some may hate this?
 

not sure if a few people will flame me for this river play

villain is a pretty good player postflop but isnt very trusting and makes some thin/loose calls against players i think he views as aggressive or bluffers. Plays more tag preflop than myself and is a 2p2 lurker/ occasional poster who probably doesnt know who I am (which is why i was a bit hesitant to post this).

I wont comment much more on his play, I have some notes on him of things hes done in the past but dont have them in front of me. Hes not a bluffy or hugely aggressive player, his play postflop is mostly fairly straightforward by wpex standards.

preflop folds to Button who raises, hero 3bets 77 in sb, bb folds, Button caps

flop A 7h 3h
hero checks, button bets, hero raises, button 3bets, hero caps, button calls

turn 6h
hero bets, button calls

river Th
hero bets, button raises, hero folds (13:1)

Re: some may hate this?
 

Hate is a strong word, I'll say that I think this will be a bluff more often than 1 in 14. If he´s a 2p2 lurker he may know the Clarkmeister line which sways me more towards a call.

Re: some may hate this?
 

ya thats how i play it

Re: some may hate this?
 

I would check-call the river, primarily because I really dislike folding sets HU, and I don't want to pay two bets to show down.

Anyway, though, it appears that Villain flopped top pair with a big ace of hearts. Either that, or he has a hand like AxKh. Or possibly he actually turned a flush with AhQh or something and decided to wait until the river to raise.

But we don't know that prior to the raise. So I don't hate the river play or anything, but as I said at the start, it's not one that I would make since I hate folding sets in HU pots.

I guess I should add too that, prior to any river action, if we give Villain a range of a big ace, and I think basically we can, then he'll have rivered a flush a little over 6/15 or 2/5 of the time (I'm discounting the AhXh possibility because of the lack of a turn raise). So there's not really a hell of a lot of actual value in a bet, and making the bet relies strongly on our ability to fold to a raise and also on the idea that Villain will check behind with his non-flush hands (which he probably will).

Basically you have no good options, and what your river play attempts to do is make the most of what has become an unprofitable street for you.

Re: some may hate this?
 

on wpx I think i'd never fold a set HU

Preflop is fine, flop is fine, turn I think is fine and I'd probably go for a C/C on the river to try and induce him but I think even after betting i'd still call his raise

Re: some may hate this?
 

I think this is fine especially since the ace is not a heart.
I would guess u're good somewhere between 5 and 10%, so it seems close. Of course the equity difference between 5 and 10% is pretty big in a pot this big.

Re: some may hate this?
 

i like everything except the river. i just check call.

Re: some may hate this?
 

[ QUOTE ]




I guess I should add too that, prior to any river action, if we give Villain a range of a big ace, and I think basically we can, then he'll have rivered a flush a little over 6/15 or 2/5 of the time (I'm discounting the AhXh possibility because of the lack of a turn raise). So there's not really a hell of a lot of actual value in a bet, and making the bet relies strongly on our ability to fold to a raise and also on the idea that Villain will check behind with his non-flush hands (which he probably will).



[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, Nick or anyone else. I'm not very good with math so can you explain what your 6/15 numbers represent. I would think if we put villian on a rivered flush holding an Ace he makes that flush 1/3 times

Re: some may hate this?
 

basically stef we're assuming hands he would have played this way preflop and on the flop are AJ+. It's debatable about how often he caps AJo here preflop (or 3bets it on the flop) but this is pretty much his range, AQ+ seems very likely. Using hand reading going into the river we are assuming he has a big ace and thus assign this range.

out of those hands, there are 12 combos of each AK AQ and AJ. Out of those 12 combos 5 contain 1 heart, and one contains 2 (this we can discount somewhat since he didnt raise the turn). I think nick just messed up the numbers he came up with doing the combinatorial analysis. Either that or I have, which i dont think i did. I think nick just accidentally said there were 16 combos of each (true if the A isnt down), then discounted the one Ahxh combo from the total but then not from the number of hands that have a flush.

These numbers aren't the odds he makes a flush if he had a heart; they are the numbers that represent how many of his likely holdings will have a flush on the river.

hope this helps stef let me know if it didnt

Re: some may hate this?
 

[ QUOTE ]
basically stef we're assuming hands he would have played this way preflop and on the flop are AJ+. It's debatable about how often he caps AJo here preflop (or 3bets it on the flop) but this is pretty much his range, AQ+ seems very likely. Using hand reading going into the river we are assuming he has a big ace and thus assign this range.

out of those hands, there are 12 combos of each AK AQ and AJ. Out of those 12 combos 5 contain 1 heart, and one contains 2 (this we can discount somewhat since he didnt raise the turn). I think nick just messed up the numbers he came up with doing the combinatorial analysis. Either that or I have, which i dont think i did. I think nick just accidentally said there were 16 combos of each (true if the A isnt down), then discounted the one Ahxh combo from the total but then not from the number of hands that have a flush.

These numbers aren't the odds he makes a flush if he had a heart; they are the numbers that represent how many of his likely holdings will have a flush on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is right. (And you figured out what I did wrong, too.)

Re: some may hate this?
 

Thanks J, I get it now. Villian has a flush here 50% of the time assuming our range is correct. Actually I guess we should be including the AA combos(he may not raise the turn with these on a 3 flush board)bringing the total to 53.3%

Re: some may hate this?
 

I just hate bet/folding.

Check call the river. I would checkaise before bet folding! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: some may hate this?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks J, I get it now. Villian has a flush here 50% of the time assuming our range is correct. Actually I guess we should be including the AA combos(he may not raise the turn with these on a 3 flush board)bringing the total to 53.3%

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we should probably discount AA about as much as Ahxh. Id be very surprised if he didnt raise AA here with or without the heart (not sure which would be better or worse not to raise with? someone wanna answer that for me?). Either way both are rare "slowplays" or variation lines.

He has seen me check-raise the flop and fire the turn with an UI gutshot but he really shouldnt think i have a flush here very often after i cap the flop. A3 A7 AK 77 or 33 are much much more likely, and even if i did spaz out with Khxh or something hes got 10 outs to redraw to a boat and another 7 if hes got a heart. Not raising AA here would be missing out on tons of value IMO, but i wont rule it out from this player on occasion.

If we discount those holdings AA and Ahxh, we are slightly ahead of his range going into the river. I think we can assume he crying calls without a heart most of the time at this point.

However, if we add even 1 combo or so for him bluff raising (even many non bluffers can try on a 4 flush board on occasion), bet/folding here as a line in general starts to look a little mehhhhh to me, but is check calling less -EV?

Gehrig I give a lot of weight to anything u say since u dont strike me as the type to do something without knowing its best. Why is this the best way to play this hand exactly?

And the fact the A was a non-heart did mean something to me at the time, but what should it mean exactly? Should I be more likely to bet call or ck call if it is a heart?

Re: some may hate this?
 

u bet the river bc its better than check calling and check folding

u fold to the raise bc theres nothing for him to be bluffing with he always has top pair or a flush here

Re: some may hate this?
 

Edit: Cliffs Notes version of what follows -- If Villain bluff-raises the river as much as 1 time out of 20 that he doesn't have a flush, then bet-folding is probably only very slightly better than check-calling the river. If he bluff-raises more than that, then betting could end up costing us plenty. (Remember, if Villain is going to have a flush about half of the time and will never fold a better hand to a bet, then the most a bet-fold can salvage for us versus a check-call is 0.5 BB, whereas a bet-fold can in theory cost us about 6 BB on average if Villain always raises whether he has a better hand or not.) And, anyway, I don't trust my judgment that much when I have a hand as good as a set and the pot is big.

Here's some more math (I'll try to get it right this time).

Let's simplify slightly and say that Villain has you beat half of the time on the river, prior to any action. Let's also say he's always at least calling with whatever he's got.

If he never raises a worse hand, bet-folding is then break-even.

Check-calling, on the other hand, is going to be a losing venture for us, most likely, since Villain shouldn't really expect you to fold after you make a defensive river check and he probably won't bluff all that often. So let's say you lose 9 times out of 10 when you check-call and Villain bets (probably this is overly pessimistic by at least a little bit), making check-calling and check-folding approximately equal plays that each cost us a little under 0.5 BB per hand on the river.

So, wow, we should bet-fold, right?

The problem is that Villain will most likely hopelessly bluff (or value bet his ace) when checked to more often than the 1 in 10 I gave, and so we'll lose something more like 0.3 BB on the river with a check-call.

But, of course, there's a bigger problem. If Villain makes a desperation bluff-raise on the river without a flush even as often as one out of 20 times he doesn't have a flush, then, well, that's 11 BBs we lost on those occasions (our initial river bet plus the 10 BBs in the pot when the river action began). So, with that percentage of bluff-raising, we're winning 19 BBs on the river out of 40 bets, we're losing 20 BBs the times Villain raises with a flush, and we're losing 11 BBs the time that Villain bluff-raises us out of the pot. So, on average, we're losing a little over 0.25 BB on the river with each bet-fold.

This is all speculative and I don't know what the actual percentages should be, but what I did does illustrate that Villain doesn't have to bluff-raise very often at all in a pot this big to cut deeply into the attractiveness of the bet-fold option.

Re: some may hate this?
 

im curious if gehrig thinks an unknown ever raises Ax no heart or if tags ever do and what % he would assign to it if nonzero. I know it doesn't seem logical and not something most of us would do but villains do stupid, irrational things a lot at low limits and this isnt the worst spot for it if he thinks i would bet fold the range of hands I might(which he really has no reason to think at this point though).

if he thinks about our hand, its most likely A7 A3 (6 combos each) 77 33 ( 3 each) AK (8 combos) or AA (1 combo) , if he has Ax with no heart. If thats my entire range, bluff raising is profitable if i ll fold those 15 out of 27 combos that don't have a heart. Even if we discount those holdings, since i bet the river, by about a third; his bluff raise is still almost neutral EV since he only needs to make a better hand fold 1:5. Not sure if villain would ever think about it like that or take this action with that hand but just kinda taking a look at it through villains eyes.

Re: some may hate this?
 

I've never ever raised that river there without the goods.

Re: some may hate this?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If thats my entire range, bluff raising is profitable if i ll fold those 15 out of 27 combos that don't have a heart.

[/ QUOTE ]
i am the only person on the internet that would advocate bet/folding the river here. every other low limit opponent villain will play against that will never fold middle pair+ on the end to a raise protects u from having to call a raise

Re: some may hate this?
 

[ QUOTE ]
u fold to the raise bc theres nothing for him to be bluffing with he always has top pair or a flush here

[/ QUOTE ]
You know we beat top pair, right?
Not that I disagree with bet/folding. I'm kind of torn between bet/folding and check/calling, but it might be a bet/fold against this opponent since you said he could make marginal calls if he spots a bluff.

Re: some may hate this?
 

Villian thinks TP is the nuts thats why he is so agressive on the flop am I correct. Mjeh I cant fold it I wish I could so a c/c line would be nice.

Re: some may hate this?
 

i think we also have to account for the fact that there are hardly any 'weak' hands here for villain to have on this river. if villain has a decent hand (wich we beat), i doubt he's raising as it might be the best hand (unlikely but possible). if has has any kind of hand, he wants to showdown. if he has air he might bluff but i dont see much air at this stage of the hand.

Re: some may hate this?
 

I was bluffing.

Re: some may hate this?
 

Serisously, though, someone made an almost identical play against me on UB. I'm going to see if I can find the hand. He bet/folded a set of 7s on the river, but showed the fold. If I made this fold I would never show it. I never bluff raise at low stakes, and only rarely at higher stakes, and this is like telling someone it can be a profitable play against you.

As it is, I don't like the bet/fold very often on the river, but here it may well be the best line.

Re: some may hate this?
 

Standard.

Re: some may hate this?
 

[ QUOTE ]
u bet/fold the river bc its better than check calling and check folding


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: some may hate this?
 

If you think you can trust this guy than go ahead and bet/fold. If you cant trust him then check/call.

Is this game really that simple? Unfortunately the answer to that question is a resounding no becuz the above advice I just gave you is actually laced with a huge flaw. The problem with my advice is the word "think". For example if your opinion that you can trust this guy is only 75% accurate then bet/folding in this pot size is probably a mistake. And IMO this is the area where a player trying to play well is going to make most of his mistakes, and that is thinking his reads are more accurate then they really are.

Now im not trying to say that check/calling the river is better than bet/folding. What I am saying is in order to bet/fold here in this pot size you better be damn sure that this guy will only raise the river with a better hand and that check/calling is bad cuz this guy is very unlikely to bet a lesser hand on the river if you check. I do believe that most players who bet/fold the river in this spot are overestimating the accuracy of their read. And I also think that if one is not 100% certain which line is best, then check/calling and always seeing a showdown has to be the best line. In general, whenever youre faced with a tough situation with a marginal hand where you dont know which line is best, taking the line that leads to a showdown will usually be the best path.

Jstill im not sure how strong you read was, but I know what I usually do in this spot, and thats check/call unless I have a very strong read that says not to.