Hand Reading Problem

Bozzer

This hand was taken from 2+2 and is a good exercise for reading hands.
No need to comment on hero or villain's play.

NLHE cash game 20/40 blinds

villain is the best player on the table, very solid, aggressive, and hero generally tries to stay out of his way, and he knows this.

rest of the table is v.weak/passive

hero has ~5K, villain has ~10K.

hero straddles utg and four players call, hero checks w/66.

flop comes 10d 5d 3h.

villain leads for $300, hero calls, everyone else folds.

turn 3s (10d 5d 3h).

villain leads for $800, hero calls.

river 5c (3s 10d 5d 3h).

villain bets $1500.

What should hero do?

careca

I would flat call. If I think my hand is ahead after the turn I don't see any reason to believe it is now any different. A raise is only asking for trouble.

Daithio

Fold but I would have folded or raised the flop. Flat call there is a bad idea, as you have no idea where you stand.

Ste05

You'd need to be fairly sure the Villian can fire three bullet bluffs in order to call here.
The info. above just isn't enough to make a meaningful decision on this River. There's no info to go on.....

ntlbell

He should fold on the flop

But I'd push now.

Bozzer

I would call the river and I don't think it's too close a decision.

Looking at the hand on a street by street basis

Preflop Villain overcalls the straddle from the blinds. He is not gonna to do this with a big pocket pair and unlikely to do it with 10's for that matter.

Flop Villain could lead out with a fairly wide range here as table is passive.
He could have 55/33/Tx/A3d/random flush draw/straight draw(64 unlikely-you have 66). Maybe even 5x.
Villain wouldn’t complete T5/T3 preflop.
Pure bluff is v.unlikely first to act.

Turn Villain probably puts hero on a T,a draw or maybe set/two pair(would probably raise flop with these).
Less likely that villain has 33/55 now.
Tx still very possible.
As hero has been getting out of villain’s way, then he would have no problem semibluffing a draw here,trying to take hero off a T or a bigger draw.
Less likely that villain has 33/55 now (pretty big bet for these holdings also considering he wouldn't want to push you offa flush draw).
A3d is possible.
5x would not lead here.

River This is where villain's hand becomes a lot clearer.
Villain’s not betting a T here.
Already ruled out 5x.
33/55 now very unlikely.
Only hand you’re really worried about is Ad3d.

Villain could easily be bluffing a missed draw as hero has played his hand own like a draw.
Even if villain put hero on a T may feel he can push him off it.
Villain will be bluffing here a large enough % of the time to call.

It only becomes close if villain could be betting A10 here but most
of the time a solid player check-calls that hand on this river.

I have read the thread on 2+2 but I didn't feel that the river decision was
too tough the first time I saw the hand.

Like I said in the op I wasn't looking for comments on how hero should have
played the hand, just on the river decision.

Lafortezza

I don't think there's enough information in the original post to make a proper judgement. Any Tx, or 88 or 99 or an overpair could play it like this. Villain could be bluffing with any two broadway cards. If Hero doesn't raise along the way then he hasn't a clue where he is.
Long term, calling down to the river here is a loser.

Ste05

Apart from the fact that there's no information to go on, here's a quick run down....

Bozzer wrote:

I would call the river and I don't think it's too close a decision.

Looking at the hand on a street by street basis

Preflop Villain overcalls the straddle from the blinds. He is not gonna to do this with a big pocket pair and unlikely to do it with 10's for that matter.

He is gonna do this with any 2 cards,

Bozzer wrote:

Flop Villain could lead out with a fairly wide range here as table is passive.

He could and would lead out with any 2 again - and it's easy for him to have a 3 or 5 in his "any 2" hand. He would feel he could outplay all these passive weak players post flop using his reverse position on them.

Bozzer wrote:

Turn Villain probably puts hero on a T,

We have no idea what this player thinks of the Hero other than he's a calling station so far. And I doubt he puts him on a T - he would have re-raised with a T, not called down. I'd say he puts him on a low pair, some kind of draw or the 3 or 5.....

Bozzer wrote:

River This is where villain's hand becomes a lot clearer.
Villain’s not betting a T here.

We know absolutely nothing at all about this villians hand other than it's not AA, KK or the like...

He doesn't need quads to win this hand, just any 5 or 3, because this table is so passive and weak, this decision is difficult to make unless the Hero has seen him make 3 bet bluffs - the only reason to call here is if you think he is on pure bluff......

I haven't seen this 2+2 post, and if I'm wrong so be it, but this kind of calling station play certainly wouldn't work at the lower levels that I play at, seeing as I have no 20-40 experience the above is all just guessing.....

Bozzer

lafortezza wrote:

I don't think there's enough information in the original post to make a proper judgement. Any Tx, or 88 or 99 or an overpair could play it like this. Villain could be bluffing with any two broadway cards. If Hero doesn't raise along the way then he hasn't a clue where he is.
Long term, calling down to the river here is a loser.

I'm not saying that the idea of calling down to the river is
+EV, I agree that it's generally a loser.

I'm just talking about the river decision.
A good player raises 10's-A's preflop out of the blinds close to 100% of time
in a straddled pot unless the straddler is known to raise a large % of the time.
A good player doesn't play 10x like this on the river. Maybe A10 but even that's unlikely.
88/99 would probably check-call the river aswell because the hero is only gonna bet a missed draw or a v. strong hand on this river(exception is maybe A10).

Bozzer

Ste,

He could and would lead out with any 2 again - and it's easy for him to have a 3 or 5 in his "any 2" hand. He would feel he could outplay all these passive weak players post flop using his reverse position on them.

A v.good player doesn't habitually complete any two from the blinds.
It is very unlikely that he would lead into a field of passive players on
a complete bluff.

We have no idea what this player thinks of the Hero other than he's a calling station so far. And I doubt he puts him on a T - he would have re-raised with a T, not called down. I'd say he puts him on a low pair, some kind of draw or the 3 or 5.....

I think hero has played his hand v.much like Tx calling down or a draw.

We know absolutely nothing at all about this villians hand other than it's not AA, KK or the like...
He doesn't need quads to win this hand, just any 5 or 3, because this table is so passive and weak, this decision is difficult to make unless the Hero has seen him make 3 bet bluffs - the only reason to call here is if you think he is on pure bluff......

Every river bluff is a pure bluff and of course villain isn't value
betting a hand that hero beats.
I think it's wrong to say we have know info on villains holdings.
Villain isn't gonna complete in the blinds with any 3 or lead the flop with
any 3. Only worrying hands with a 3 are A3d,K3d and maybe some similar.

Villain probably doesn't lead the turn with just a 5 as it would be an
extremely thin value bet and he would have to fold to a raise.

Villain doesn't bet a random 10 on this river either.

That doesn't leave too many hands which could bet this river and so a bluff
is quite likely,especially as hero could reasonably have a draw.

Ste05

surely any good player will complete the blinds with any two cards if it offering 9:1 at a table of passive players

ntlbell

Bozzer it's very easy to shoot down peoples opinions down when you know the result of the hand....

why did you post this hand? to get opinions on it or to contradict extremely good players opinions on it?

Ste05

Bozzer wrote:

It is very unlikely that he would lead into a field of passive players on
a complete bluff.

Bozzer wrote:

Every river bluff is a pure bluff and of course villain isn't value
betting a hand that hero beats.
I think it's wrong to say we have know info on villains holdings.

These were my point exactly, and why calling at the end is difficult without more info, you are calling here only to catch out a bluff, but we don't have any background on this regarding the players involved previous actions bar this below, for one thing we'd need to know whether he's been seen making three continuation bets with nothing....

Bozzer wrote:

villain is the best player on the table, very solid, aggressive, and hero generally tries to stay out of his way, and he knows this.

so TBH we know nothing - except that the Villian would take these calls very seriously indeed, for example does the Villian have the Hero down as the same weak passive as the rest of the table, or does he respect this players game...... has he played against him previously; is this OP'er Prahlad Friedman, etc. etc. etc.

we know nothing from the original post unfortunately bar the quote above and the fact that it's a 20-40 game....

could you possibly link the 2+2 post

careca

Just to clarify my original post. I too would have raised the flop and seen where I was at, but the question asked you to make a decision on the river and forget the rest of the play.

Now I can't see too many players here who have called the flop bet, then called the turn bet, only to fold the river. Why would you have called the turn bet if you did not think you were ahead.

NickyOD

He can't justify calling off $1100 on 2 streets then fold for $1500 when the river is a blank. Vilain doesn't have a 5. He'd bet less.

Ste05

Just to clarify, I haven't even talked about what my decision on the River would be, I just mentioned that with only the above information, I would find it very difficult, if not impossible to make any sort of informed decision.

Just because he called $1100 on 2 previous streets does not always mean he will always call another $1400 on the river. I agree he must think he is in front when he called on the flop and turn and should possibly call here, but we just don't have enough info, how exactly do we know he'd bet less if he had a 5??

The only information we have is that this player is a good one, Does everyone think the decision would always be the same no matter who the Villian was.

Alot of this decision will depend on who the opponent was; what he has done in the past; and what he has seen you do in the past, etc.....

Tackle

I would love if the villain had turned over 1010 here.

So what did he have bozzer?

The Troll

This post is ridiculous. Bozzer you have given your in depth analysis of your "read" even though you know the result of the hand. Anyone can analyse play when a hand is finished.

The Troll

This looks like 3 continuation bets to me. Possibly AK. You've said he's a good player. generally, in my experience, good players lead out on a dead flop and back it up with continuation bets on the turn and river. I'd probably have played this hand the same way as the vilain of the piece. I find that jamming the river like he has done nearly always pushes someone off a better hand, unless they have a monster.

handsfree

i'd say the villian has 5 4, first two bets were trying to take the pot down early, the third bet is trying too hard to look like a bluff. villian could easily have played this hand from the blinds.

Bozzer

I posted this hand because I thought it had some interesting
hand reading elements to it.

All of my analysis was done before I read any of the thread, let alone
the results.

That said, I now agree with ste that there isn't enough information
to go on for the river decision - you need to know if villain will complete
with any 2 preflop(which I probably underestimated) and if villain is
capable of firing 3 barrels without a made hand. You also need to know
more about what villain thinks of hero.

Anyhoo, hero called and villain turned over 2d4d.

Ste05

I wasn't trying to be confrontational at all, and as I said I have no experience at this level, and by the sounds of your posts previously, you could very well have. What I was trying to say was that for us plebs down at the lower levels, looking at a hand in isolation like this can't be done.

My reasons for not being able to make a proper decision without background info is that, I know that at a table of passive players I would have played the hand similarly with a 3 or 5, betting bottom or middle pair on the flop to win the pot now, then as my hand improved continue to milk a calling station. Having said that I might also play the hand the same way with nothing.

It was a good post and did have some interesting insights into the higher levels and IMHO the more posts like this the better, they help us all to improve our game......

The better the players that post here, letting us learn off them, the better.

ntlbell

Bozzer wrote:

I posted this hand because I thought it had some interesting
hand reading elements to it.

All of my analysis was done before I read any of the thread, let alone
the results.

That said, I now agree with ste that there isn't enough information
to go on for the river decision - you need to know if villain will complete
with any 2 preflop(which I probably underestimated) and if villain is
capable of firing 3 barrels without a made hand. You also need to know
more about what villain thinks of hero.

Anyhoo, hero called and villain turned over 2d4d.

Apoligies, I only realised this was a cash game now.

Bozzer

No need to apologise ntlbell.Your comments were still valid.

Thanks for the post ste, I think my next post will be less ambiguous

Ste05

Bozzer wrote:

Thanks for the post ste, I think my next post will be less ambiguous

, didn't want to scare off a good poster .... Looking forward to the next one ....