River spot 100NL

cardshark202

Villain has been at the table only a short while and has been playing about 20/16/1.5 over about 50 hands, haven't seen him get out of line, I've been playing about 21/18/3 or something like that in the time he's been at the table. He doubled up with QQ on a Q high board vs AQ about 2 or 3 rounds ago.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

saw flop|saw showdown

SB ($198)
BB ($99.50)
cardshark202 ($335.70)
MP ($85.95)
CO ($199.50)
Button ($40.75)

Preflop: cardshark202 is UTG with 2, 2.
cardshark202 raises to $4, 1 fold, CO calls $4, 3 folds.

Flop: ($9.50) 2, K, 4(2 players)
cardshark202 bets $7, CO calls $7.

Turn: ($23.50) T(2 players)
cardshark202 bets $17, CO raises to $45, cardshark202 calls $28.

River: ($113.50) K(2 players)
cardshark202 checks, CO bets $60

StraddleFor6

Fold. Based on info, he's not raising turn without a better hand. And if he was, he just rivered you.

pok3rplaya

call. Could be beat, could be missed clubs, I don't think we can foldeo.

ianmc38

Eh instacall. Could be vbetting any king here. Too many hands we beat...

White Knight

The hand I would be most worried about is 44

phantom_lord

can't fold for that price, too many hands we beat.

IHAVEACAT

i think you should always call in this spot if your unsure. over the longrun your going to be ahead more times than not.

sikes

how did the AQ hand play out?

I assume you arent considering folding and wondering wether you should push.

I am pushing this, if he has 44,TT,KT, of which i can only see KsTs being there, boo hoo, but he is never letting a K go on the river, when he is getting >3/1. Would he three bet AK preflop? The turn raise sucks, cos he isnt pricing out a flush draw and its very unlikely you have a fd. I wouldn't be surprised if he turned over KcQc, KcJc, in fact, i think thats his most likely holdings.

Ste05

I don't fold sets, I think you played this perfectly.

cardshark202

Just so you know I'm not considering folding. Well, I did consider folding for a few seconds before I did what I did.

CoolBoardr

Would def call the river.

edit: whoops, didn't see you were deep,

DeadParrot

cardshark202 wrote:

Just so you know I'm not considering folding. Well, I did consider folding for a few seconds before I did what I did.

you shoved didn't you, if you did brave line and will again get called by and K

Ste05

I think a push has some merit, as only realistically K10, 44 and 1010 beat us and alot of K's will call. But I find it hard to see any decent K's, 1010 or K10 played like this. I think I'd probably just call, I think his most likely range is AK or 44 personally.

RacingSilver

As played I think you should call the river bet.
You have been the aggressor in the hand and he has been the passive caller.
If he has a set of fours (the only hand he could have that’s beating you), then his turn raise is a bit suspicious. Why did he not just call your turn bet, and hope that you’d bet into him again on the river ?
From his viewpoint, you might have missed the flop, especially because of your pre-flop raise, and you may just be trying to blow him out of the pot. So if he has a set of fours, then his raise on the turn is pointless – you’re just going to fold, and so he’s lost the possibility of extracting more money from you on the river.
If he is a reasonable player, then he has played it more like he has KQ or KJ than 44.
If he has KQ or KJ, then his turn raise makes perfect sense.

cardshark202

Ok well I think pushing here is pretty bad. He was playing pretty predictably, so I don't expect him to raise the turn a bet the river like that with many kings or anything (especially as I don't think there are many Kx hands in his calling range preflop). In fact, I felt on the river against this guy I was only beating a bluff, which was pretty unlikely given his passiveness postflop. In the end I made a crying call expecting to be behind actually. He had TT. I think if I had like 1k hands on him then I could give folding more consideration.

RacingSilver

Yeah, pushing is very bad. I still think youir opponent raising the turn with three 10s (or three 4s) is very poor. I think calling behind makes more money in the long run.
I think you have analysed your opponent well - hindsight is great !
I amy be wrong here but I gave him hands like KQ and KJ because of your general aggressive tendencies, although he may not have known that.
Would I be wrong here ?

sikes

RacingSilver wrote:

Yeah, pushing is very bad. I still think youir opponent raising the turn with three 10s (or three 4s) is very poor. I think calling behind makes more money in the long run.
I think you have analysed your opponent well - hindsight is great !
I amy be wrong here but I gave him hands like KQ and KJ because of your general aggressive tendencies, although he may not have known that.
Would I be wrong here ?

You are contradicting yourself here, if those hands are in his range then pushing is good. If he can have only AK, KcJc, KcQc in this spot as well as TT, 44 then pushing is fine. As soon as other Kx hands come in its auto push

cardshark202

RacingSilver wrote:

Yeah, pushing is very bad. I still think youir opponent raising the turn with three 10s (or three 4s) is very poor. I think calling behind makes more money in the long run.
I think you have analysed your opponent well - hindsight is great !
I amy be wrong here but I gave him hands like KQ and KJ because of your general aggressive tendencies, although he may not have known that.
Would I be wrong here ?

I doubt he would have noticed how aggro I had been playing(though I wasn't playing too aggro on that table).

Gholimoli

RacingSilver wrote:

As played I think you should call the river bet.
You have been the aggressor in the hand and he has been the passive caller.
If he has a set of fours (the only hand he could have that’s beating you), then his turn raise is a bit suspicious. Why did he not just call your turn bet, and hope that you’d bet into him again on the river ?
From his viewpoint, you might have missed the flop, especially because of your pre-flop raise, and you may just be trying to blow him out of the pot. So if he has a set of fours, then his raise on the turn is pointless – you’re just going to fold, and so he’s lost the possibility of extracting more money from you on the river.
If he is a reasonable player, then he has played it more like he has KQ or KJ than 44.
If he has KQ or KJ, then his turn raise makes perfect sense.

this is extreamly bad analysis IMO.

Lafortezza

Gholimoli wrote:

this is extreamly bad analysis IMO.

So why don't you add to it and explain why?

ntlbell

lafortezza wrote:

So why don't you add to it and explain why?

Haven't you noticed everyone just wants to be like Valor.

cardshark202

ntlbell wrote:

Haven't you noticed everyone just wants to be like Valor.

In fairness now what Valor can say in 2 words is worth more than most of the posters on this site.

RacingSilver

sikes wrote:

You are contradicting yourself here, if those hands are in his range then pushing is good. If he can have only AK, KcJc, KcQc in this spot as well as TT, 44 then pushing is fine. As soon as other Kx hands come in its auto push

No. Pushing is not fine.
Why would you push when if you get called, it will be by a better hand ?
If you push, then you're pretty much announcing you can beat KQ. If you know the opponent will call with KQ or KJ, then you can push, but I think this opponent is more likely to fold these hands, especially KJ.

RacingSilver

Gholimoli wrote:

this is extreamly bad analysis IMO.

I'm gutted.
Now if you can tell me where I went wrong, I will be most obliged.

sikes

RacingSilver wrote:

No. Pushing is not fine.
Why would you push when if you get called, it will be by a better hand ?
If you push, then you're pretty much announcing you can beat KQ. If you know the opponent will call with KQ or KJ, then you can push, but I think this opponent is more likely to fold these hands, especially KJ.

he is getting better than 3/1, with little hands between the two and this being .5/1, he is calling enough with those hands we beat for it to be profitable.

phantom_lord

You have been the aggressor in the hand and he has been the passive caller.

he raised the turn.

From his viewpoint, you might have missed the flop, especially because of your pre-flop raise, and you may just be trying to blow him out of the pot.So if he has a set of fours, then his raise on the turn is pointless – you’re just going to fold, and so he’s lost the possibility of extracting more money from you on the river.
If he is a reasonable player, then he has played it more like he has KQ or KJ than 44.
If he has KQ or KJ, then his turn raise makes perfect sense.

doubt it, k is a large part of his raising range, and he's firing two barrels. raising with a set makes perfect sense cause it gets value from aa/ak/qk or whatever.

raising kq/kj makes absolutely no sense. and he'd have to be pretty bad to do that.

raising sets here is good cause it builds the pot so he can get more value on the river. Saying that calling with sets makes more money is just plain wrong.

Marq

I haven't read the replies yet so I don't know the result.
I call the river. think you played the hand pretty well but I don't see a huge amount of value in raising the end.
I think his most likely hand is TT, but that's only marginally most likely. Pretty much all other hands I think you beat and shouldn't call a raise.

EDIT: w00t! my 1337 hand reading skillz pwn so hard.

RacingSilver

sikes wrote:

he is getting better than 3/1, with little hands between the two and this being .5/1, he is calling enough with those hands we beat for it to be profitable.

you're right - sorry. For some reason I thought he had a deeper stack. If he has KQ or KJ, then getting more than 3/1 makes it a very hard fold. I probably couldn't fold it, even though I'd not be too happy about it.

Gholimoli

RacingSilver wrote:

As played I think you should call the river bet.
You have been the aggressor in the hand and he has been the passive caller.
If he has a set of fours (the only hand he could have that’s beating you), then his turn raise is a bit suspicious. Why did he not just call your turn bet, and hope that you’d bet into him again on the river ?
From his viewpoint, you might have missed the flop, especially because of your pre-flop raise, and you may just be trying to blow him out of the pot. So if he has a set of fours, then his raise on the turn is pointless – you’re just going to fold, and so he’s lost the possibility of extracting more money from you on the river.
If he is a reasonable player, then he has played it more like he has KQ or KJ than 44.
If he has KQ or KJ, then his turn raise makes perfect sense.

ok ,
first of villain has not been passive ,he has called the flop,raised hero on the turn and has bet on the river,i dont see this line as passive at all.

second the turn raise by villain is not suspisouse ?
you seem to recommend here that should indeed villain have a set here he should just call our bet with the intention of raising the river.
this is really bad and flawed.
villain has a very strong hand and as such he needs to get as much money in the pot as possible,by not raising the turn 1.he has missed one street to get money in the pot 2.as a result of not raising the turn ,the pot is now smaller on the river resulting in smaller bets/raises on the river.
for example if pot is 5BB on the turn and hero bets 5BB,then if villain flat calls the pot will be 15BB on the river.now hero checks the river and villain can bet 10-15BB on the river in relation to the pot.
now if we go back to the turn which was 5BB,now hero bets 5BB and villain makes it 15BB.hero calls and the pot is now 35BB on the river.
any susequent bet is not nearly twice as big which is what we want with a strong hand.

"From his viewpoint, you might have missed the flop, especially because of your pre-flop raise, and you may just be trying to blow him out of the pot. So if he has a set of fours, then his raise on the turn is pointless – you’re just going to fold, and so he’s lost the possibility of extracting more money from you on the river."

this is all very bad.
why is it that from his point of view we have missed the flop?
why is it that the flop raise says we have missed the flop?
can not have AA,AK,KQ,KJ,QQ,22,44,TT,KT here?

why are we going to fold a semi strong/strong hand to his riase on the turn?
none of the above makes any sense really.

"If he is a reasonable player, then he has played it more like he has KQ or KJ than 44.
If he has KQ or KJ, then his turn raise makes perfect sense"

again this is totally wrong.
KJ,KQ should not play this way at all as that holding is not really that strong so want to pay a big pot with.
if he had KQ,KJ then his trun raise would often be a mistake and not as you said make perfect sense.

RacingSilver

To Gholimoli and Phanthom_Lord.

Ok, thanks for the comments !

In my first post I stated
"You have been the aggressor in the hand and he has been the passive caller."
Sorry, that was a mistake. I had meant to include that line along with my recommendation of him calling the turn, and letting you continue being the aggressor.
I should have deleted it, because as you both say his actual play wasn't passive.


Gholimoli - get it right - I didn't say "from his point of view we have missed the flop".
I said we may have missed the flop - there's a big difference.
(By the way, when I say missed the flop, I don't include hands like AA,QQ !)
If the OP has missed the flop, and the caller has a set, then calling may result in winning extra money on the river ?
If the OP has connected with the flop (i.e.from aa/ak/qk or whatever), he will probably still pay you off on the river.
Gholimoli, your example of the 5BB, 15BB, etc. is fine - we all know the pot-building theory. There's also a theory of extracting as much money as possible without scaring off your opponent - there can be a fine line between the two, and I would consider this specific hand an example of trying to be on the right side of that line, and I don't think it's simple.
If the OP has a hand like AK and the villian had checked the turn, then all the money is going in on the river anyway,
i.e. your well written 5BB, 15BB example counts for little.

You said "none of the above makes any sense really" - this is based on me saying that the OP has missed the flop !

Using phrases like 'bad and flawed" and "this is all very bad" is stupid - if you don't agree, fine, just give your take on it.


Phanthom_Lord said
"raising kq/kj makes absolutely no sense. and he'd have to be pretty bad to do that. "
Gholimoli said
"KJ,KQ should not play this way at all as that holding is not really that strong so want to pay a big pot with.
if he had KQ,KJ then his turn raise would often be a mistake and not as you said make perfect sense."

I strongly disagree. Raising with KQ,KJ is not unreasonable. You may win the pot immediately which is great if the OP has a hand like AQ,AJ, QQ, JJ and he rivers a flush, straight or trips. Not giving him a free card in this situation is vital. Also, if he reraises you can consider folding - this is good because if you just call and he raises or check-raises the river,it may cost you more.


Phanthom_Lord said
"raising sets here is good cause it builds the pot so he can get more value on the river. Saying that calling with sets makes more money is just plain wrong."
Don't put words in my mouth to bolster your own argument. I didn't say that as a general rule, I said it specifically relating to this hand.

phantom_lord

Don't put words in my mouth to bolster your own argument. I didn't say that as a general rule, I said it specifically relating to this hand.

I meant in this hand too, but it's a good general rule anyway! I don't need to bolster my argument. u say he should raise kq but flat call with a set? that's illogical.

I strongly disagree. Raising with KQ,KJ is not unreasonable. You may win the pot immediately which is great if the OP has a hand like AQ,AJ, QQ, JJ and he rivers a flush, straight or trips. Not giving him a free card in this situation is vital. Also, if he reraises you can consider folding - this is good because if you just call and he raises or check-raises the river,it may cost you more.

it's terrible.

the chance of him having those hands, or rivering you with those hands is quite slim.

*sigh* that's just nonsense and again illogical.

Captain Tom

i think this is close to a push.just because raising turn with Kx is awful doesnt mean players dont do it.villian can easily call with worse considering pot odds.never fold.

racing silver,your thought process for this hand is flawed on many levels.

Gholimoli

RacingSilver wrote:

To Gholimoli and Phanthom_Lord.

Ok, thanks for the comments !

In my first post I stated
"You have been the aggressor in the hand and he has been the passive caller."
Sorry, that was a mistake. I had meant to include that line along with my recommendation of him calling the turn, and letting you continue being the aggressor.
I should have deleted it, because as you both say his actual play wasn't passive.


Gholimoli - get it right - I didn't say "from his point of view we have missed the flop".
I said we may have missed the flop - there's a big difference.
(By the way, when I say missed the flop, I don't include hands like AA,QQ !)
If the OP has missed the flop, and the caller has a set, then calling may result in winning extra money on the river ?
If the OP has connected with the flop (i.e.from aa/ak/qk or whatever), he will probably still pay you off on the river.
Gholimoli, your example of the 5BB, 15BB, etc. is fine - we all know the pot-building theory. There's also a theory of extracting as much money as possible without scaring off your opponent - there can be a fine line between the two, and I would consider this specific hand an example of trying to be on the right side of that line, and I don't think it's simple.
If the OP has a hand like AK and the villian had checked the turn, then all the money is going in on the river anyway,
i.e. your well written 5BB, 15BB example counts for little.

You said "none of the above makes any sense really" - this is based on me saying that the OP has missed the flop !

Using phrases like 'bad and flawed" and "this is all very bad" is stupid - if you don't agree, fine, just give your take on it.


Phanthom_Lord said
"raising kq/kj makes absolutely no sense. and he'd have to be pretty bad to do that. "
Gholimoli said
"KJ,KQ should not play this way at all as that holding is not really that strong so want to pay a big pot with.
if he had KQ,KJ then his turn raise would often be a mistake and not as you said make perfect sense."

I strongly disagree. Raising with KQ,KJ is not unreasonable. You may win the pot immediately which is great if the OP has a hand like AQ,AJ, QQ, JJ and he rivers a flush, straight or trips. Not giving him a free card in this situation is vital. Also, if he reraises you can consider folding - this is good because if you just call and he raises or check-raises the river,it may cost you more.


Phanthom_Lord said
"raising sets here is good cause it builds the pot so he can get more value on the river. Saying that calling with sets makes more money is just plain wrong."
Don't put words in my mouth to bolster your own argument. I didn't say that as a general rule, I said it specifically relating to this hand.

Dude first of all chill,
The reason why I didn’t give reason’s in my first post when I pointed out that your analysis was extremely bad and poor was this.
But then you asked me to explain I though well here is a lad who wants to learn where he is wrong.
Then you come up with this post, which is an attempt to justify your first post except it has more mistakes in it.

I don’t think there is much wrong with me saying something is wrong or flawed as long as I give a valid reason for it .you made comments on your first post that were flat out wrong (and in this post) .how would like me to address them?
Try to understand that I don’t even know you so anything in my post’s cant possibly be a personal abuse/attack or anything of that nature but the attack is at the logic and the thought process behind the post which is again (sorry but I have to say it) mostly wrong.
Now you can either take this personally and defend your flawed logic with even more flawed posts and logic or start thinking about it and ask specific questions where it does not make sense to you or where you are lost.
To give you an example I will explain one place where I think (judging by your post ) you may be lost :

Pot building versus scaring opponents off with big bets
You said you know pot building is good but you also don’t wanna scare opponents either that’s why you think in this hand its better to call his bet ratter than raising him and our logic seems to be that if you raise him he may fold a lot of hands that you could extract more money with on the river(because of an extra value bet/bluff by him on the river).
Ok to make this simple we assume 3 different scenarios :

1.our opponent has a very strong hand on the turn(top two pair and above)
2.our opponent has a marginal hand (up to button two pair)
3.he has nothing

1.he has a very strong hand:
Is this case you should not be afraid of raising him because there is not a chance of scaring him off and if he is happy to play a big pot when you have big hand then fine by you. so a raise here will result in him calling or raising but either way you will not scare him off.

2.he has a marginal hand
Now in this case a raise could very well scare him off depending on a lot of things such as strength of his hand, the bored, what he thinks of you, what he thinks of your hand strength, stack size etc but its very possible that he may fold to a raise.
So this is the case where you are seemingly right in saying “I don’t wanna scare him off”.
But it’s all about how much money he is willing to put in to the pot on the river.
Most semi decent opponents will switch off with most of their hands when they have been called on two streets. so with a marginal hand he will more than likely check the turn to you and he may or may not call a bet from you.
Again you cant comment on these situation in isolation but you get the general idea that is with a marginal hand he will not put much more money in the pot if he is decent.

3.he is bluffing and has nothing
now if that’s the case a raise by you would very well scare him off as he has nothing but then again because he has nothing he is not going to put more money in the pot.
You have called his raise pre-flop, called his bet on the turn, called him on the river as well so he wants to be a total nut to try another barrel .
So all an all as you can see you should not really be concenred about if you will scare him off or not,what you should be thinking about is what impact “scaring him off” would have on your situation and EV.
This goes with a lot concepts that people in general learn about a theory or a concept but fail to truly understand that concept and adjust it when it actually needs adjusting.
Another such concept that I can see (based on your post) that you have problem with is giving free card v protecting your hand.
I let you think about this one your self.

God im feeling really generous today.

phantom_lord

RacingSilver wrote:

If he has a set of fours (the only hand he could have that’s beating you), then his turn raise is a bit suspicious. Why did he not just call your turn bet

cause he wants to win more $$$ obv.

valor

Well, the main thing here for me is that the stats are only over 50 hands. If he had those stats over a resaonable sample size you should fold

shoving is complete spew here, its close between call and fold but im a station so its a call

RacingSilver

Well Gholimoli, I'm very impressed with the depth of your response, thanks for taking the time. My overall view of it is that it is very good and I don't think I disagree with anything in it on principle.
I honestly don't see how it contradicts my previous point (and I'm not trying to irritate you)
i.e.
Case 1 - opponent has very strong hand. in that case whether you raise or just call may not make much of a difference as all the money may go in on the river anyway.
Case 2 - if opponent has a marginal hand, then will he not fold to a turn raise ? but is there not a chance that he will make a crying call on the river ?
Case 3 - he's bluffing. Then raising the turn achieves nothing. Maybe he will pick up something on the river, and again make a crying call.

I'm honestly not trying to justify any previous posts. I'll change my mind if I can be convinced (my ego isn't that big).

As regards protecting your hand ( if you have say KQ), then I would like someone to tell me why raising the turn is so awful ? I wouldn't always do it but I can't believe that if calling is an option, then raising isnt ? I've outlined reasons for this already.