Am I supposed to bet this?

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]

wtf is he supposed to bluff with

[/ QUOTE ]

[CardSharpCook]

People will often "bluff" with bottom pair in this situation. Don't ask me why they do it, but they do.

[noles321]

I guess I play this a little different. I like a check call in this situation almost every draw was completed by the river card, FD str8 draw, almost every suited connector is now a str8 or 2 pair. Check calling allows him to bet one pair and takes away the river raise bluff which he may be capable of on this board. Assuming, he isn't a complete retard what hands can we beat. No ace almost no suited connector (56, 67, 89) and a flush. What do we beat (orphaned 9) (orphaned 5) (23) (34) and a bluff. Seems to me that checking to induce a one bet bluff is the line, especially if he will fold the orphaned 5 or 9. JMO

[DeathDonkey]

Noles IMO your analysis would make me think check/fold is better than check/call (ie you win when it goes check/check but you are so far behind his betting range that you aren't getting a good enough price to call). Personally I would bet/fold here against most people because I call down so often in so many spots I have no fear of getting bluff raised. That's an image thing might be the same for CSC and might not be.

-DeathDonkey

[noles321]

DeathDonkey,
I understand where you are coming from but I think that people auto bluff any checked river that you get so many bluffs that a check call is still more valuable than a check fold, bet fold line. I don't really like the bet fold line that costs me a bet and I don't get a showdown with a hand that still has value. So for the same 1 bet I see the showdown and feel like I induce enough auto bluffs to make it a plausible line. That was my thinking.

[Milo]

I like the check-call here.

Any draw has likely come in, and will raise, and I would not want to call (but would) a raise. There are lots of non-ace hands that will bet this river assuming his open-raise in the SB was total BS. There are even some cheesy draws that include one pair that will bet this every time.

Caveat: I play CP's 8/16 where "value-calling" is profitable as many CP 8/16 lagtards will bet any river when checked to. YMMV.

[Heisenb3rg]

I am a strong advocate of bet/folding here.

All the hands in a non insane players range here have showdown value.
Most people are not sophisticated enough to bluff raise rivers with a showdownable hand.
On the rare occasion he decides to, it's still a very small fraction of his raising range, since he has so many hands your behind to that can legitamitly raise this river.

There are many worse hands in his range that you claim will call a river bet.
Most players would check those hands if checked to (some % bet them).

Weighing all those factors leads to a bet/fold unless you have a clear read.
If youve seen him bluff showdownable hands before or make retardedly thin "value bets" then I would check/call.

[mcpst17]

I agree with Heisenb3rg. The majority of players are going to call you down with many hands they would not bet on the river.

I think you also have to consider how the villian views your play in the blinds (if he thinks at all). How agressive have you been in the blinds (what % are you raising when folded to you in the SB)? What hands has the BB defending with when he calls down?

I know you mentioned he would call with 60% non-aces and without a better read I can't put the villan on a hand that he would not raise flop or turn with where the bet/fold line is not optimal.