\"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

Instead of derailing a few other threads with this discussion I want to have it here.

I see this line used all the time in strat threads (or the variation "If you fold the river you should just fold the turn"), but I question if it's a theoretically sound piece of advice.

Why can't I call the turn and then get more information on the river and change my mind? Why does a decision on one street mandate that I make the same decision on a future street?

example hand

150bb stacks, 6 handed
MP raises to 4bbs, folded to you in the BB and you call with A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Flop T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] (pot 8bbs)
You check, Villain bets 7bbs, you call

[/b]Turn:[/b] T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]] (pot 22 bbs)
You check, Villain bets 19 bbs, you call

River: T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]] (pot 41 bbs)
You check, Villain bets a lot, you fold.

The river deuce doesn't change anything really, but I think we're ahead on the turn often but very rarely ahead on the river. In a situation like this can you profitably call the turn and still fold river depending on the card/his action? thoughts?

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

IMO "If you call the turn you have to call river" sucks as strat advice. I think it should be "don't call the turn unless you know what to do on the river."

Usually that can be interpolated as dont call unless you can call because if you cant call on the river then bet-fold is usually a better line on the turn than check-call. V gets maximum play with his positional advantage when you check-call the turn, and if he understands this then he will be betting the river lightly knowing you will have to fold. So you end up folding the best hand more often, which totally sucks.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

"If you call the turn you have to call river"

that line of thinking tilts me SO hard, and i constantly find myself writing posts trying to debunk it. it is hardly ever used correctly, and most of the those using it seemingly fail to realize that RANGES CHANGE ON THE RIVER, and not based just on the river card, but more importantly based on the action!

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

If you so choose to play this hand this passively (fine under certain circumstances) then yes, you need to call this river. I have absolutely no clue as to how you feel you are ahead on the turn yet behind on the river given that you have supplied no read. And the only read that would make me maaayyybe take this line is if his 3 barrel frequency is minimal to non existent.

Just to clarify, 'calling the turn = calling the river' does not always hold water. But in your example, it clearly does given that card. If you said the river was a J-K then obviously we can 'change our mind'.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

your hand is too weak preflop to play oop

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

paging Jay Riall

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

The 'call turn then must call river' is only sound when 100% of villains turn betting range bets the river. This is clearly not the case in this example, so the rationale doesn't make sense.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

[ QUOTE ]
The 'call turn then must call river' is only sound when 100% of villains turn betting range bets the river. This is clearly not the case in this example, so the rationale doesn't make sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo. Most boring TAGs at these limits have no problem firing 1 or even 2 barrels. There aren't many that are capable of firing 3.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

it's because when you make a turn call in a hand like this, you have to assume that villain is also going to bet river a huge portion of the time..so if you're not prepared to call a big river bet, you should fold the turn, rather than hoping they just chk behind on the river

EDIT: this hand isn't a prime example of that theory, but you should still expect him to bet the river a pretty good amount of the time

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

This phrase is not applicable to your example hand.

It has more to do with calling a raise (not just a bet)(and after the flop has been bet as well) on the turn where it is very likely that both players already have a made hand. If your hand is good on the turn, it's good on the river.

It's not a profitable play (ldo) to call a turn raise and fold rivers. It's like people expect to call the turn raise and have villain shut down or something when you are almost always facing a big river bet.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you fold the river you should just fold the turn

[/ QUOTE ]

flip the aggressor in this hand, get raised on the turn and fold the river.

then this applies. this hand doesn't

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

i think the other hand (88 500 bb deep) is a better example of when you have to decide on turn. in that one, a passive villain 3 bets you oop leaving himself less than a PSB to get in on the river. Almost always he is pushing riv.

In your example, it seems dependant on villain's 3 barreling capability. Not sure what the best default is at 1/2. On Stars, the play seems generally passive, and i dont hate a fold to the 3rd barrel in your example (in my game). Definitely cant be optimal, though, as a tough player would run over you. I just dont see many of the weakish tags i play against 3 barreling that board w/ A10.

Was the post about folding A10s serious? Are any of you guys folding that from the bb? how about A5s- where is the cutoff?

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

in my opinion a lot of posters on 2+2 parrot lines that make no sense

like 'you're either way ahead, way behind'
or: 'no better hands will fold, no worse hands will call'

its gibberish, they heard someone good say it so they post it every chance they get. obviously there are spots where it applies, but..

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

[ QUOTE ]
in my opinion a lot of posters on 2+2 parrot lines that make no sense

like 'you're either way ahead, way behind'
or: 'no better hands will fold, no worse hands will call'

its gibberish, they heard someone good say it so they post it every chance they get. obviously there are spots where it applies, but..

[/ QUOTE ]

well, im not sure about that, but in the hand OP quoted, he's definitely either way ahead or way behind

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

[ QUOTE ]
IMO "If you call the turn you have to call river" sucks as strat advice. I think it should be "don't call the turn unless you know what to do on the river."

Usually that can be interpolated as dont call unless you can call because if you cant call on the river then bet-fold is usually a better line on the turn than check-call. V gets maximum play with his positional advantage when you check-call the turn, and if he understands this then he will be betting the river lightly knowing you will have to fold. So you end up folding the best hand more often, which totally sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]
My exact thoughts.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

[ QUOTE ]
your hand is too weak preflop to play oop

[/ QUOTE ]


stop posting. not only is this not relevant, but youre wrong.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

I think BobboFitos said somewhere that if he calls turn with a made hand he'll (nearly) always call river if all the draws miss. But he plays high stakes.

I think theoretically speaking, it's very bad to call turn and fold river a lot. You are often giving away a lot of money to the worse hand if villain is a good aggressive player.

But at SSNL, most TAGs don't make big bluffs. They are a product of a style designed to beat calling station donks. So they never fire the third barrel. So against them the line may often be the best one.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

The hand you posted really makes your question confusing.

If the question is "If you call the turn WITH A MADE HAND you have to call the river ALWAYS" correct?, then the answer is no.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

as others have said your hand isnt the greatest example. the call the turn, have to call the river is more of a limit line which came about after ed miller book where most limit players where trying to save bets by making "good" river laydowns. give alot of people played limit before no limit it kinda came across with it. its obv wrong for no limit because you have different bet sizes which usually mean different things and you can adjust based on this.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

I admittedly couldn't think of a very good example when I was writing this, so if someone else can think of a better one please do.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think BobboFitos said somewhere that if he calls turn with a made hand he'll (nearly) always call river if all the draws miss. But he plays high stakes.


[/ QUOTE ]
I think this should be apparent. By the turn betting yuo should knwo what range you are facing (when you have a made hand) and where you stand in relation to it. If you are thinking while playing, you should have a guess what the river action might reasonably look like. If your made hand looks good against opponents range and action then you call turn with every intention of calling the river. This breaks down at two points, when the river ebt is unexpectedly large, and when draws come home. When draws come home your position relative to their range can change drastically, and when the bet is unusually large, or unexpectedly size, you can use this new information to revise your opinion of their range.

All in all, this is pretty much self-evident if you think it through.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

I mean isnt OP basically saying (and it' something that I've thought might be true)

Villian double barrells. We are ahead of that range. Villian triple barrells. We are behind that range.

I mean how relevant is the third barrell compared with the second

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

Sometimes the phrase works, sometimes it doesn't. There are situations where a subsequent action gives us no new information, in which case if we call once we should be prepared to call twice. However there are definitely situations where a second action narrows his hand range alot, in which case it's a whole new ball game.

I agree that it's used way too often and many times incorrectly.

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

blanket statements suck (except that one)

/thread

Re: \"If you call the turn you have to call river\" theory Q
 

As stated previously, I think that this statement is often incorrect in SSNL games where 3-betting frequencies are much lower than double barreling frequencies. However, if I know I'm playing against a trickier aggro opponent, I don't mind 'calling the turn and calling the river'. Though obviously board texture/etc play heavily into this decision.