Going for river sexy-time with the nut full house.

[SABR42]

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: 2+2 Forums)

CO ($28.50)
Button ($68)
SB ($209.65)
Hero ($100)
UTG ($110.85)
UTG+1 ($99.65)
MP1 ($65.75)
MP2 ($35.40)
MP3 ($90.55)

Preflop: Hero is BB with Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].
<font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, MP1 calls $1, <font color="#666666">1 fold</font>, MP3 calls $1, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, SB completes, Hero checks.

Flop: ($4) 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], Q[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(4 players)</font>
SB checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $3.25</font>, MP1 calls $3.25, MP3 folds, SB folds.

Turn: ($10.50) Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
<font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $7.5</font>, MP1 calls $7.50.

River: ($25.50) 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Hero checks

Betting the nuts can never be wrong, but is check-raising better here?

I think most of his range is some sort of draw (that missed), and I can't win money from those by betting.

If he has a Q, I don't think he can resist betting. He'll check behind with a jack unless he's retarded, but it's doubtful he would have called a bit bet with a jack anyway. Thoughts?

[BT2]

since there is only one queen left i doubt he has it so i bet.

[Fonkey123]

Bet. In my experience people don't usually bluff missed river draws. If he has a smaller house you can bet/3bet.

[SABR42]

[ QUOTE ]
In my experience people don't usually bluff missed river draws.

[/ QUOTE ]
But it's far less likely that he'll bluff-RAISE a missed draw. If a missed draw is what he has, checking is clearly better.

[ QUOTE ]
If he has a smaller house you can bet/3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
If he has a smaller house I'm check-pushing and the money goes in regardless, so that doesn't make a difference.

[Fonkey123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my experience people don't usually bluff missed river draws.

[/ QUOTE ]
But it's far less likely that he'll bluff-RAISE a missed draw. If a missed draw is what he has, checking is clearly better.

[ QUOTE ]
If he has a smaller house you can bet/3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]
If he has a smaller house I'm check-pushing and the money goes in regardless, so that doesn't make a difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't realize he was so short. Just bet, and get paid off by a medium strength hand that he would check behind. Also to note they bluff missed draws 5% of the time, and raise bluff draws 1% (ballpark numbers, but they're probably close.) The equity you give up there is negligible in importance to the number of hands that he'll call with that otherwise would have been checked.

[SABR42]

[ QUOTE ]
Also to note they bluff missed draws 5% of the time, and raise bluff draws 1% (ballpark numbers, but they're probably close.)

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree there. I think they bluff much more than 5%, and they bluff-raise close to never after I lead at the pot 3 times.

[Fonkey123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also to note they bluff missed draws 5% of the time, and raise bluff draws 1% (ballpark numbers, but they're probably close.)

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree there. I think they bluff much more than 5%, and they bluff-raise close to never after I lead at the pot 3 times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay zomg fine. Let's say he calls with medium strength hands 33% of the time, and bluffs missed draws 20% of the time (if you believe this is higher than 1 in 5 wowowowo.) Just based on these numbers DUCY betting is better?

*assuming he checks behind medium strength hands less than 13% of the time which I presume is true since people make thin value bets even less than bluffing missed draws*

[emmapeel9]

I'm going to bet about the size of the pot on the river as I am worried that a hand like QT might check behind. But if Villain is of a type that would find this kind of hand hard to fold then pushing might be better.

EP

[futuredoc85]

i like it better w/ JJ than QJ here. i think its kind of meh either way but given how the hand played out there arent many hands he can value-bet here so his betting range is mostly missed draws. i probably bet here b/c 1) if he bets a weak made hand he may bet very small and fold to a push, betting will extract more from marginal hands. and 2) i just think hes calling with a much wider range than hes betting here.

edit: in addition to there not being many hands he can v-bet here, there are also a lot of hands he can check behind that he could call a bet with.

[Fonkey123]

[ QUOTE ]
His calling range&gt; ENTIRE betting range+ added equity from bet+calling range

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. Which is what I've been saying the entire thread.