Beginner Limit Hold'em Poker Forums

Villain is an unknown at this point, no reads other than the fact his stats appear Lag/Taggy.

I'm almost positive I have the best hand on the river. Do you think I make more by betting and hoping he makes some type of hero call or by checking and hoping he turns a hand like Ace Hi into a bluff? (obviously I'm C/R'ing if I check)

Also, if we assume villain is now a known solid regular, does our play change at all?

Poker Stars $2/$4 Limit Hold'em - 6 players - View hand 1834794
DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

Pre Flop: (1.5 SB) Hero is UTG with K A
Hero raises, 2 folds, BTN 3-bets, 2 folds, Hero calls

Flop: (7.5 SB) Q 2 2 (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets, Hero calls

Turn: (4.75 BB) 6 (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN checks

River: (4.75 BB) K (2 players)
Hero

They can't call with Ace high if you don't bet

But seriously, when he xb the turn, I really don't think he has a value hand like a pp, or Qx. So I'm guessing he's trying to induce on the river. If that's the case, then he's probably not betting Ace high for value.

Against an Unknown I would just bet the river after the turn was checked through.
Against a known solid reg I think it depends on how he views you. I think I would still bet against a solid reg.

I think I'd bet only because I can't imagine too many value-oriented hands he'd check back the turn with. He really can't have many Ace high hands here since you raised UTG, but since he checked the turn, hands like 66, 77, 88 also seem out of the question. I'd rather 1-2 bets go in than 2-3, just in case he played QQ or 66 in a very weird/bad fashion, so I'd bet-call.

Rob

No one has mentioned anything about inducing bluffs from villain on the river if check. Honestly, I think this is the only good reason to check. Any "value hand" villain checked on the turn seems very unlikely to value bet this river after we check.

Is it just that no one ever bluffs in this spot? Its obviously a very good card for his range (as well as mine.)

No one has mentioned anything about inducing bluffs from villain on the river if check. Honestly, I think this is the only good reason to check. Any "value hand" villain checked on the turn seems very unlikely to value bet this river after we check.

Is it just that no one ever bluffs in this spot? Its obviously a very good card for his range (as well as mine.)

Yeah I mean what's he supposed to 3! you with that is 1) worse than you're hand and 2) now willing to bluff? Does he really have JTs or whatever more often than...

It seems like the majority of hands that 3!'d you pre are either value (Qx, Kx, or pp's--the Qx and pp's being unlikely given the turn xb) or worse showdown hands (Ax high) that aren't betting the river (but will call).

I think I'd bet only because I can't imagine too many value-oriented hands he'd check back the turn with. He really can't have many Ace high hands here since you raised UTGbut since he checked the turn, hands like 66, 77, 88 also seem out of the question. I'd rather 1-2 bets go in than 2-3, just in case he played QQ or 66 in a very weird/bad fashion, so I'd bet-call.

Rob

Huh?

Huh?

I think this is just because people aren't 3betting every Ax combo button vs utg because of positional dynamics?

I think this is just because people aren't 3betting every Ax combo button vs utg because of positional dynamics?

Yep - we raised UTG, what Ace high hands do you expect him to have? I'd fold A8s and A9s to a standard UTG raise in 6max, probably start 3-betting at ATs/AJs, and possibly AJo as well. So there are a very limited # of combos of Ax that BTN can have here.

Rob

No one has mentioned anything about inducing bluffs from villain on the river if check. Honestly, I think this is the only good reason to check. Any "value hand" villain checked on the turn seems very unlikely to value bet this river after we check.

Is it just that no one ever bluffs in this spot? Its obviously a very good card for his range (as well as mine.)

It's mostly that not many people bluff in this spot and the fact that he 3-bet preflop and checked the turn eliminate a lot of bluffs from his range. I'd expect more 3-barrels from JTs if he's 3-betting that (not everyone is, for sure).

Rob

It's mostly that not many people bluff in this spot and the fact that he 3-bet preflop and checked the turn eliminate a lot of bluffs from his range. I'd expect more 3-barrels from JTs if he's 3-betting that (not everyone is, for sure).

Rob

In addition to this, beyond just thinking about what his range is here and what we expect him to do with his range, what does our range look like? I'd argue that our check-calling range is mostly showdown bound on a this board (different story if it's 822 or 922) when you combine it with the fact that we raised UTG. He shouldn't bluff very frequently but he should value bet thinly, since our hand looks an awful lot like Ax and some middling pocket pairs.

FWIW - I'd actually cap preflop vs. this sort of player rather than call OOP. I think you dissuade people from 3-betting you light more often by capping than you do by inducing bluffs and slowplaying - there's reasonable arguments on both sides to be had, though.

Rob

In addition to this, beyond just thinking about what his range is here and what we expect him to do with his range, what does our range look like? ...since our hand looks an awful lot like Ax and some middling pocket pairs.

I agree with this, I'm just not sure our range looks showdown bound. If he views us as a showdown-bound player type, obviously bluffing is bad, but if he thinks I (hero) am capable of folding a marginal hand like AJ/77, I feel like he has a lot of incentive to bluff, as this is most of our range at this point. To be clear, I would be hoping a hand like AT bluffed the river if I checked. I don't expect him to check back say Jhi very often on the turn.

FWIW, I think capping in this spot preflop is not good. I'll have a narrow capping range, villain is going to c-bet the flop 100% anyways, and villain has position. If villain is checking back too many turns, I feel a better adjustment is to fast play the flop more often. Also, I don't really mind when villain checks back this turn, I'm going to have a ton of hands in my range that want to see a cheap river anyways.

FWIW, I think capping in this spot preflop is not good. I'll have a narrow capping range, villain is going to c-bet the flop 100% anyways, and villain has position. If villain is checking back too many turns, I feel a better adjustment is to fast play the flop more often. Also, I don't really mind when villain checks back this turn, I'm going to have a ton of hands in my range that want to see a cheap river anyways.

I'm not worried about the specific spot (or worried about him checking back the turn), I'm just communicating that I'd like there to be a significant disincentive to allowing players to 3-bet me. I've found it more frustrating to play against players who cap a balanced range OOP than to play against players who will slowplay stronger hands preflop.

That's just one opinion, though, and like I said there are very reasonable arguments for both decisions - but I disagree strongly that "capping in this spot preflop is not good." My standard is to cap more often, causing a counter-adjustment, rather than call more often, because I would rather better players step out of the way preflop than have to adjust to me postflop. In position or in situations when the ranges are already much wider, I'd be less inclined to cap.

Our range is already strong, so we don't gain as much value from deception, and we believe our opponent to have tag/lag stats. I'm also not advocating capping with just the strongest portions of our range, but a wider/balanced range until I'm certain he's 3-betting me less. This is more a concern when this has happened multiple times, but should be noted.

Rob

I agree with this, I'm just not sure our range looks showdown bound. If he views us as a showdown-bound player type, obviously bluffing is bad, but if he thinks I (hero) am capable of folding a marginal hand like AJ/77, I feel like he has a lot of incentive to bluff, as this is most of our range at this point. To be clear, I would be hoping a hand like AT bluffed the river if I checked. I don't expect him to check back say Jhi very often on the turn.

FWIW, I think capping in this spot preflop is not good. I'll have a narrow capping range, villain is going to c-bet the flop 100% anyways, and villain has position. If villain is checking back too many turns, I feel a better adjustment is to fast play the flop more often. Also, I don't really mind when villain checks back this turn, I'm going to have a ton of hands in my range that want to see a cheap river anyways.

I understand what you're saying, but the parlay of the following:

1) He has AJ/AT and doesn't bet it on the turn, then bluffs it on the river.
2) He has some other bluffs that he checks back the turn with, but bluffs on the river.

When combined with the fact that you raised UTG means that it's not likely enough. You gain 1BB often enough vs the top of his protection range by betting, and many of these hands you're relying on him being good enough to turn into bluffs, which isn't going to happen often enough to justify checking rather than betting. If you knew more about his postflop tendencies (and conversely he knew more about you) we'd have a different discussion, but I think you're giving far too much credit to a player you know little about.

Rob