River line - 2kPLO8

[I dunno]

[ QUOTE ]
I have my doubts that checking can induce a bluff here. You made a very strong move on the turn, and the pot is offering you four to one to call, so Villain would need strong evidence that a bluff would work here before putting it in with air.

If you plan to call any bet here, you're giving the negative freeroll, where villain is more likely to bet only the hands that have you beat, and check the likely losers. Given your turn rep, putting the last bit in has a small chance of knocking out a weak flush that is better than your weak flush. Granted, it's likely V will call with a slightly better flush, but it's still better than checking and watching the 7-high flush check and collect.

(Again, I don't play this rich; grain of salt.)

[/ QUOTE ]

People generally don't make it this high without being aggressive. He's probably not going to bluff here that often, but I'm sure every now and then he's shoving some whiffed hand. Being more aggressive means getting away with thinner value bets, and this is certainly a spot where he could with any flush. He's probably correct to bet the nut straight for value as well.

My first post was kind of scrambled, but I think it comes down to this. Villain is going call or bet with any flush. He also probably bets or calls with the nut straight. But if you check, you allow him to occasionally bluff into you, which happens more often than you will get looked up by a good two pair, which he's unlikely to have anyway.

[facialabuse]

its def a check-call, barring a ninja (pt) read on the partic. opp. being unusually nut-peddley (peddly?)

what about the flop though? if we're going to just call, are we sure about re-potting turn for 60% of our stack? it's a semi-blank, but villain could have just doubled his outs...we pretty much force ourselves to call anything on the end, since we're 5 to 1 (I do believe that now that we got here we have to call)
we can see if we improve on turn without filling up while exercising good pot control to the end...I agree that the stacks aren't big enough to make another smooth-call great but:
a) at such an aggressive limit you disguise your hand well
this is why with so little invested on flop I think folding>calling>raising
b) what do we think about smooth-call flop and FOLD turn as we haven't picked up much more to be happy about AND if he can call a re-pot here we're at best a 70/30 fav with 60% of our stack invested=mediocre spot (again villain's range important)

[I dunno]

[ QUOTE ]
but villain could have just doubled his outs

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF

[ QUOTE ]
we pretty much force ourselves to call anything on the end, since we're 5 to 1

[/ QUOTE ]

Which is one reason for raising

[ QUOTE ]
a) at such an aggressive limit you disguise your hand well
this is why with so little invested on flop I think folding>calling>raising
b) what do we think about smooth-call flop and FOLD turn as we haven't picked up much more to be happy about AND if he can call a re-pot here we're at best a 70/30 fav with 60% of our stack invested=mediocre spot (again villain's range important)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a situation where we are 60/40 on average. That's a pretty good ROI.

[franknagaijr]

[ QUOTE ]
People generally don't make it this high without being aggressive. He's probably not going to bluff here that often, but I'm sure every now and then he's shoving some whiffed hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand the concept. and I can see villain generally calling or betting any flush. However, the turn check-raise by hero might have represented NFD/NLD among other things, so there has to be some doubt in villain's mind if his flush is second best here.

Here's the math involved in 'value bet' versus 'bluff catcher':

If hero catches a bluff, he gains an extra 740, if hero convinces villain to lay down a better flush, he gains an extra 2727. What this means is that if villain bluffs 50% of the time, the expectation there is $370. To gain a similar expectation by betting into a better flush, villain only needs to lay down a better flush 13.5% of the time. (Hero's intention to call any river bet makes the EV comparison easy. )

The relevant question here is what percent of the time will villain have a better flush as compared to a bluffing hand that he will bet, and how often would villain bluff the straight compared with how often villain might lay down a middle flush.

Edit: If we assume V will call w/ a worse hand 20% of the time if H bets, but will bet a worse hand 70% of the time, that's a 50% EV increase by bluff-catching, but H only needs to push off a worse flush 13.5% of the time for pushing to be a break-even play.

[I dunno]

His hand looks very little like a flush draw, so I don't think villain ever folds it.

Betting would be better than folding if you had some kind of read that he's calling with the nut straight but won't bet it. But there's no way to know that without history. Just like you can't know he's going to fold 63 of clubs if you bet.

Not that it really matters, but he's not bluffing 50% of the time.

If he does<ul type="square">[*]He's terrible[*]Hero would probably know that[*]If he's that bad, then he certainly isn't going to fold a flush[/list]