A river problem

[Octopus]

Here is a river problem which I misplayed. I hate sucking at this game. (Actually, every street post-flop is at least a little questionable.)

1/2 9 handed. It is folded to MP who raises. HJ cold calls. I 3-bet in the SB with QQ. MP caps and we call. Three to the flop for 12SB or so.

Flop is Q53r. MP is 17/8/1.4. He has quality. HJ is 64/0/0.3. He likes to call. Never-the-less, I decide to wait for the turn and check/call. (Possibly a mistake, I am still mulling it over. In any case, this is not the main decision for this post.) Three to the turn for 8BB.

Turn is a ten, suited with the five. I check again. (But I think I like donking here.) MP bets again and this time HJ folds. Pity. I raise it and he calls. Two to the river for 12BB.

River is a non-flush ace. Bet or check/raise? (As a side note: if he raises in either case, do you fire again?)

[davelin]

Given the way you played this...I would have to question your sanity if you checked this river.

[tiltaholic]

"waiting for the turn" in this situation would be be leading the flop and only calling the raise in order to checkraise the turn. as played i think you need to bet the river since he's probably checking a lot of hands here and paying off with them too.

[jrz1972]

Definitely bet the river.

I would have check-raised the flop so as to tie HJ to the hand, hopefully. A good alternative is to lead the flop and go from there. Slowplaying against a preflop capper and a fish who's along for the ride is asinine.

[NIX]

Bet the river. I don't know how many hands MP will bet that you're ahead of except maybe AK.

On the flop though, I'd at least raise it there, to see if I can get into a war with MP with HJ coming along for the ride.

[Octopus]

Some assumptions:

1. He has JJ+, AQ+. I will count the probability of AQ fully, though I think it is somewhat less likely that the others.

2. KK, JJ will check behind on the river, but will call a bet some unknown percentage of the time. This percentage will be our main variable.

3. AK, AQ will bet if checked to, but will not raise if bet to. (We will consider AQ raising at the end.) They will also call a c/r.

4. AA will, obviously, not stop.

5. If he raises at any point, we stop.

So, if we check, we win nothing 12/30 of the time, and 2 bets 15/30 of the time. We will lose 3 bets 3/30 of the time. For a grand total of : 21/30 BB.

If we bet, we win ?? 12/30 of the time, 1 bet 15/30 of the time and we lose 2 bets 3/30 of the time. For a grand total of somewhere between 9/30 BB (if KK/JJ never call) and 21/30 BB (if they always do). If AQ will sometimes raise a bet, then we get an extra bet there.


So, in order for betting to be better than checking, we need KK and JJ to call most of the time AND AQ to raise sometimes, or we need his range to be larger than I guessed, and for those hands to pay off. (Will a 17/8 cap AJs with bad relative position pre-flop?) Otherwise, checking is better.

In any case, I do not think checking is a sign of insanity. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[death_blooms]

Seeing as this hand was capped preflop, is it wrong to bet out on the flop to hope for a check raise to get more bets in the pot?

[sarsen]

I think it's an easy c/r on the flop. I bet/call the river.

[tiltaholic]

[ QUOTE ]
Some assumptions:

1. He has JJ+, AQ+. I will count the probability of AQ fully, though I think it is somewhat less likely that the others.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really think you can almost completely remove AQ. At best, given his stats, he could be capping AQs after a 3-bet from the blinds. That would be exactly one combo of AQ since 3 are known.
[ QUOTE ]

2. KK, JJ will check behind on the river, but will call a bet some unknown percentage of the time. This percentage will be our main variable.

3. AK, AQ will bet if checked to, but will not raise if bet to. (We will consider AQ raising at the end.) They will also call a c/r.

[/ QUOTE ]

He's pretty passive for being tightish preflop. As I said earlier, he rarely has AQ and imho I doubt he's betting AK since your turn checkraise looks to an tight passive player like a set or at least 2 pair.

If you had noticed him valuebetting hands on the river, i could see checking to induce a bet since he is unlikely to fold to a checkraise and it would really piss him off. However, I think this type of tight passive player is much more likely to call 1 bet on the river than to muster up the courage to value bet his KK or AK.

also, if you're going to suppose he can have AQ, then I think he might also have TT just as much, and I think betting the river is better then too.

[Octopus]

[ QUOTE ]
also, if you're going to suppose he can have AQ, then I think he might also have TT just as much, and I think betting the river is better then too.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he has TT, he is betting when checked to. Will he raise if bet to? I do not know. (Also, would he not 3-bet the turn?)

The real question is how often will he value bet AK (or AQ if he has it) versus how often will he make a crying call with JJ (and KK, though that is a pretty certain call). You may be completely right: betting is better. But it is closer than you all are implying.



In fact, I did bet and got raised. Anyone for a 3-bet? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]