"Donking" into someone

[psuasskicker]

Why do people use this term to refer to a bet? So far I've seen it in multiple threads and it implies a stupid bet when in almost every case I've seen it used it's created confusion in the hand.

I seriously can't stand this term the way I see it used. If someone does something like cold calls a reraise oop on a board of A73 two tone and calls a turn bet and raise and then bets out on the river when whatever draws don't come in, then I can see it being used. That looks to me like a stupid bluff.

But when someone opens from CO, calls a 3-bet, bets and calls a raise on a ragged flop, and then bets the turn, the term "donking into you on the turn" doesn't seem very applicable.

- C -

[Harv72b]

A true "donk bet" occurs when a player check/calls on one street, and then leads after a blank hits on the next one. For example, check/calling a HU flop with a board of A76 rainbow, and then betting into his opponent when a 2 hits on the turn.

The situation you described, where a player bet/calls the flop and then leads the turn, is a stop & go.

Both moves can be effective when used in the right situation--you might donkbet the turn in anticipation of 3-betting an aggressive opponent, where you believe he'd just call down if you check/raised. The stop & go is often used when you have a good but not great hand and believe your opponent might have raised the prior street on a semibluff.

[psuasskicker]

Okay, so understanding now what the more formal definition is, this is a term that's being grossly misused...

Thanks for the clarification.

- C -

[Abbaddabba]

It's for when you're closing action (or close to it) on a previous street, and rather than raising, you call. And then, when a card that seems incredibly unlikely to have helped anyone falls, you bet out.

There are instances where it's applicable. Namely if you think someone is raising for a free card, and you wait to see if obvious draws dont come in, and then bet. In that case, your hand has improved - just not in the conventional sense. It's improved because a good portion of the potential hands that your opponent could have did not.


If it comes J73 rainbow, you bet, he raises in position and the turn comes an offsuit 2 - why would you bet out again? Anyone who raises the flop is going to bet the turn and possibly raise. If you didnt think you were good enough to 3bets on the flop, why would you open action for a stronger hand to make it 2 bets now? And if you did, why would you not check raise? If it DID improve you, then you would almost always want to checkraise since there is almost no chance that the villain will check behind.

[psuasskicker]

why would you bet out again? Anyone who raises the flop is going to bet the turn and possibly raise. ... if you did, why would you not check raise?

I largely agree with this but I will make this move all the time against an aggro opponent who I know will raise me on the turn cause now I can three bet him. I do that successfully all the time. Why's it called donking into someone? I don't care if it looks fishy, it's created a confusing situation, and I think it's dangerous to assume it's something representative of poor play.

- C --

[A_C_Slater]

[ QUOTE ]
why would you bet out again? Anyone who raises the flop is going to bet the turn and possibly raise. ... if you did, why would you not check raise?

I largely agree with this but I will make this move all the time against an aggro opponent who I know will raise me on the turn cause now I can three bet him. I do that successfully all the time. Why's it called donking into someone? I don't care if it looks fishy, it's created a confusing situation, and I think it's dangerous to assume it's something representative of poor play.

- C --

[/ QUOTE ]


It is indeed dangerous to assume that the donk bet in itelf is representative of poor play. But if you see the same person frequently cold calling raises and never folding his SB or open limping in late position and he does all this along with donk betting then you can probably assume he is not good. And when you finally do see him showdown something then it will usually be confirmed.

[Abbaddabba]

If you think he's so loose aggressive that he'll raise the turn with anything that he raises the flop, you're probably best off 3betting the flop.

There are so few circumstances that warrant those 'donk bets' on draw free boards that you'd probably be better off just never doing it.

[NateDog]

[ QUOTE ]
If you think he's so loose aggressive that he'll raise the turn with anything that he raises the flop, you're probably best off 3betting the flop.

There are so few circumstances that warrant those 'donk bets' on draw free boards that you'd probably be better off just never doing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

As Harv explained, donk betting the turn from a thinking player is often to block a free card play. Pretty standard defense to a semi-bluff. However, your opponent must be capable of using a semi-bluff/free card play in order for you to attempt to block it on a subsequent street. A stop-n-go can be used in quite the same fashion, if the raiser is capable of making such a play.

When a not-so-good/non thinking player donk bets a seemingly innocuous card, it's time to re-evaluate the strength of your hand and use the appropriate line.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
If you think he's so loose aggressive that he'll raise the turn with anything that he raises the flop, you're probably best off 3betting the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

To given an example, let's say you defend your big blind in a HU pot vs. a good TAG. You're holding some suited hand like 86 or something, and flop a gutshot. You check/call, knowing that your opponent will bet the flop 100% of the time vs. just the BB, and knowing that you may be able to steal the pot later if he doesn't have a made hand, or else check/fold the turn if you miss and/or it brings a scare card. Instead, you hit your gutshot on the turn, and feel that your opponent is extremely unlikely to put you on a made straight (let's say you held 86 and the flop was J47, turn 5). If he doesn't have a hand and you go for a check/raise, you run the risk of him checking through and folding to a river bet UI, or else of him bet/folding the turn. But if he is holding an overpair or TPTK or something, he may interpret your lead bet as a weak hand trying to see where it is, and raise, which allows you to 3-bet. On the other hand, if you check/raise the turn, it's very possible that he goes into calldown mode immediately with anything short of a set or AA.

Alternately, you may want to mix your play up in a scenario like this if you'd flopped a set of fours or sevens, or you may want to bet/3-bet if you'd turned a set of fives. Then again, you may want to use this line once in a blue moon with a weaker hand or on a bluff/semibluff, if you feel confident your opponent will fold anything less than a monster here. I would obviously not recommend doing that against 99.9% of your small stakes opponents.

[7stud]

Hey. Thanks for asking the question and thanks for the interesting replies on alternative strategies. Good reading. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
The stop & go is often used when you have a good but not great hand and believe your opponent might have raised the prior street on a semibluff.

[/ QUOTE ]
Can you give an example of a hand where that strategy might be employed? Would something like top pair on a flop with a straight and flush draw be one? If you bet out on the flop, and your opponent raises you, making you "stop" and call, and then the turn is a blank, should you "go" and bet out?

I guess I don't understand how you come to the realization that your opponent was semi-bluffing. If you believed that on the flop, shouldn't you have reraised? If you come to that realization on the turn, what is it that triggers that realization? Don't you have to act first?