aces rivers set but massively connected board.

[kazana]

UTG's preflop play looks staggeringly like a small to medium pocket pair.
This makes this a rather easy call.
A raise actually doesn't sound too bad, either, because there's a good chance he's going to call with a lower set. You didn't bet the turn which indicates that you don't have a straight/flush.
Obv this depends on whether villain is an observing type or not.

[hra146]

That A doesnt change anything. Could have been a K as well. You only beat a bluff. Basta.

edit: not quite right, sorry... He may assume since you raised pf the straight or flush isnt really your range and valuebet his set.

I call.

[the machine]

[ QUOTE ]
That A doesnt change anything. Could have been a K as well. You only beat a bluff. Basta.



[/ QUOTE ]

no need for the edit. IMO this is exactly correct. after the hand that is how i felt about the hand.

i did juts call his river bet. he had J10.

IMO this ace changes nothing. this is one coordinated board. does anyone think hes going to valuebet 2 pair/set in this spot. no hes not. he could only do this is he had me exactly on AJ+, (now im going to go on an assumption streak here and think thats hes a good knowledgeable player) but he must know with a hand like AJ there is no way i could call a river bet given 4 straight and 3 flush out there. even the newest of n00b s would fold AJ there. so he cant be VBing 2 pair and the likes, another set meh maybe but for the same reasons as well. with those 2 hands he has showdown value. he wouldnt be making a small VB with either of them. it is very clear at this point that my hand is no good. the ace really hasnt changed nothing to my hand in relation to the board.

do i have it in me to fold top set getting 5:1, hell no and i think most people would advocate a fold here a higher stakes games. thats why i found the hand interesting, and so obvious as well.

[munkey]

I'm defintely calling the river, if we raise villan can see the scary board and will only call with str8/flush/set -i.e mainly hands that beat us - if at all.

[ QUOTE ]

do i have it in me to fold top set getting 5:1, hell no and i think most people would advocate a fold here a higher stakes games. thats why i found the hand interesting, and so obvious as well.


[/ QUOTE ]


Actually I think @ higher -stakes one of the well dwellers - jkrantx [may be I can;t remeber] said they're more willing to bluff flushy-str8 boards.

[kazana]

With the amount of leveling going on at higher stakes, I'd assume that many players would call there under many circumstances, too.

[ticks]

[ QUOTE ]
do i have it in me to fold top set getting 5:1, hell no and i think most people would advocate a fold here a higher stakes games. thats why i found the hand interesting, and so obvious as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is the other way around.

I don't know much about high stakes, but I do know they are much more aggressive than micro. I'd be more inclined to look for a fold here against a nitty regular at 50nl than a lagtard playing high stakes.

This idea of mega stakes playas making huge laydowns has been ridiculed before in the high stakes forum.

FWIW I'd never fold in this spot.

[Grunch]

Most people seem to be debating whether this is a call or a raise on the river. In my opinion, that's the wrong debate. The debate for me is call or fold.

In truth I call here usually. The Ace changed the value of Hero's hand only very slightly. The turn 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] changed it much more by completing virtually everything, even though it gave us a redraw. On the river we pulled ahead of two pair hands and sets, but those hands aren't very likely here.

Think about the opponent's hand based on his preflop action. Things like suited aces, offsuit weak broadway hands (AT, QJ), mid-small pairs and suited connectors. Everything completely missed the flop except for the suited connectors which hits like a ton of bricks, and the pair which if it sets up will be getting aggro on that very scary flop. A set is unlikely here.

SCs could also have made two pair here, which may not be as aggor on the flop & try to see a cheap showdown.

So while these hands (set, 2-pr) are unlikely enough to not be a reason to raise the river, given the size of the river bet the question now becomes is it likely enough to call? It might be just barely likley enough. Probably not though, so truly we should probably fold. In reality I call here however and swear at the computer "why couldn't he bet more so I could fold, damn him."

[kazana]

[ QUOTE ]
Most people seem to be debating whether this is a call or a raise on the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that was just me. Most people were in call/fold mode, or maybe my reading comprehension is just off today. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
A set is unlikely here.

[/ QUOTE ]
I disagree with this part.

This is why:
[ QUOTE ]
UTG calls $0.50, ..., Hero raises to $3.50, ..., UTG calls $3

[/ QUOTE ]

Whit no reads, this looks to me more like a small to medium pocketpair than a suited connector. This time, I've clearly been wrong. Not trying to be results oriented, but should I always assume SCs are more likely than pocketpairs?

And I can see a set playing it exactly this way on the river trying to get an Ace to call. Furthermore, if the player is thinking, I can also see him calling a raise with a lower set here.
Any thoughts on that, Grunch?

[Grunch]

I wouldn't suggest that in general you assume SCs are more likely that PPs. Not at all. You have to consider each situation on a case-by-case basis.

In this particular case I think sets are less likely than SCs because a set will be very afraid of that board. Just like you might be if you had 8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. A SC hand however, even one still on the come, isn't afraid at all. They are licking thier chops, waiting to make the kill. A flopped set, being very afraid, is going to try to push a draw off the pot by raising. He's not usually going to be this passive.

[kazana]

Thanks for the explanation. Alright, I agree.
I've just seen so many bad slowplays (in similar flop situations) recently, that I've had a stronger assumption of a set being out there. Although the worse set slowplayers then tend to go berserk on the worst possible turn card for them. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]