WedgeRock
Royal Flush
Look at all the equity...
-
This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!
Getting close to the bubble with black 66. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ChaosRock
- Start date
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
Just as I was about to post. His smooth-call on the turn was a hail-mary play. Damn you Doug Flutie!
flipupchipup
Straight
Paulo, I refrained from chiming in during this post because I had a strong feeling this hand would play out this way. I agree with everything that happened up until the river bet. Now I'm not saying this just because the hand actually played out this way but I think a lot of times in poker, we are always looking to do "the right play" based on the board/hands/position/etc. but not necessarily "the right play" based on all of the situational information. I think there are other factors here in play that should be considered - the size of the tournament/payouts and being near the bubble, the level of play at the table, and the value of actually getting paid from that river bet. What actually is going to pay you off there on a 3rd street of betting? At a table with very good players, I don't see too many calling down with AQ but perhaps. So my value paying hands are essentially A/K, A/J or A/6? Any of which I think we see a check raise from on the flop or turn. A/4 is not check shoving the river (I'm assuming your opponent isn't a complete schmuck) So again, outside of those hands, if you fire off what are you really drawing value from? Is it worth it to fire off a small-ish bet with the risk of being check-shoved?
As played I really don't think you can make the river call. If he is bluffing in this spot (which is very uncommon) but if so, it's kudos to the bluffer. Again though, this analysis is based more on the tournament, environment, and current position near the bubble. In a different setting/tournament I'm most likely mimicking your actions to a T, just not in this exact spot.
OP
OP
All reasonable points, Josh. And I agree with many of those. The only thing we might have differences there is how wide Villain call the river bet. AQ+, A6, A3, A4 plus a random bluff catcher. But yeah, some of those 2-P might be raising the turn, I agree.
But yeah, the point that you and Dave make is the point that I've heard many times right afterI got back to the hotel. There's certainly merit to that, as there's a lot of merit to not folding a top 6 combo hand. That's why this hand has hunted me for a while. Definitely not because of the outcome, trust me, I busted from many tourneys before. It's more about the thought of the call or fold.
Even now after all this discussion I tend to favor a call a little more than a fold but I am not super, super confident that's the right play there. I think if I am a pro playing the tourney circuit, it is a call all day long. For me a recreational player, it might be a fold. Which is counter intuitive, right? There should be a "right" way regardless...
Mr Tree
Straight Flush
The results do nothing to change my mind that overall your basic approach to this hand was right from start to finish. I think there are more than a sufficient amount of times you stack a pile of chips at the end of making this river call to make it right. It’s a tournament, your job is to collect all the chips in the room.
OP
OP
Maybe the river decision boils down to this simple point:
How often does Villain check/shoves
, 
, 
, 
on the river? (although sometimes all those hands might be raising the turn and imo, the pure bluffs might lead the river instead of c/s more often).
How often does Villain check/shoves
, , , on the river? (although sometimes all those hands might be raising the turn and imo, the pure bluffs might lead the river instead of c/s more often).
If I'm the villain, never (and feel free to add that to your playbook on me, lol).Maybe the river decision boils down to this simple point:
How often does Villain check/shoves
Much more likely to shove-bluff, but not check-shove -- because hero is rarely folding imo.
OP
OP
I think this is possible, although I'm not sure how much more profitable that would be, meaning leading the river.
Hero's holding looks a lot like AK/AQ plus some
. If Villain leads, he'll get paid one bet most likely. If Villain check, I think AK/AQ (not sure about betting AQ, which might the tiebreaker) would bet, and Villain would shove folding Hero's hand. So also a one bet move. The advantage of checking is that you get some of Hero's buff to fire/fold. It's less likely Hero would shove over Villain's lead with . Would Hero call a lead from Villain with something like 
, a hand that would check back otherwise? Probably.Does Villain loose some value from a hand like
that would bet/call a shove and "might" just call the lead? Possible, although I am not sure.I think all in all, it's pretty close.
The biggest mistake I think Villain made was on the turn probably.
Sometimes.
You have to mix up your play.
Also (and more significantly) everything @ChaosRock just said.
Jimulacrum
Full House
A funny thing about this hand is that I would much rather have been out of position the whole way. It would be a pretty small difference on the flop and turn, but on the river, being first to act would allow you to check and expand Villain's shoving range to include a lot more bluffs. He might also just bet a fraction of the pot, allowing you to call and still have a stack left.
As played, I don't think you can check back the river with a set on such a relatively clean runout. No heart came and the OESD didn't fill. Villain had to specifically have the case hand
for him to be ahead and for his betting to make sense. (You could argue 
, I guess, but I think that's a big stretch for preflop, and AA/JJ didn't seem right given his line.)
Obviously his actual hand was way at the top of his range, but it was exactly one combo. There were many other hands he could have had.
As played, I don't think you can check back the river with a set on such a relatively clean runout. No heart came and the OESD didn't fill. Villain had to specifically have the case hand
for him to be ahead and for his betting to make sense. (You could argue , I guess, but I think that's a big stretch for preflop, and AA/JJ didn't seem right given his line.)Obviously his actual hand was way at the top of his range, but it was exactly one combo. There were many other hands he could have had.
But would that have affected the outcome? Multiple people who commented here had the goal of getting stacks in on this hand. If we’re so convinced we’re ahead that we’re not willing to check it down and collect 40bb, aren’t we raising a 15bb river bet?
WedgeRock
Royal Flush
The pure bluffs might take a swipe before the river, in addition to leading river...
If he leads river, or jams river, does that change your analysis?
OP
OP
Totally agree, Eric! And I wrote that somewhere... I think some his
might raise the turn.Yes, a lead bet or a shove might change some of my thoughts. I'm not sure it would change my decision, but it would change the way I look at Villain's range. I might, and I gotta think more about it, but I might just call the bet. I'm calling the lead shove as well but that wouldn't change anything.
Jimulacrum
Full House
I had a goal of getting stacks in, given how the action progressed. I'd play it somewhat differently out of position. The reason I'd go for a value-check on the river is that his line was very drawish on a draw-heavy board. I expect him to have a lot more busted draws than made hands in a spot like this.
I think I'd just flat a normal-sized river bet (1/2 pot, give or take). That bet can be a lot of things, including bluffs, thin value bets, and fat value bets. The trouble with check-raising is that his calling range is much narrower. All fat value bets are all calling, but the bluffs and thin value bets are pretty much all folding, so why raise?
I think it's been identified several times over this week, in multiple threads, that you are not this.
Well this is why I don't like to play stacks close to bubble. No matter if it is a 100$ or 10.000$ there will be donks and suckouts.
Did you play it correctly? If you wanted to play for stacks then yes.
If you wanted safe value and go into the money then I would have liked an overbet to scare away hands like this.
But we both know you are a great player and a better player than me so hopefully the river will be nicer to you next time
Did you play it correctly? If you wanted to play for stacks then yes.
If you wanted safe value and go into the money then I would have liked an overbet to scare away hands like this.
But we both know you are a great player and a better player than me so hopefully the river will be nicer to you next time
OP
OP
I think it's been identified several times over this week, in multiple threads, that you are not this.
I know you're joking, Craig, but here it goes anyways:
Those who have played with me know I'm a decent player at best. I have no illusions about being anything other than that. That doesn't mean however that I don't like talking about poker and throw my 2¢ out there. As one of my friends told me today: "you are one opinionated motherfucker!",
Last edited:
Jimulacrum
Full House
This approach is underrated by a lot of tournament players, IMO. Uncontested pots are often your best friends. Can't argue with 100% equity.
In the interest of beating this totally to death, I was thinking more about the check-shove vs donk decision by the villain on the river. My instinct was that it is a clear bet there, though others seem to see it both ways. My reasoning would be that you are losing value from a large number of hero top pairs that would call a smaller donk bet on the river but would check behind if checked to. When worked it out in more detail, it was closer than I thought -- only about 2BB better EV on a donk by my estimate. The C/R is more profitable on the sets, which are more likely to bet and then call the shove (unfortunately for hero). The donk is more profitable against the combos of pairs and 2 pairs, which are more likely to check back and more likely to fold to the shove when they do bet (for the 2 pairs). The thing I missed is that the check raise is more profitable against hero's flush draws -- donking small could still induce a bluff from hero, but the check is even more likely to lead to a bluff shove from hero.
However hero gets here with way more combos of top pair than any other holding, so squeeking value out of the top pairs and 2 pairs overwhelms stacking the 2nd best monsters.
However hero gets here with way more combos of top pair than any other holding, so squeeking value out of the top pairs and 2 pairs overwhelms stacking the 2nd best monsters.
I agree with that, but I think I take it too far, and don’t get paid off enough for my monsters.
OP
OP
Fantastic!!!! Thanks, man! Much appreciated...
I'm glad I wasn't that far off at first glance...
I really can't argue much with any of your assumptions there. My only question: Why do you have a 50% BC/Induce for Flush Draws under the Check Fold table? Shouldn't that be almost zero and the difference going to BF?
Mr Tree
Straight Flush
I thought I just said you are a motherfucker. Are you sure the opinionated was added in there?
Those who have played with me know I'm a decent player at best. I have no illusions about being anything other than that. That doesn't mean however that I don't like talking about poker and throw my 2¢ out there. As one of my friends told me today: "you are one opinionated motherfucker!",
OP
OP
I thought I just said you are a motherfucker. Are you sure the opinionated was added in there?
It wasn't you Tom, but yes, motherfucker has been a constant in our convos... The friend who told me that, told me with the best of intentions, just highlighting I'm not a "go with the wind" kinda guy, LOL!!!
Yeah all of this is subjective and so these were just first-pass assumptions. I guess my assumption was that if hero had a FD and villain checked, there'd be a high chance of him bombing the river to fold out the large amount of medium value that villain would have in his range. I just put it under the same column as bet-call since it's the same net effect - hero is committing his entire stack.
OP
OP
Gotcha! (y) :thumbsup:
Mr Tree
Straight Flush
WedgeRock
Royal Flush
This should be my signature...
Anthony Martino
Royal Flush
Oy vey what a brutal turn of events! It's like my week has been going with the PCF tournaments. I checkraise pot in PLO with 65% equity on the turn and the guy spikes the miracle river card to take a big chunk of my stack.
Then same guy and I checkraise pot him on the flop with 88% equity (board is 778 and I have A7xx and he has A8xx and you know the miracle 8 on the turn sends me home)
I can't wait for the next NL event cause I'm just shoving EVERY hand. If I can't win as a favorite at least I can lose as an underdog, the way things should be!
Then same guy and I checkraise pot him on the flop with 88% equity (board is 778 and I have A7xx and he has A8xx and you know the miracle 8 on the turn sends me home)
I can't wait for the next NL event cause I'm just shoving EVERY hand. If I can't win as a favorite at least I can lose as an underdog, the way things should be!
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
