66 SB Defense/River bluff 10/20 Motor City

[JJH3984]

CO in this hand is my villain. He's somewhat TAGy for live and probably beats this game pretty well; however, he is a bit too passive in spots and tends not to be positionally aware.

He should see me as a good TAG who rarely gets out of line.

The hand:

One limp to villain who raises in CO. I call in the SB with 66. Loose passive BB calls. Limper calls.

Flop (four players, 8 SB): 7 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]9 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]2 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

I check. Limper checks. Villain bets. I raise. Everyone folds to villain who calls.

Turn (two players, 6 BB): 9 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

I bet. He calls.

river (two players, 8 BB) Q [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

I check. He bets. I raise???

Edited for a messed up board.

[Allday Everyday]

I struggle in spots like this preflop. Obviously easy call from BB, but I'm not sure if I'd call here from SB. If villain isn't positionally aware, he might not even be isolating light. Information on the limper and BB would make the decision easier. Calling doesn't seem too bad. Might be good. I'm not sure.

I think the flop check-raise and turn bet are good play. I think you could have check-called the river. Given that you played the hand rather unusually if you check-raise the river, I don't think he would lay down a better hand than you for one more bet at the end getting that price very often. I suppose if he is a winning player he would be capable of a laydown. But I think a lot of the time you take this down with a check-raise, you could take it down with a check-call for the same amount of profit.

[shane88888]

Is anyone opposed to a PF 3bet?

I like the flop c/r and the turn bet also.

Personally, I would have bet/folded the river.

I don't think I see the point in a river c/r. If he has you beat, you're losing two bets. If he fired with AJ high or something, then he's not calling a raise. I don't see a hand that beats us that we can fold, except for 88. I also can't see anyone folding a Q here, but I don't know the villain.

I guess you have to just call here since you're in this spot.

[BigBadBabar]

either bf or cc the river imo

i don't see what a cr accomplishes; he's not folding a better hand

[SeaEagle]

I think the value of your play depends on your motivation for making it. If you made this play because villain is taking stabs when people show weakness and you want to let him know that he can't always bet after your check, then it's fine.

On the other hand, if villian hasn't been bluffing at lots of rivers, which is what your read would have me believe then, as everyone is saying, this is FPS and will cost you a lot more than it makes you.

[Christian_Peters]

What was your reason to go for a river c/r, rather than just a straight-forward b/f?

I imagine it's because of your image, but I almost never expect even a solid tag to fold a better hand here - certainly less often than 22%** of the time.


**22% of the time being how often he must fold to break even with this play. You are risking 2BB to win 9BB, and you will typically only win this hand if he folds. 2/9 = 1:4.5 ~ 0.22. Note that he will have TT+,KQ,AQ more often than 22% of the time.

[Christian_Peters]

[ QUOTE ]
I struggle in spots like this preflop. Obviously easy call from BB, but I'm not sure if I'd call here from SB. If villain isn't positionally aware, he might not even be isolating light. Information on the limper and BB would make the decision easier. Calling doesn't seem too bad. Might be good. I'm not sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. Your intuition was right. This is a bad call PF. It's not really bad, but it's bad.

[ QUOTE ]

I think the flop check-raise and turn bet are good play. I think you could have check-called the river.

[/ QUOTE ]

c/c is only a little better than c/r. It's a bad play. Unless I'm missing something, this is a pretty standard b/f.

[Allday Everyday]

[ QUOTE ]
c/c is only a little better than c/r. It's a bad play. Unless I'm missing something, this is a pretty standard b/f.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I've reconsidered. I think b-f is better than c-c. Not sure I would call check-calling bad. But then I guess in a sense every correct decision is good, every incorrect one bad. I think it's difficult to know the correct move without knowing the villain. When we bet once again, the amount of hands villain will call with decreases. That is, his AK, etc doesn't look as good, and may fold. Checking can induce a bluff. But I think in this case bet-folding is better than check-calling, as it often is.

[StrictlyStrategy]

I don't get why a b/f is better than a check call?

I really don't see any reason to bet the river at all but I'm tired.

[Bob T.]

I think we need one or two more limpers to make this right in the SB.

[ QUOTE ]
however, he is a bit too passive in spots and tends not to be positionally aware.



[/ QUOTE ]

These are reasons not to get involved, instead of reasons to get involved. It makes it harder for us to capture bets on the back end, and it also makes it more likely that he has a big hand. Additionally, our relative position isn't good on this hand, so we are going to have to choose from plays that might kill our action and reduce our implied odds if and when we hit.

The flop and turn, I don't mind. I am a little nervous when a tight passive player sticks around.

On the river, I think check/call might be the best line against this player, because he probably checks a lot of hands that beat us. I don't like bet/fold, but that is probably me, just because I can't do the fold part very well. Against a passiveish opponent, I think the checkraise on the river is just chipspew.