40/80 Trips meets the ugly river

[rafiki]

Is it juicy like L.A. ? I've never played more West then Vegas (east coast guy here), but everyone tells me to forget Vegas and play in California. I would love to have time to play both. Lord knows I need the vacation.

[Howard Beale]

The way villain played this hand his river bet looks like it's either a bluff (in which case I'd say he doesn't think much of you) or he flopped full and let you hang yourself. I lean towards c/c over b/c (and I certainly wouldn't b/f) because the check can easily induce a bluff w/ that board.

What do we do on the river when we are raised by a poor player instead of the villain as described?

[paulcouto]

i wouldnt say that the 40/80 is juicy at all. its a pretty standard game with a lot of regulars. friday nights and the weekends usually stir up some kind of crowd but thats standard any where u go.

the juciest game in the bay area is the 8/16 with half kill at garden city. thats usually a very very good game.

[AragornX151]

I like c/c in this spot. Other than a weaker 6 or big pair, I don't see a hand villain calls your bet with that you can beat, and would those hands really not raise at any point post-flop? Unless he's calling with air the whole time, it sure feels like you're beaten on that river a decent amount of the time...and when you're not, I think you have a much better chance of getting an extra bet when ahead by snapping off a bluff than betting for value.

[private joker]

I bet this river all day long because it's a blind steal hand and TAGs call down with AK-high a lot, and they're right to do so on this raggedy board. I hate the raise but I pay it off. This hand is totally standard.

[vmacosta]

nh.
Checking is terrible here, imo. You can't usually get him to bluff with anything because when you check you are saying you want a cheap SD. Now I agree he will vb many paired hands for you if you check, but not nearly the whole set of hands that was willing to put in a river bet. A bluff-raise is pretty rare as well, but if you can add in a worse 6 or AA then I would pay off the raise.

[brettbrettr]

[ QUOTE ]
I bet this river all day long because it's a blind steal hand and TAGs call down with AK-high a lot, and they're right to do so on this raggedy board. I hate the raise but I pay it off. This hand is totally standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. And tags call down with way less than AK. Just the A is fine, usu.

[AragornX151]

[ QUOTE ]
TAGs call down with AK-high a lot, and they're right to do so on this raggedy board.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this player is like that, by all means fire again. However, AK isn't overly likely for him given that he raised on the button and could have a much wider range. I mean, of course he could have it, but I think he could have tons of hands in this spot. Does he call down here with AJ? KQ? Probably not. That means he's more likely to have a draw on the flop or a pair than just overcards that he'll pay off with.

However...I'm probably underestimating the fact that lots of TAG's call down the whole way with, say, 77 or 88 here, instead of putting in a raise. With that in mind, I like betting a lot more. If you do bet, though: against a TAG who plays as you guys described (ie the reason you love betting here), I think it's bet/fold over bet/call this river, because he'll continue to call with 77/88/even AA for sure [if he was planning to raise river, now he'll slow down 99% of the time with it]. Bluff raises from TAG's on the river are so rare that IMO, the odds don't justify a call. Kinda similar to the hand that Shawn just posted where he folded trips to a river raise, actually.

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
Kinda similar to the hand that Shawn just posted where he folded trips to a river raise, actually.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's not at all similar because the flop went 3 bets, there was a limper making it a 3-handed pot, and the board was much scarier with QJJ9 on it, making all kinds of straights and boats and whatnot. QQ was a big part of Shawn's villain's range and his fold was fine.

In this hand, the river bet is mandatory and calling the raise is fine because a lot of TAGs wait to raise the river with big pairs, knowing they can fold to a 3-bet and stringing along a worse hand the whole time. Also, if they think you're the type to bet/fold rivers, there's some fold equity too. Remember the thread we just had where people would say stuff like "if only I raised every time I called with K-high," etc.? That's a TAG thinking.

[AragornX151]

I suppose so. If the TAG will not open moderately widely on the button in this spot (I.E. is a ROCK), then yes, the board is *less scary*. Of course, if he's like that, 3-betting pre is debatable, so I'm assuming that wasn't quite OP's read. Are you implying that

And your analysis of this guy being willing to raise/fold the river with AA/etc seems kinda dubious to me. Maybe it happens a lot in the Commerce, but I haven't seen much of it in NYC clubs, AC, or Foxwoods...if someone raises the river, they almost ALWAYS make a crying call...and the type of people who WOULD fold there rarely call down with AJ or AQ (they'd put in a raise themselves if they think the opposition is weak, not play it so passively). I'm just not seeing everything add up here that bet/call is the best river line. Remember, while the board isn't *scary* in that it missed big cards, every conceivable draw got there by the river. Flush, 78, a 3 (33).

I do agree that betting out is good against a TAG because he will call you with most pairs there, but unless he's a VERY creative TAG, I think it's unlikely he raises you with something you're beating. From my experience, anyway. If this guy happens to fit that mold, then bet/call is fine.