Warning micro micro: Gross turn and river

[corsakh]

ama > Twoplustwo obv, I'd listen [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Maunzekater]

No way i fold here. If he plays 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] or KK like this, nh sir.

I wouldn't be suprised to see AK, KQ or an awfully played AA (lol i have teh nutz!) here.

[ama0330]

The thing about folding this river is that for us to be behind he has to have called the flop with nothing, and hit runner runner. Its a bizarre hand and I think its close, but dont forget that we are in a limped pot also. I dont see a problem with folding here.

[well named]

[ QUOTE ]
The thing about folding this river is that for us to be behind he has to have called the flop with nothing

[/ QUOTE ]

It wouldn't shock me if he called the flop with like Ah3h, although obviously since Greg has 5h he can't have any other similar hand. I think it's not uncommon at this level for some players to consider calling based on the absolute size of the bet rather than pot odds. They will call 15c on the flop with bottom pair or a backdoor flush draw because "it's not too much and I could spike an ace or a draw on the turn, or he might just be bluffing and will give up".

Without a read other than "villain is passive" I don't think this is an easy decision either way. In this situation, a big factor for me would be whether I thought he had any particular read on me. If he's seen me take this kind of line with something like TPGK (although I would only take this line with TPGK based on a read), or if I've been caught bluffing the river recently or have otherwise been very aggro and I think he's getting annoyed, then it leans towards a call since he might view 2 pair as the nuts. It would have to be a strong read though and recent, not something that happened 50 hands ago. With no read, a fold is probably better.

It's a cliche that most villains at this level are only playing their cards, but my experience has been that a lot them do notice and react to aggressive play, although they usually do so in a pretty exploitable way, so it's helpful to pay attention to how people react to your image.

One other thing: one of the concepts at the end of NLHE:TAP is the idea that a big river bet or raise is usually a more immediate and reliable source of information than other things you know, so without a read to indicate otherwise, that raise really does scream that he has a flush, even though he had to play rather wackily to get to the river. Normally it's wrong to put a villain on a hand rather than a wider range, but in this case the strength of information coming from that river raise is strong enough you probably can define a very narrow range for it most of the time, even though you would never play the flop/turn this way with that range yourself.

This is rather long and rambly. Sorry about that.

[kylephilly]

I play it the same but I c/c the river

[Snafu'd]

[ QUOTE ]
I play it the same but I c/c the river

[/ QUOTE ]
You are leaving tons of value on the table if you check call this river. Two pair or a weird set of 3's are far more likely than a straight or a flush. Check the board out. The only possible flush that even makes sense is either Ah2h or Ah4h. That's two hands. Now compare that with the number of times this guy shows up w/ KT, KQ, K3, or 33 and tell me that you prefer checking this river over betting.

[OSUGreg1983]

[ QUOTE ]
The only possible flush that even makes sense is either Ah2h or Ah4h. That's two hands. Now compare that with the number of times this guy shows up w/ KT, KQ, K3, or 33 and tell me that you prefer checking this river over betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

2c/5c NL. Nothing makes sense, but I still managed to go on a 4 BI upswing playing only 2 tables through about 300 hands.

I can live with situations like this every once and awhile, but imo people dont overvalue 2 pair with a raise that large. If villain had made it $3-3.60 I snap call ($4.20 may seem like a small difference, but psychologically it makes a difference imo-but the counter argument here could be to call the $4.20 b/c in fact, nothing makes sense) I have to think to myself..why so much?

Only 15 seconds to make a decision.

FWIW I folded. Bring on the flames.

[Gelford]

Check call river instead and honestly I'd fold here as played

[well named]

I think the point about betting vs. checking still stands, but is a separate question.

Betting for value on the river is just fine and is probably better than checking given that there is no reason to expect a check to induce a bet with weaker hands from this villain, but he will probably call, and very rarely raise worse. I also think it's fine that you folded to his raise. Tough spot.

Edit: Gelford, could you explain your thoughts a bit more on why you think check/call is better than bet/fold here?

[OSUGreg1983]

[ QUOTE ]
I play it the same but I c/c the river

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually dont agree with c/c the river either. Leaves a lot of value to one pair and weak 2 paired hands, as these hands will usually check behind on the river...whereas they would call a 3/4-full size pot bet here.

After the many replies, I'm confident a b/f-b/c is appropriate.