Bovada 400nl: River raising spot blind vs blind
Posted by Cory Mikesell
Posted by
Cory Mikesell
posted in
Mid Stakes
Bovada 400nl: River raising spot blind vs blind
At first glance, villain appears to be reggy, but since Bovada is anonymous it's hard to say...
Villain opens sb (100bb effective) 3x and I flat BB with A2hh
Flop: Td 3h 2s
Villain bets 4bb into 6bb and I flat.
Turn: 5d
Villain bets 8bb into 14bb and I flat again.
River: Jx
Villain bets 16bb into 30bb...
I think this is an extremely effective spot for bluff shove.
My question is as follows: If we have a perfectly polarized range, then we prefer to jam and make him indifferent to calling. If we decide to shove we are laying villain almost exactly 2-1 and thus should have 2 value bets for every bluff. Initially when I thought about this spot I determined that I can plausibly have 34 combos JT or better thus I should be shoving 17 combos of bluffs. However, this is not a perfectly polarized range as JT/22 beat relatively few things with which he will actually call. Is this a spot where I need to construct multiple ranges, one that jams and one that raises a smaller amount? How do you determine whether your hand is sufficiently nutty enough to be included into the value jamming portion of your range (if it beats 50% of his b/c range possibly)?
Just wanted to get a new perspective on this situation. Thanks!
Loading 4 Comments...
whyd you call turn
I called the turn because it is blind vs blind so ranges are quite wide and I have significant blockers to his value range. I turned an emergency gutter as well which I don't think counts for much, but might not be totally meaningless either. I also think his Ax combos that decided to bet flop now might barrel the turned gutter and his xxdd combos are also barreling. It might be a slightly ahead/way behind spot, but I think I'm slightly ahead a lot here. In the actual hand he had QdJx (on Bovada you can look up their hole cards even if they fold or don't show 24 hrs after the hand is played). I'm not trying to use that as a results oriented justification for the call, but I think it is evidence that my call might be okay as he can also have two random overs here as well.
Your blocker isn't that relevant when ranges are this wide.
Also you seem to contradict yourself as you obviously also block some of his Ax bluff combos and not just his value Ax combos. Not to mention that contrary to what you are saying you are actually using the result as a justification for the call.
It seems like you are grasping for reasons to justify this play while in fact the turn should be a fold. You aren't getting the right price against his entire range. Even if he bluffs you off a better hand some of the time that is fine as our range here contains a lot of stronger hands that we can call with.
Turn is a std fold. It depends if you defend 32o/64o/53o/ to design if you are not overbluffing this river. You block a set and AA but his value range still contains all sets, 2p+ and straight. I don't think he is b/f that often beside that he looks like a button clicker
Be the first to add a comment