthless information if it isn't over like 500-1000 hands which I doubt.

What makes this call harder is that he isn't betting a scare card. It actually doesn't look too much like a bluff. I would have probably closed my eyes and called it anyway.

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sample size would be nice to know. River AF 17 is really worthless information if it isn't over like 500-1000 hands which I doubt.


[/ QUOTE ]
Sample size is 330 hands, and yes I agree 17 probably isn't even close to his "real" river af. But over 300 hands it is at least likely he's active and is far from worthless.

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not the hand I'd expect when behind and probably a pretty retarded push by him (or really brilliant if he had great read).

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, what? That's the perfect move. If ahead, he has a funky two pair or 89cc.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or 98o. This is a bluff vs most players at this limit though. The majority will bet my hand at the river, and most of the players checking will not call a 2xpot bet with a crappy 2-pair like I did. So making an ordinary vb on the river is much better for him imo, unless he knows me well.

Re: 300nl - Trying to induce a river bluff...
 

i play the same.