Line check: .10/.20 NLHE with AA (Mavens) (3 Viewers)

[natumes]

My concern about a larger bet here is that the bigger the bet, the more likely were only called by hands that beat us.

Hands that beat us will call or raise a smaller bet, and I dont know that folding to every river check raise is the right play either. Larger sizing let's Jx convince himself we're bluffing missed flush and we get paid, and hopefully just a call by 44 rather than a jam. JJ/10s is likely only jam to larger size where the fold is easy.

 

[pharaohone]

I liked the larger raises proposed earlier in hand and would’ve just been checking behind here... but we haven’t gotten much value with the smaller bet sizes throughout the hand, so I think that’s what entices a thin value bet here on the river... but that is sunk cost fallacy. That being said...

I don’t see how we call a check-jam if villain were to do so after our thin value bet. I also don’t see how villain calls a bet larger than half pot with anything we beat here, unless V is just a micro stakes calling station.

so... if I have intel on V that leads me to believe he is a calling station, I’m probably betting just shy half pot here for value.

if I think v has any amount of trickiness to them, I’m checking behind. I just think it’s a really sick spot to be getting check-raised all-in here just aces on this wet of board, notwithstanding the fact that the flush didn’t get there. Think there are enough 7s in the suited connector ranges, as well as 98, that could have gotten there.

If I don’t have a read on V, just checking behind.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

Well, I've got to admit that I feel pretty good about posting this hand. There's been significant disagreement and discussion on every street since the flop, so I don't feel bad about being unsure if I played it correctly.

Going into the river, I felt that the situation was largely the same as the turn, except that I had pulled ahead of , which was a very small but possible part of UTG's range. I'm betting again, a little biggish, to try to milk more value out of a jack that doesn't believe me. I'll admit that given the way the hand has played out so far, I gave zero thought to what I would do if check-raised. I simply didn't expect it to happen. So of course...

@Schmendr1ck I hope you really got check/raised because this was a really interesting discussion

Your wish is my command. I won't let this one go too long before final results since responding to the CRAI has already been discussed to some extent.

Preflop
UTG limps.
Hero (UTG+1) raises to 0.70 with .
SB calls, UTG calls, all others fold.

Flop ($2.30)
SB checks.
UTG donks for 1.55.
Hero raises to 4.50.
SB folds.
UTG calls.

Turn ($11.30)
UTG checks.
Hero bets 5.50.
UTG calls.

River ($22.30)
UTG checks.
Hero bets 14.00.
UTG raises all-in for 43.80.
Hero...? (29.80 more to call)

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

Did he snap raise? Tank raise? Timing tells are a real thing in online poker that a lot of people don't think about

 

[Eriks]

I fold for reasons already stated. If he finds a bluff here, good for him

 

[Schmendr1ck]

Did he snap raise? Tank raise? Timing tells are a real thing in online poker that a lot of people don't think about

Effectively a snap raise, no more than a couple of seconds IIRC.

 

[JustinInMN]

I am sticking to the read from the OP. If he can overplay pair hands we need to call with AA. If he took the risk of donking a set just to check it twice after and now has a full house pay it off.

J7s kind of strikes me as the likely culprit here, only way to explain the slowdown after the donk, but still super risky not to go for a raise on the turn. Maybe there is some 98 too.

I just can't put villain on anything that makes sense. It really feels like he's turning a J into a bluff now. He partially blocks Js full. I just don't see anything else that makes sense, I could see a busted KQ or busted spades but again, why play the flop that way?

 

[Kain8]

 

[Jimulacrum]

Well, I've got to admit that I feel pretty good about posting this hand. There's been significant disagreement and discussion on every street since the flop, so I don't feel bad about being unsure if I played it correctly.

Going into the river, I felt that the situation was largely the same as the turn, except that I had pulled ahead of , which was a very small but possible part of UTG's range. I'm betting again, a little biggish, to try to milk more value out of a jack that doesn't believe me. I'll admit that given the way the hand has played out so far, I gave zero thought to what I would do if check-raised. I simply didn't expect it to happen. So of course...


Your wish is my command. I won't let this one go too long before final results since responding to the CRAI has already been discussed to some extent.

Preflop
UTG limps.
Hero (UTG+1) raises to 0.70 with .
SB calls, UTG calls, all others fold.

Flop ($2.30)
SB checks.
UTG donks for 1.55.
Hero raises to 4.50.
SB folds.
UTG calls.

Turn ($11.30)
UTG checks.
Hero bets 5.50.
UTG calls.

River ($22.30)
UTG checks.
Hero bets 14.00.
UTG raises all-in (29.80 to call).
Hero...?

This is exactly why I might shy away from betting the river. There are a few hands that may pay you off, but there's also a fair number of whiffed draws that can only win by betting, as well as some trips and full houses. Reopening the betting creates the potential for this difficult spot.

The most important piece of information for this decision is that UTG Villain is not a spewy or over-bluffy type. If this were a bluff, it would be a pretty wild and spewy one, especially after how much strength you've shown. Given that, I'm leaning toward this being a likely value shove rather than a complicated check-raise bluff. He might have even slowplayed a set all the way to the end.

Fold to river check-raise. Remember that Villain is capable of check-raising on the end. Try to talk him into saying what his hand was. My guess is a flopped set, TT or JJ (maybe 44), or even 7x of spades that chased a flush draw and backed into trips.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

Effectively a snap raise, no more than a couple of seconds IIRC.

I think I have to call. It's basically $30 to win $80 so you only have to be good 3/11 times or 27%. Could he have slow played a set? Sure, but more likely you would have heard about it on the turn on such a wet board. I know you have the A of spades, but he still could have some missed flush draws and certainty missed straight draws.

 

[pharaohone]

So... risk $30 to win $66 at this point essentially? Do we feel like we win more than 1/3 of the time calling here, in other words is V bluffing and/or overplaying their hand more than 1/3 of the time? Honestly I doubt it. Feels like a fold as disgusting as that sounds in this spot.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

So... risk $30 to win $66 at this point essentially? Do we feel like we win more than 1/3 of the time calling here, in other words is V bluffing and/or overplaying their hand more than 1/3 of the time? Honestly I doubt it. Feels like a fold as disgusting as that sounds in this spot.

Don't forget about the 14 villain has to call before his raise its 30 to win 80

 

[joker80]

I would fold. Check raise on the river is rarely a bluff

 

[pharaohone]

Don't forget about the 14 villain has to call before his raise its 30 to win 80

Ah yes. Math. Still, doesn’t feel like someone is shoving a river bluff in a micro stakes cash game all that often after this much strength showed by hero. Hate this spot so so much, hence the checking behind.

 

[Steve Birrer]

Well this is why I said check it down. Now you have potentially screwed yourself. Yes you can win more by calling now than you would have by just checking the river in the first place. But you have to foresee this coming. So you should have already decided what you were going to do in this scenario when you didn't check the river in the first place.

Fold for me.

 

[Anthony Martino]

People don't bluff as much as you think, but I think our river bet has committed us to the hand

I expect to run into a flopped set a good chunk of the time unfortunatley

 

[boltonguy]

Puke and call. I am a station. Pray for JT. Maybe he thinks you have AJ ... but he probably has 44

You should probably fold but I would probably call. Oh Aces ...

Edit: Hoping for KK!!

 

[natumes]

I think villain has has 44 or J10 based on limp call preflop then donking flop. Pocket 10s/Js probably raises pre and checks the flopped set to the aggressor. Suited connectors with a 7 probably doesn't donk, J7 seems unlikely as well. So I think its 50/50 and a call.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

I think villain has has 44 or J10 based on limp call preflop then donking flop. Pocket 10s/Js probably raises pre and checks the flopped set to the aggressor. Suited connectors with a 7 probably doesn't donk, J7 seems unlikely as well. So I think its 50/50 and a call.

There are 3 combos of 44 and 9 combos of JT, so if that's his range it's not really 50/50.

 

[Jimulacrum]

People don't bluff as much as you think, but I think our river bet has committed us to the hand

I expect to run into a flopped set a good chunk of the time unfortunatley

I don't buy this "committed us to the hand" assertion, especially not on the end.

The last bet Hero has to put in is about 27% of the total pot, so that's the bluffing threshold for this to be a break-even call. (Or look at it as 1 bluff in every 3.7 instances, if that's your preference.) Do you really think that this player—

UTG (58.00): I've only played against him a couple of times. He seems reasonably solid, maybe a little overaggressive with TP-type hands but I haven't seen him spew or overbluff.

—is bluff-shoving his stack on the river more than a quarter of the time? And not just a bluff-shove, but a check-raise bluff-shove.

I'd be very surprised to learn that a player who fits this description would turn up with less than aces in this spot anywhere near 27% of the time, despite all the potential missed draws from the flop and Villain's pre-river line being consistent with a draw.

 

[Kain8]

I don't buy this "committed us to the hand" assertion, especially not on the end.

The last bet Hero has to put in is about 27% of the total pot, so that's the bluffing threshold for this to be a break-even call. (Or look at is as 1 bluff in every 3.7 instances, if that's your preference.) Do you really think that this player—



—is bluff-shoving his stack on the river more than a quarter of the time? And not just a bluff-shove, but a check-raise bluff shove.

I'd be very surprised to learn that a player who fits this description would turn up with less than aces in this spot anywhere near 27% of the time, despite all the potential missed draws from the flop and Villain's pre-river line being consistent with a draw.

The villain's line to me makes NO sense at all. The flop was very draw heavy, same with the turn. You can re-open the betting on two streets with a flopped set and you decline both times? That's just madness that you're waiting until the river, of which you check AGAIN when you fill up hoping for ANOTHER bet from your opponent? That's way too many things to "go right" for a flopped set to get paid off the max.

All of the draws bricked and I'm not giving any consideration to a player limping UTG with any 89 or really any hand that contains a seven. They can't even have .


To the villain, having a good top pair here, like , can easily be best since all the draws missed. He could even have queens or kings here and was waiting to see the coast was clear by having all the draws whiff.


Curious to see what the decision was made in any case. If the villain shows a better hand than Aces here, I'm making any excuse in the future to play pots with him.

 

[AWenger]

Tough spot. I'm not sure what I do, the me who's reading this thread probably leans fold, but the me who would be playing the hand in real-time online, probably leans call.

 

[AWenger]

He could even have queens or kings here and was waiting to see the coast was clear by having all the draws whiff.

Interesting take! Could be.

 

[pharaohone]

All of the draws bricked and I'm not giving any consideration to a player limping UTG with any 89 or really any hand that contains a seven. They can't even have .

I would suspect there are a fair number of players in micro stakes games that would limp or call raises with hands like 89 suited, 78 suited, 67 suited, etc. They’re only 6 handed, plus the stacks are playing very deep. The implied odds from stacking someone make these hands very interesting to play. I personally don’t mind open raising with these hands when the stacks are this deep. Great opportunity to stack someone.

 

[redeagle]

I'd call just because, well.....

 

[Perthmike]

I think I have to call, as much as I hate it.

I just don't see why he's suddenly raising on the river, his entire line makes no sense to me. So I'm just calling to see what he has.

Jj or 10s doesn't add up with his preflop line and his postflop line.

89 just seems odd with the paired board on the river.

Busted flush kinda does make sense, but not really.

I wouldn't be surprised to see an overvalued AJ or J10, but I guess you are going to call and see j7. Hence the weak ass donk on the flop.

Oh well.

 

[JustinInMN]

The villain's line to me makes NO sense at all. The flop was very draw heavy, same with the turn. You can re-open the betting on two streets with a flopped set and you decline both times? That's just madness that you're waiting until the river, of which you check AGAIN when you fill up hoping for ANOTHER bet from your opponent? That's way too many things to "go right" for a flopped set to get paid off the max.

I really agree with this. I know the read on the villain, but this just feels more like a random act of river-spew than a monster hand. It even happens from the players you least expect sometimes.

If you think it makes sense to play a nutted hand in this way, then you also have to consider it makes about the same sense to play a missed draw or to turn a pair into a bluff this way as well. I might just pay this off to get the information if I am wrong here..

I still rank the three choices on the river accordingly:
bet planning to call > check back > bet planning to fold.

If I am wrong here as hero, the data point I grab will make me switch the top two options.

 

[pharaohone]

The donk could well have been a semi bluff / betting V’s equity. Then getting re-raised on flop deciding to slow down. Imagine he could’ve done this with a hand like 89 of spades or 78 of spades (both of which are possible limper / call pre flop hands in light of being 6 handed and how deep stack sizes are). Actually think the action of semi bluff raise hoping to win it there and/or gaining some equity with a call makes sense, and then just check-calling the turn since clearly hero is strong. The really disciplined move by V if this is true is the check on the river.

V is either a total donkey, or really good (and potentially in this case getting a bit lucky and being really good).

 

[Perthmike]

The donk could well have been a semi bluff / betting V’s equity. Then getting re-raised on flop deciding to slow down. Imagine he could’ve done this with a hand like 89 of spades or 78 of spades (both of which are possible limper / call pre flop hands in light of being 6 handed and how deep stack sizes are). Actually think the action of semi bluff raise hoping to win it there and/or gaining some equity with a call makes sense, and then just check-calling the turn since clearly hero is strong. The really disciplined move by V if this is true is the check on the river.

V is either a total donkey, or really good (and potentially in this case getting a bit lucky and being really good).

I'm going with donkey lol. I'd be surprised to see this donk bet being a semi-bluff. Surely a check raise would be far better.

I could be wrong. I'm excited to find out lol these kinds of spots are always interesting.

 

[pharaohone]

I’m getting scared op’s going to say he folded and V didn’t show... would be so anti-climactic. I need to know!