How big on the River
Posted by patrickred90
Posted by
patrickred90
posted in
Low Stakes
How big on the River
SB: $10.05
BB: $40.17
UTG: $13.41
MP: $19.76 (Hero)
CO: $25.08
The UTG raise is a Reg with 22/17, AF3. He is folding to 3 bets in EP vs MP a lot, thats the reason why I just call. I think there are pros and cons but I think its okay. The Problem is, that the BB coudl now cheaply see a Flop. He looks like hes loose but i dont know him.
The Flop is good for me but i dont like raising much here. I want that small PP are calling at least once and the UTG Raise isnt so weak because hes betting against 2 players.
The turn isnt the worst card for me. I think the bb could easiliy have A5 or 56 especially suited. Sets or 2 pair would have been raised on the Flop from the BB so I think I could discount these combos.
UTG would bet A5s I guess, any sets. I think when both check to me , I have nearly always the best hand. I bet pretty big because of the 2 players how could call a lot with worse, any draws etc.
The 3 on the river doesnt change mutch i think. But because they both called im quit unsure how big i should bet.
I bet a litte more than half pot in the case that the BB is shoving i could still fold, but can also get value of a Q or a worse PP.
So my question is how big/small I should bet here
Loading 34 Comments...
Seems fine!
I'd go bigger. Your value range is quite narrow here, and you can have a quite a few bluffs, and people hate to fold at the micros!
I'd go ~$7.80 i think, and don't expect his calling range to change much at all.
I think there's almost no way that this is meant to be a valuebet, you're against four cards and are going to have put in 9x the flop pot here. I would need some sick reads to think I could get away with valuebetting this and if it's a normal thing to do I think it's representative of massive mistakes being made in multiway pots at these limits.
Strongly disagree with this. I think it's a pretty clear valuebet.
I think its a big big mistake not to value bet here. They play to hoonestly at theses stakes and they will call with much worse
Agreed. Seems like a spot we can be results orientated too after they call. The only hand i'd expect you to sometimes lose to is AA.
Out of interest, what did UTG show?
yeah thats the only hand i think. QQ he would bet 3 times.
Her showed KQ
All in.
I think shove is an option but because of the unknwon sb who could have a better hand i would bet>shove>check
It's the only sensible sizing with these stack sizes, or betting close to pot.BB would lead a full house, 65ss/cc,A5ss/cc or raise the turn more likely so his range is almost always weak Qx or missed FD here.
yeah i Aggree- but if he have a lower pair i hope get value of the BB too.
Starting at preflop and assuming everything only x/c's or x/f's to simplify frequencies, the hands villains have which we think they can still have are something like
6 combos KQ (we block two kings)
12 combos AQ
1 combo QcJc
1 combo QcTc
1 combo KK
6 combos AA
4 combos A5s
4 combos 65s
3 combos 22
3 combos 44
3 combos QQ
So amongst two players we're distributing 43 combos and we currently beat 19 and split with one. We're currently beating less than half of that range and there are two players who can have it. Villains don't care about defending combos like AcXc here because they can't beat a bluff (they are blocking almost all of our bluffs anyway).
We can check to close the hand here so for a river valuebet to be good it has to not only get us called by a range which we're beating more than half the time but we also have to be making enough off that fact to compensate for the times we get bluffraised and lose the entire pot.
Because villains can play all of the above hands with differing frequencies I don't think it's impossible that this is a good valuebet against these two players, but I think it's very clear that it should not be and that it being a good valuebet represents them massively skewing their x/c lines toward every hand which loses to KK (but not AA for some reason) and us having absolutely no fear of ever being bluffed. If we valuebet this hand for three streets 3-way we will be very easily exploitable by villains x/c'ing strong hands against us, and by villains doing things like x/r'ing QcJc all-in on the river.
Some things which I think are clearly true if this is a valuebet are:
We should never call a river raise with less than QQ
We should never bluff river
Looking at the spot if both villains never slowplay a hand better than AA and call in order to make AcJc indifferent to bluffing (while never bluffraising themselves) valuebetting KK here is going to make us 11bbs more than checking it.
For every further combo UTG has which we are behind we lose about 2.5bbs on the difference between betting and checking, and if they balance those combos by raising with bluffs occasionally it's more like 3bbs.
For every combo SB has which we are behind we lose more like 4bbs because I started SB with literally only having hands we beat. If SB doesn't raise 22 at any point in the hand and has Ac3c in his range checking is already 6bbs better than betting, and that is without considering him having a bluffing range.
Basically for this to be a good valuebet your opponents have to suuuuuuuuuuuuuuck and you have to very confidently know exactly the way in which they suck. They need to almost never slowplay strong hands in this situation, almost never bluffraise, and still have to call too much on rivers.
Incidentally if we're bet/folding KK OTR here I get that UTG has a +139bb bluffjam with QcJc against us. lol.
This play is just very very very exploitative and I do not think it is justified.
Your range assessment is way off.
Agreed. And it's irrelevant if they have an incredibly profitable bluffjam because they are NEVER taking it. Literally no one at these stakes is x-jamming a missed flush draw here.
A3cc is another combo i agree we can lose to. I think we only ever lose to that and AA. Then we beat KQ and AQ which are never folding, and we never get bluff-jammed.
It might be true that we're never getting bluffed, it might not. If it is true and it's also true that neither of them is slowplaying anything stronger than AA we're making 10bbs or so and if it isn't we're only risking losing uhhhhh, 130.
This is 25nl but like, it really really sucks when someone does this to you:
http://weaktight.com/7243226
Thank you for your work with calculating this, but I think you forgot some little Details.
These are Players at NL10- there is a Reason why they play this kind of stakes. Sprince said it before. They would never c/c bluffs, never c/r bluffs. So I expect them to call with a worse Q. Maybe the original raise hast sometimes AA which is really seldom. They would nearly alwasy bet QQ on the flop , turn and river. reraise sets and 2 pairs on the flop and turn. Lead out with the nuts. They play too honestly so they just call a weak range, (never) bluff raise the river but call TP 3barrels if the FD / SD misses. Thats the reason why I think we have always, no I really mean ALWAYS have to bet, because we are missing too much value if not.
I see fish slowplay stuff they should raise allllllllllllll the time. There isn't a school somewhere where all fish learn how to play the Q42fd board wrong the same way.
@JolNrbs utg has ATcc,AJcc,AKcc.The BB (who is an unknown and most likely recreational player), can have a ton of flush draw combos, all of the Q5s-AQs, Q9o-AQo, 54s, 64s, Acx that he`s continuing with ott.
As patrick said, they will almost never have better here the way the hand played out, and with a BB in the hand who is calling a bet with any Qx, maybe even worse when the flush draw misses, it would be pretty atrocious not to value bet AQ+ here.
We don't care if they have combos which lose to or are eliminated by AcJc, because their calling ranges only care about making AcJc indifferent to bluffing and AcJc would beat those combos by checking. The Q makes the majority of our range which could bluff from preflop into a pair. If someone can have 64s and 54s it's really bad for us because then they can also have 32s, 43s, and 53s.
It really doesn`t make a difference because he would lead trips on the river.
BB is an unknown. Assuming these things about unknowns to justify making ludicrously exploitative plays is probably bad. We are talking about trying to valuebet a hand which doesn't beat all bluffcatchers for three streets in a three-way pot.
Firstly he has way more Qx, XXcc combos then 3x+.Secondly, op is a reg in these games and since villain is unknown it's safer to assume he is probably a recreational player.Lastly, it's 10nl where people are still playing their two cards and not thinking enough about theirs or their opponents ranges.So him being oop and checking after x/c'ing twice on a drawy board, it's a lot safer to assume that his range is 99% air or weak bluff catchers, rather then him being tricky with a strong hand on all streets and especially river in a 3 way pot.
yeah but in this 3 way pot is my hand completly underrepresented- so i could also have the nuts here ir a bluff. a busted FD on the River which I might have to bluff- in the eyes of my opponents. and because they are unsure if they dont have the nuts- they dont raise or lead out...
JoINrbs, what stakes are u usually play?
Putting 9x the flop into the pot 3-way with one pair is not underrepping your hand in NLHE. If this is working for you keep at it I guess, it is a very large mistake if anyone ever exploits it though and I'm not actually convinced it is making you money if they don't.
Slowplaying/backraising probably got less merits at nl10 so I would just 3b. As played flop turn seems ok, but your river bet is too small.. We want to put up some pressure on a hand like Qx, which is probably what we'll face the majority of the times when we get called. Betting anywhere between 70% of pot -> 100% of pot seems fine to me .
I pretty much always make some assumptions when watching hands at these stakes:
1) People always got what they represent, they don't missrep their range
2) If UTG had you beat he would most likely keep betting, if BB had you beat he would most likely raised at some point.
The only slowplayed hand you can spot here once in a while (but extremely less likely, so it's not a reason not to value bet big) is if UTG got QQ. Both for bluffs and for value I would just try to target the hands villain represents like always given they play their range faced up.
Fish in the big blind could have big ammounts of Qx.
Yeah I Totally Agree with this!
About 7 bucks seems good.
I'm shocked to see JoINrbs's argument... That perspective seems so alien but I do respect your thought process in most posts of yours I've read. I guess you must play a lot higher...this seems like a spot where it would just be insane not to value bet to me for the reasons others highlighted.
I'm curious...you mentioned that if kk is a value bet we should never be bluffing... I don't understand...what value bets do you even have to balance bluffs with here if you don't feel comfortable vbetting kk?
I like the 7 sizing because it caters to both villain ranges. Utg has some decent qx that are likely to bluffcatch on the missed flush river given our line, an bb is probably inelastic.
I'm vbetting QQ and thinking about it with AA here. My betting frequency is not meant to be high, we have the weakest range on the flop as far as value-betting hands and six bets have gone in so far three-way.
I wouldn't bluff here because for vbetting to be good I think villains have to be massively overcalling flop turn and river. I only have something like 4 combos to bluff with on the turn anyway along with 3 combos of QQ so I really don't need to go out of my way to find a ton of value hands to be betting with.
Youre waiting til the flush draws have missed to value bet these hands?
Was talking about the river. The turn looks like it is a good spot to value bet AQ+, KQ seems close to me. Checking those hands will be very profitable on the turn too.
Main Thinking
I think AQ+is definitly a Value bet here. We have to figure out what kind of weaker hands will call on the turn. This are the FD, SD, weaker Qx combos, and sometimes low pockets like 66-JJ.
We are crushed by sets, some two pairs and straights.
Our hand is also not repped as Kings, because were in a single raised pot.
On the river bricks the FD and we are now ahead of some low 2 pair combos. But the main thing is it doesnt change mutch. We are still beat by sets who have fulls now and straights. We still beat low pockets and Qx Kombos.
Nl10 thinking
The regular player at theses stages play really straight forward. If somebody has a set on an FD board, hes most likely to reraise in a multiway pot, because at least one could call, and he has to protect his set because of the FD. If somebody of the 2 guys turns his straight he would lead out or raise the turn bet, because he now always having the best hand and has to protect of the FD.
On the River would every Full House lead out, because they are scared to miss value because the other villains could check behind.
Thats the Reason why we have got nearly in 99% of cases the best hand and not to bet here would miss soooo much Value. I got from KQ!!!! 53bb which increases my winrate.
In higher games were the people are more aggressiv I would consider to bet much more polarized here because they are getting with more hands to showdon.
Be the first to add a comment