$2/$4 PLO: Big draw hits non-nuts on river.

[luckyjimm]

No-one thinks villain calls the turn with a backdoor flush draw?

I hate betting that river.

[cmyr]

villian bet, not called the turn. A set is what I think he has most of the time, here.

[luckyjimm]

My bad. But a player out of position can bet a developing flush draw on the turn like that. It means when the backdoor flush gets there, there's a nice big pot and it's harder to put them on it. And if it doesn't get there, given a blank river he can often still take down the pot by being first to bet out. That's the flipside of playing a pot heads-up out of position - when you're betting a drawing hand and they're calling with one, when you both miss you can often take it down on the river by being first to act.

[ QUOTE ]
villian bet, not called the turn. A set is what I think he has most of the time, here.

[/ QUOTE ]

[BobAllinSki]

Reraise the flop, get it all in with 20 outs and gambool, failing that when you pick up top pair on the turn to dominate other draws and still be a coin toss against sets then push it in, the T is really a safe card for villain and your betting represents top set waiting for a safe turn, if he has top set he'll play with you, but middle & bottom set & 2 pair may forced to fold but weaker draws you dominate may call if they feel they have a good price against a set. Worse case your a coin toss.

On the river you hit a weak hand, very little better than you is folding as the flush is backdoor and very little worse is calling, its to good to bluff and not good enough to value bet, I'd check.

[Bartholow]

Villain thought for a long time and folded.

I still think I like my river bet, but I'm having a hard time describing why. Maybe that's a bad sign [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]. I THINK this situation is analogous to 7 card stud when you have two small pair on the river, out of position, vs. a probable big pair. If you check, the big pair can check behind if it didn't improve and bet if it did, and you'll generally have enough of a hand to be forced to call. But if you bet out, you'll get called by both 1 pair and two pair hands. So either way you lose a bet to the two pair, but at least you gain a bet from the one pair sometimes. Of course in big-bet you're opening yourself up to a big raise, but since effective stacks were smaller than the pot size that became a non-issue, was my thinking. So the situations are similar in that I felt like I had enough hand that I'd have to call if he bet, and he'd mostly only bet if he had me beat, but he might call with some worse hands.

Thoughts on this?

[CrushinFelt]

Ehhhhh... I have a thought.

"He'd mostly only bet if he had me beat, but he might call with some worse hands"

You think this is true for a bet putting him all in? How much did he have behind about $350 and the pot is 500? I guess the shove on the end almost is a value bet. I think with all the draws that got there on the river he may be more inclined to call a $150 bet with a set or top two.

[piiop]

Your river bet is bad.

He calls any hands that are beating you and folds all hands that you're beating.

You should check the river and consider calling or folding if he bets.

Your only other option is to bet small on the river hoping he makes a bad call with a set, but that river card completed so many draws it's unlikely for him to even call that.