Nasty River Spot: AK good vs Tight Player? (1 Viewer)

[Senzrock]

T9s is in most players' ranges here, as is JJ.

I do just want to point out that most people on this thread thought it was very unlikely that villain had T9s here (because "tight players don't raise draws like this"). So we can't have it both ways! If we are giving villain T9s, which is fine, we also have to credit hero for making a good call on the flop (given that a variety of draws can be added to villains range in addition to the 8x and TT type of hands, giving us more than enough equity to call the min raise on the flop).

 

[RainmanTrail]

I do just want to point out that most people on this thread thought it was very unlikely that villain had T9s here (because "tight players don't raise draws like this"). So we can't have it both ways! If we are giving villain T9s, which is fine, we also have to credit hero for making a good call on the flop (given that a variety of draws can be added to villains range in addition to the 8x and TT type of hands, giving us more than enough equity to call the min raise on the flop).

It depends on which brand of "tight player" we're talking about. If it's "OMC (old man coffee) tight" then they are correct, and T9s isn't in his range. But if it's a strong tight player, then T9s is absolutely in his range here.

 

[Senzrock]

It depends on which brand of "tight player" we're talking about. If it's "OMC (old man coffee) tight" then they are correct, and T9s isn't in his range. But if it's a strong tight player, then T9s is absolutely in his range here.

I agree with you. It is not an "old man coffee" type at all. I think I shared that this person, though playing tight on the felt, also gambles large amounts of money in Crypto and the stock markets. So clearly he has some gamble to him.

 

[warma]

I followed you partially here, but was a little confused that we can't have JJ but somehow Villain then turns around and reps JJ himself? I think we do need to be consistent here. Also, seeing that villain is a tight player, would he really be turning his hand into a bluff on this river? Also unlikely right?

I said earlier that he could have Jacks:

I’m guessing V is repping a pair, either, , , maybe with a now busted straight draw. Probably not Jacks.

I think I’m consistent.

Jacks are borderline for V, in that the bet size might have been bigger. Tough to know there. Jacks plus the draw potential keeps things alive, but the King slows things down. That all makes sense to me. I said probably not Jacks as I was being optimistic.

As for you, it’s more of a feeling based on bet sizes and that you just called V’s raises. To put you on Jacks or better, I would have expected a bit more aggression to signal that you had something better? V’s aggression opens that door, your call says you’re comfortable but searching for something. Plus, they could be in V’s hand. I don’t know, I don’t know, but Jacks doesn’t seem right.

So would a JJ bluff be risky? You made a comment earlier about how folks perceive you. I think a tight, smart, player could come over the top and rep a set of Jacks. Risky? Perhaps, but a tight V that puts you on Kings or pair close to theirs might take the risk because it’s you.

I could be wrong, and I usually am. But I love the question and how you’ve shared this hand. It’s interesting and helping me think better.

 

[Legend5555]

I generally agree with the check-call line on this river but I do disagree with this above. Seeing as we hit our "gin" card on the turn, and villain checked it back, I am personally NOT happy when we check river and he checks back. That's two streets of most likely putting $0 in when we are ahead and only putting $ in when we were behind (potentially).

Unless villain is going to bet worse and bluff somewhat frequently, then why did we call flop if we are just going to check turn and river praying he bets?

This was my issue all along. We floated OOP against a possibly weak range, got our card, and we still have no idea if we can bet for value and get called by worse very often.

 

[jr8719]

I think you're easily beat here — villain hit his set of Jacks on the River. Fold.

 

[Marius L]

It depends on which brand of "tight player" we're talking about. If it's "OMC (old man coffee) tight" then they are correct, and T9s isn't in his range. But if it's a strong tight player, then T9s is absolutely in his range here.

If its OMC, then I fold as well pretty easily.

If its a strong tight player that has it in him to raise T9 on this flop (which is honestly pretty standard IMO), then he might also very well be able to run a bluff with 56s on the river and punish @Senzrock with that weak-ish valuebet

 

[Senzrock]

Will reveal the final action (which includes villains cards!) after my last few afternoon meetings - appreciate everyone's thoughtful feedback on this hand!

 

[Legend5555]

How often is villain really bluffing the river here? Rivers are SOOOOOOOO underbluffed by amateurs and recreational players, even break even ones, that you just can't try to bluff catch here with one pair even if the turn checked through.

I really think you over thought this hand. I feel like you tried to justify your call on the flop by the odds and the potentially weak range. But you were OOP and had no good way to make up the value in this hand. Your basically forced to check the turn because of the flop action. And in the river you are kind of forced to bet or check call. Both suck.

Betting kind of sucks because he would have to be looking you up with a bluff catcher himself like a pocket pair that's 2nd or 3rd pair to the board, or an 8 that somehow just doesn't believe you. But that's a tough sell because you 3 bet pre, and if he had something like 99-QQ, then what are you betting for value that he beats? And what bluffs do you even have?

Checking river sucks because you do miss value sometimes and are counting on him to value own himself with 2nd or 3rd pair to the board, which people don't do very often, or bluff. And if he's bluffing it means he somehow didn't continue firing something like 56 on the turn? That seems unlikely to me if he's semi competent.

Not to mention that on this particular river T9 gets there too.

 

[grebe]

I generally agree with the check-call line on this river but I do disagree with this above. Seeing as we hit our "gin" card on the turn, and villain checked it back, I am personally NOT happy when we check river and he checks back. That's two streets of most likely putting $0 in when we are ahead and only putting $ in when we were behind (potentially).

Yes, but are you able to bet/fold here with TPTK? If not, you must come to terms with missing out on that value sometimes. If you are going to bet/call, you are spewing and are better off with check/check and missing some value.

 

[grebe]

River: (pot still $7160)

Hero (SB): Leads for $2200 into $7160
Villain (MP): Raises pretty quickly to $9300

Hero: ????

Vomit/fold

 

[Senzrock]

I feel like you tried to justify your call on the flop by the odds and the potentially weak range.

I think I did a pretty decent job explaining the reasons for my flop call. Part of it was pot odds (which we should always be using whenever we are put to a decision - just because we are behind, doesn't mean we want to fold), but part of it was also that his raise just didn't make a ton of sense (you can disagree with my assessment of course, but I'm relatively happy with it, even though we now have this brutal river spot).

And in the river you are kind of forced to bet or check call. Both suck.

I don't think check-calling sucks here. Bet folding and bet calling both suck but not check-calling. I think after the turn check-check, a check-call is the least we can do. Are you advocating ever check-folding this river with TPTK?

Yes, but are you able to bet/fold here with TPTK? If not, you must come to terms with missing out on that value sometimes.

Definitely. I am able to bet/fold here (gross as it is). This is always a great question to ask yourself before leading in a spot like this - can I fold to a raise if I need to? If no, then you should be checking. In terms of missing value... I really try not to. I would rather value own myself in certain spots (which is usually for a relatively smaller amount) than miss value consistently. Value betting thin is where a lot of our profits come from at the table once competition gets better.

 

[boltonguy]

I would rather value own myself in certain spots (which is usually for a relatively smaller amount) than miss value consistently. Value betting thin is where a lot of our profits come from at the table once competition gets better.

I agree with this 100% generally, but tend to do so more in SRPs and/or IP than in this particular scenario.

 

[MrCatPants]

The more I think about it the more I think a check lead (regardless of result) on the river is the correct action. It's one of those "Only getting called by a better hand" situations the way it was played, with the possible exception of a hand like J10 suited or QQ that might call and be beat. He's going to lay down 10s/9s/8xs at this point, everything else has you beat.

 

[Senzrock]

do so more in SRPs and/or IP than in this particular scenario

This is definitely a fair point! Sorting our thin value bets based on position + how many bets go in pre.

 

[Senzrock]

The more I think about it the more I think a check lead (regardless of result) on the river is the correct action. It's one of those "Only getting called by a better hand" situations the way it was played, with the possible exception of a hand like J10 suited or QQ that might call and be beat. He's going to lay down 10s/9s/8xs at this point, everything else has you beat.

Check-call you meant? Agreed.

 

[Legend5555]

Are you advocating ever check-folding this river with TPTK?

Not at all. But like I said, you are relying on villain betting worse for value or bluffing. And given the action on the turn, I just don't see that happening very often.

So my point was, given how the ranges play out for both of you, I don't see how you get very much value here. You hit gin, and still you can't be sure how to play this. That too me seems like a problem and a big reason to just save the chips and fold on the flop.

If you had been in position, I think this is all very different. You can realize equity so much easier.

I have a terrible feeling that you called the river and ended up winning here and are going to justify it by your read on the flop of his play not making sense.

I just think it's optimistic to think you are going make up the value calling in the flop. And I don't think he's raising sets 0% of the time. You 3 bet from the SB. You are supposed to be big pair heavy. And you don't think a player would raise a flopped set this deep against an over pair heavy range?

If you know the player THAT well, then kudos. I'm not trying to rag on you here, really I'm not. I just feel like you aren't giving the "fold flop" opinions a fair shake because you think your read is so good. I heard your reasoning, and I don't think it's good enough unless you know the player REALLY will. And if that's the case, why ask for opinions on the hand?

 

[Senzrock]

I don't see how you get very much value here

Ah, I misunderstood your point here. You are saying check-calling sucks because villain often just checks behind and we lose value you mean right?

I have a terrible feeling that you called the river and ended up winning here and are going to justify it by your read on the flop of his play not making sense.

I don't share hands to pat myself on the back lol - I share them because I think there is something of substance to discuss. But I get that it has that feeling.

I just feel like you aren't giving the "fold flop" opinions a fair shake

I think I wrote that my default in these spots is just to "fold and move on" and I totally understand the rationale for folding flop - not sure where you feel like I have not been giving those opinions a fair shake? I think I have been pretty open to any/all opinions here (but of course I have my own). Apologies if you feel like I have not come across that way, it was not my intention.

 

[Senzrock]

For reference @Legend5555 here is what I wrote about the flop:

In the past, this would have been an automatic fold for me. And for good reason. Even if I can make the argument that I have enough equity to call here, is it really worth it? I have no problem with a fold, I think that is kind of the default play here. For me though, I have been trying to spend more time practicing hand reading, especially at the lower stakes where I feel confident enough about making speculative calls to see how that hand reading works out for me. My thinking is, this will allow me to become a stronger hand reader, and overall tournament player at the higher stakes.

My plan here is to call the weird flop raise (and it did strike me as weird right away I have to say), and re-evaluate on the turn (folding many turns but hoping to either hit an A/K or have villain check behind which could give me a lot of information).

 

[warma]

Sometimes you have to play an odd hand, just to keep folks on their toes. I’m actually OK with how things turned out until V bet the Jack. Now I’m wondering if V had it or bluffed. I hope V bluffed, it would make for a more interesting game.

 

[Senzrock]

FINAL REVEAL:

Context: We are playing in our weekly $40 rebuy tournament that runs Wednesday nights. Two tables, we have all 15 players in still, now nearing the end of the one-hour rebuy period. Generally play is fairly loose during the rebuy period, as are probably most of the rebuy tournaments you all play for friendly stakes. To give a sense of the payouts, 1st: $510, 2nd: $280, 3rd: 170. There is also a points structure for the league.

Hand: 8-handed table, blinds at: 40/80 with a $10 Ante.


Action:

UTG: Folds
UTG+1: Folds
Villain (Tight Player): Raises to 240 ($23,015)
HJ: Folds
CO: Folds
BTN: Folds
SB Hero: ($18,431)
BB: Tight Player ($19,652)

Hero raises to $1100 (out of position, with a hand like AK, I tend to lean on going larger rather than smaller. I don't mind having to fold to a large 4bet here if I really need to. Anything less than 800 here I think is a mistake as we give good odds to any two suited connectors and have to play out of position. I want to make villain pay here for dominated Ax and maybe force him to fold a few small pairs that are ahead of us.

BB: folds
Villain: Calls $1100

Flop ($2360 in the middle):

Hero (SB): Bets $1041
Villain (MP): Raises to $2400
Hero (SB: Calls $1359

Pot: $7160

Turn:

Hero (SB): Checks
Villain (MP): Checks behind

River: (pot still $7160)

Hero (SB): Leads for $2200 into $7160
Villain (MP): Raises pretty quickly to $9300

Hero: ... Tank folds the AK. I was thoroughly confused by villains play but just didn't feel like he was making this river raise with less than 2-pair. Given that in addition to JJ, one of the most likely draws got there (T9s), and not being able to identify a single value raise that I was ahead of... I decided to make the painful fold (which I told myself I would do if I bet out and got raised).

After the hand, I immediately texted my buddy I was in the hand with and this is what I got (note* I lied about my actual hand in the text because I was too tilted to tell him I actually had AK):

 

[Senzrock]

I shared this hand in part because it was a pretty brutal way to lose with the best hand, but also because I think it complicates a lot of baseline assumptions that I (and obviously many of us on this thread) hold to be "obvious." I've thought a lot about this hand since I played it a week ago and overall I think my decision making process was pretty solid. I think the river is probably just a check-call but I don't hate a bet-fold, even after seeing the horrific result. I couldn't put him on KQ, and in his mind he was literally raising the river for value (which is hilarious to many of us BUT, importantly, it shows how many amateur players who play in our home games think about the game). Very instructive IMO, I learned a lot from this spot.

 

[Irish]

Maybe he's lying too....

 

[Senzrock]

Maybe he's lying too....

I thought about it lol - but kept pressing him later on and pretty confident he wasn't.

 

[Mandos]

The best bluff is the one that thinks it's a value bet.

My main conclusion here is that the river raise was probably a mistake, especially since he "knew" you were going to raise the river.
And that being sure that V "can't" have something because it makes no sense is sometimes a mistake if dealing with a certain type of player.

 

[Senzrock]

The best bluff is the one that thinks it's a value bet.

My main conclusion here is that the river raise was probably a mistake, especially since he "knew" you were going to raise the river.
And that being sure that V "can't" have something because it makes no sense is sometimes a mistake if dealing with a certain type of player.

You mean his river raise was a mistake? Definitely agreed. He should just be calling my river bet there. Very unnecessary bluff in a spot where he doesn't need to (although it worked out great for him in this specific case).

 

[RainmanTrail]

Your friend is lying to you.

 

[warma]

Interesting. Love this guy, he’d fit in well at my game. And you got some good intel as well.

Curious if you learned what V thought you had, but it doesn’t seem like he put much thought into it.

 

[JMC9389]

Your friend is lying to you.

Maybe he's lying too....

My thought as well. You're both lying to each other lol

 

[Legend5555]

You mean his river raise was a mistake? Definitely agreed. He should just be calling my river bet there. Very unnecessary bluff in a spot where he doesn't need to (although it worked out great for him in this specific case).

I don't think he thinks he was bluffing with the river raise. Though we obviously all know he can't get called by worse.

Flop raise was super crazy. Obviously his line of thinking is simply "he has AK, I'm just going to bluff this board regardless of my actual hand or perceived range. What's a range?"