Home / Community / Forum / Poker Education / Poker Education & Beginners Questions / Old Hand Analysis Section /

4NL 68 off, Bomb on the river!

 
Old
Default
4NL 68 off, Bomb on the river! - Wed Jun 29, 2011, 06:36 PM
(#1)
oriholic's Avatar
Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 751
BronzeStar
All right, so I'm playing 4NL and playing pretty LAGgy.

I'm in the SB with . Action folds to the tight cutoff who minraises to $.08. I 3-bet to $.21, because it's fun and gets folds here soooo often, plus it gives me the initiative and a super deceptive hand if I hit. The cutoff surprises me and min-4-bets. He has about $7 behind so I make the call for the implied odds, putting him on a super tight range here of AA, KK, AK and maybe QQ. The plan is to bust those big hands or get out.

Flop is and I check. Obviously I'm still way behind here. I might peel a card, but I'm mostly check/folding here. He checks behind.

Turn is . Obviously no help. I'm pretty sure he has at least two pair here, and I'm check/folding 100%. Again, he checks behind. Okay, obviously he's slowplaying. He can get value out of so many hands...why is he taking such a weak passive line?

River is . Hooray! I lead here since he's been so damn passive and always has something he can call me with. I bet the pot ($.72) to get value out of AK and unlikely QQ. Then he bombs it, making it $2.88, double the pot, and I go into the tank. He'll do this 100% of the time with AA and KK, and I assume most of the time with AK. He's far more likely to be holding AK in this spot than AA or KK, since there's only 3 ways he can have AA, 3 ways for KK, and 9 ways for AK. I know I might just call in his position with AK, but with top two he might think he has the best hand right? I have to call $2.16 to win a pot that will be $6.48 before rake ($6.16 after, that was throwing off my numbers). I have to win about 33% of the time for this call to break even before rake (40% after) and I figure he has AK here enough of the time. If he has AA or KK here 6 times, he only has to have AK 4 times for me to profit. After using up my time bank, I call. I figure he'll value raise AK here around half the time.

He hit his 2 outer on the river!! There were exactly two cards that could win him a big pot, and he got really lucky. Anything else and I check/fold.

So, does he have AK enough to hero call on the end? My read is that he's tight, not that he's good. I expect to see a lot of "raising because it's probably the best hand", without regards to what will call. A lot of bad tight players tend to raise the river when they think you're bluffing, when they really should just be calling with all that showdown value. Based on his slowplay throughout the hand I figured he probably wasn't very good and was likely to make those sorts of raises, thinking his AK was good (which it usually is--good for a call).
 
Old
Default
Wed Jun 29, 2011, 10:25 PM
(#2)
pokerstar671's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,206
Maybe he only has ace10 or ace jack just go all in
 
Old
Default
Thu Jun 30, 2011, 04:00 PM
(#3)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
(Note: when Ori states "he hit his 2 out-er on the river to beat me", he does NOT mean the Villian hit the river 8, per se. Ori is referenceing the fact that at ANY point in the hand a bet by the Villain results in Ori folding. Villain carried a slow play all the way to the point where Ori caught 1 of only 2 cards which would make him feel "safe" about putting chips in the pot.)
....

Point #1: If you have a skill advantage over an opponent, you WANT to be playing more pots against that opponent.

There is a lot of benefit in playing pots with weak holdings like 86o, but only if you have a soild skill advantage when you do so. As stated, your plan seems pretty solid: you know what you "need" to see to keep going, and your read tells you that if you get it, the money is deep enough (and your opponent is weak enough) to pay you handsomely for your risk. Nice thought process.

I would warn others who may see this as "right", Ori's play is CERTAINLY "non-standard".

The only things which justify it are the fact he "knows" where he is at when he raises, and he knows what must come for him to continue. He has a PLAN.

If you look at the hand posted by PSO STAFF in this forum, between Hellmuth, Negreanu, and Brunson, you'll see DN making a very similar type play, for very similar reasons, agaisnt Hellmuth. Ori's decision is probably not one DN makes very often, since Ori is out of position here, but then the Villain Ori is trying to take advantage of is not on the same sort of level as Phil Hellmuth nor Doyle Brunson (most likely not at least!). So if you find yourself making thse sorts of pot entries WITHOUT the same detailed thought processes Ori has shown here, then you are more likely to be leaking chips than taking advantage of opponents!

NEXT...

Point #2:
Flop comes, and Ori spikes 2nd pair. He checks (holding true to his intended "plan"), and the Villain checks behind.

Ori is definately on top of this situation still. He knew what he needed, but didn't get it, so he is now ready to give it up. The Villain does just about the WORST thing he can do in this spot if he has caught a good piece here: he gives Ori a free card.

Villain really needs to bet for value here behind Ori's check if he has ANYTHING, especially on any top pair. Not doing so allows "free" draws at those hearts, and also a wierd variety of 2nd pair/trips draws may hit off that freebie. The ONLY time you should be giving free cards is when:

A) The flop does not put a big "threat" of you being drawn out on.
This generally means a SET+, not a single pair hand.

B) You must strongly suspect that by betting, you will cause to fold hands which otherwise would have bet BEHIND a check by you.

Ori is out of position, so there is no way the Villain can "induce" a bet on this street by checking. Yes, he MIGHT induce a bet on the next street with his check, but then that requires a "big" hand, not very vulnerable to suck-outs; 1 pair hands really do not count as that on this flop.

C) The pot must not yet be "large".

The Villain min raised, and Ori took it to 21c, the Villain called. This put the pot at 42c + 4c for the BB. While this is not a HUGE pot, 11BB certainly isn't "tiny". This is a very nice sized pot for a single pair hand to feel happy about betting a little bit of value into, but if that doesn't work and Ori folds, he isn't going to be crying bitter tears over lost opportunities.

CONTINUING...

Point #3:
Same/same holds on the turn, only WORSE. Villain MUST get some value in now if he holds top pair with the Ace, and ESPECIALLY if he now holds top 2 pair.

The fact is, Ori raised oop (showing he "probably" has some value in his hand), and Villain is quickly running out of chances to leverage that fact. All he is doing by turn checking is giving Ori's possibly QQ/JJ/TT hand a chance to spike (IF Ori had raised those, and was palying passively due to the over card on board). If Villain's intent was to get those types of hands to "pay off" a flopped top/top by delaying the bet, then the purpose has been served. Just because the turn puts top 2 out there for Villain does NOT improve him enough to make the risk of free cards valid; a LOT of the same suck out cards are still going to rn down top 2 as readily as top/top, see?

Still, Villain checks...

NEXT:

Point #4:
Ori spikes trips, and now is "ahead" of any hand up thru top 2. unlike the Villain, Ori doesn't get "cute", he correctly leads. This is a very intelligent lead, because:

1) Villain might have been checking something like QQ/JJ.
Ori checking twice, plus the fact he raised oop, means these sorts of hands may NOT "believe" he holds an A/K/8. If those hands do not "believe", Ori gains value.

2) Villain is un-likely to bet WORSE now, on the river, if Ori does check.
Either Villain is slow-playing a set or something (and now boated), or he is probably not going to try a rash river bluff. checking does not give Ori ANY value here.

Villain now "wakes up" and jams...YUCK!

Point #5:
Actually, Ori is risking the loss of $2.16 for the chance of wiining a pot of $4.32, or exactly 2 to 1 odds. So Ori's "read" on how often he has to win to be profitable is spot on. but is it enough?

Well, to answer that, you gotta look at the hands Villian would slow play every street.

If he is a rampant slow player, the "tricky type" who tends to play for the ego boost of saying "a-HA! GOTCHA!", then AK as a slow play is going to be a lot more common.

If he isn't, one of the first things a newer player learns is the "value" of slow playing a flopped set; they often do it improperly, but a set IS the most "common" slow play hand. So the chances it is AK goes down a lot in most circumstances.

The thing about looking at card distribution factors as Ori did here (AK is made X ways, AA and KK are only made X ways), is that they are really only valid when the situation says there is a strong possibility that the Villain will play each hand TYPE (2 pr or a set/boat) the exact same way. This hand would have entailed the Villain to first slow play top/top, then slow play top 2 if he were on AK. Unless villain is the "tricky" type, this isn't really very common. It is MUCH more common to see a slow played set, so you must add weight to the set potnetial over and above the pure numbers distribution of AA/KK vs AK in your river decision.

So without over-riding info on Villain which says he will slow play at nearly EVERY chance, I am not so certain you had the right "price" here to call a large river bet. Thing is, this is really a "feel" call a lot of the time though, and there are others factors you "saw", but didn't put in here, which led you to a call. In an edge situation this close, it is VERY HARD to say you are "wrong", because it is so much aobut your "feel". The thing is though, I think you may have been better served looking at factors that might have led to a FOLD a bit harder.

...but that is really easy to sa now, hind sight IS 20/20!
 
Old
Default
Thu Jun 30, 2011, 05:43 PM
(#4)
!!!111Dan's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,290
I don't think the villain's line is good for value here, but I think he may be protecting himself should a flush hit. I have done this at times if I think the opponent will call down any bet. As JD said, the pot is already decent, not great, but decent.

If he's holding AA, which could be reasoned by the betting pre-flop, (villain puts in last bet) then he could easily play this hand the way it went. He can passively call with the best hand (or check/call) to make sure that he isn't drawn out on and then attempt to exploit maximum value on the river. I don't see him holding KK, as most tags are going to do the same thing he did pre...put in the last bet if they have AA, yet call a 3-bet pre to watch for an A to hit.
 
Old
Default
Mon Jul 04, 2011, 07:47 PM
(#5)
Horrible68's Avatar
Since: Jul 2011
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by !!!111Dan View Post
I don't think the villain's line is good for value here, but I think he may be protecting himself should a flush hit. I have done this at times if I think the opponent will call down any bet. As JD said, the pot is already decent, not great, but decent.
This confuses me. I thought you protected against draws by betting. How does checking protected against a future flush?
 
Old
Default
Mon Jul 04, 2011, 09:08 PM
(#6)
!!!111Dan's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,290
Protecting himself against losing a big pot is what I meant. As I continued, some times you know if you bet here to protect against the draw, the player will call you down no matter what, so you can keep the pot small, should the player complete his draw, and protect against losing a big pot by check/calling a medium strength hand.
 
Old
Default
Tue Jul 05, 2011, 02:19 AM
(#7)
JDean's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,145
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horrible68 View Post
This confuses me. I thought you protected against draws by betting. How does checking protected against a future flush?
By controlling the pot size with a marginal hand having mainly CALLING, not betting, value.

Example:

You've shown yourself to be a boarderline LAG/TAG player, with a 22/55 VPiP and raise %.

You open raise to 3 x BB in the cut off position, at a pretty normal table holding A9o.
Button, who is a pretty LAGgy player, prone to play a wide variety of drawing hands, flats.
SB folds.
BB, who is showing a pretty tight 15/60 VPiP/raise % Calls.

Flop comes 6h 9h Kd

BB checks to you.

Now...

In this spot, having flopped 2nd pair A kicker, you are not really sure where you are at versus either player.

If you lead bet, the LAG with position may well raise you either on a K, an ooe straight draw, or a flush draw. Your hand carries quite a bit of CALLING value versus his range, but leading and getting raised shrinks a lot of that value up. Also, by leading into the LAG, you are likely to get him to fold clean misses (gaining you no "value" for your bet), or get flat called by his "monster" hits like 78s or a set (which puts you in a "dangerous" spot ith more $ in). Basically, you are checking in hopes he attempts to semi-bluff his draws, NOT riaise them over your flop bet.

The BB can easily check a big K here to induce bluffs from either of the 2 aggressive players in the hand. Granted, that is a BIT of a "weak" play by him, since it potentially gives infinate pot odds on a pretty "wet" board, bt if he feels strongly you are likely to C-Bet a good portion of the time, he may well CHECK an AK/KQ for the chance to check/raise, and shut out any draws.

With both of those opponents, a flop CHECK will probably give you more info, much cheaper, than a flop bet. Consider...

Let's say LAG bets the flop behind 2 checks. Based on the size of his bet, and what we have seen of his bet patterns with certain hand types, we could either call to peel, or FOLD CHEAPLY if the BB calls or raises.

If the LAG checks the flop, and the BB does NOT bet a non-scare card turn (like a 2c or 3d), we could then feel pretty confident our hand is best and bet out for value. If it does come a scare card (like Jh, Th, or 5h), we can always elect to check/fold if the LAG bets, thus "losing" a pretty small pot.

See?

It is about controlling the size of the pot to avoid putting MORE chips in than we need too in order to gain the info we require to form our decision. If the flop had hit us HARDER, say even a top pair 9 on the flop with our A kicker, then we'd certainly be better off leading (usually for right around half pot), but with 2nd pair only we hae to be ready to release as cheaply as possible.

Last edited by JDean; Tue Jul 05, 2011 at 02:27 AM..
 
Old
Default
Tue Jul 05, 2011, 08:34 AM
(#8)
Horrible68's Avatar
Since: Jul 2011
Posts: 16
Thanks, both of you. I think I need to work this in to my own game. I guess I've become a bit of a "betting station".
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com