Big bet into 4-flush river, line/range check?
Presenting this one without Hero's cards as I'm not terribly proud of the line given my hand and I'm much more interested in what ranges are likely to get here in order to contextualize the choice of line.
Hero probably has a bit of a TAG image. Table has been unusually into folding pre, and 5x opens from MP actually buy the blinds almost half the time. Early in the session so we haven't shown anything yet, played relatively few hands and either took the pot down or folded.
Villain seems like a pretty competent thinking MAWG reg; has a giant triangle of redbird stacks like he came from a 20-40 limit table. Don't have too much of a read on him, but he seems to be playing pretty reasonably with the most notable deviation (shared with the whole table) being sizing turn and river bets based on previous bets rather than the pot. By this I mean that if the flop and turn were bet for 10 and 15 respectively, then a "big bet" on the river is going to be 25 or 30 because it's "bigger", even though it's less than half pot. However, the table is folding to these like they are actually pot-sized bets, so maybe it pays to go along with it a little?
OTTH:
1/2 NL 8-max
Hero (effective stack at $470) opens to $8 from MP. Villain ($1,350 or so, working on a size-5 triangle) on the BN calls, and the BB comes along.
Flop ($21): Jc 8c 3h
BB checks, Hero bets $10, V calls, BB folds.
Turn ($39): 6c
Hero bets $15, V calls.
River ($67): 2c
Hero bets $55 (I sized down a little bit due to table dynamic above, I expect call/fold more like a "normal result" from an $85 bet or so).
Questions: Is it ever right to c-bet flop second to act on this board? What is a good range, if so? What does Hero's range look like after taking this bet-bet-bet line? What does Villain get to the river with? What is Villain likely to fold here?
8 Replies
Vs 2, im only cbetting flop if i hit a piece of the board. checking back on complete whiffs like ak
River is a polarizing bet, i rather bet like 35~40 with range. Some ppl are more inclined to bluff catch vs a polarizing bet. Some does it even without any clubs.
V range does have alot of 1 clubs hand. The question is which part does he fold?
It's very dependent on villain since some even call down light with non flush. Some folds a club to even the tiniest bet.
I guess bluffing river is ok, but i probably wouldn't run a 3barrel bluff then a polarizing bet on river with not much reads.
As for what does your hand look like with 3barrel and polarizing bet on river nuts/air is probably your range.
If you did it with like something Ten of clubs for thin value, good for you, but it's very villain dependent to make such move. Villains range isn't really capped on river. If river was a blank I don't mind even with an overbet with whole range.
Against an unknown, I tend to play more faceup.
If I had to guess, you made some random bluff, villain snapped with a non club.
Then you go on tilt thinking wtf was that fish doing.
Btw, not sure if this is the case for your pool.
But at the place I play at, ppl are more willing to call 'big' river bets in small pots than 'small' bets in big pots.
Ie. people prefer to call 100 or less bets whether the pot is big or small.
Once bets get more than 100$ then they start folding more on river. Doesn't matter if it's 1/5 pot or pot size.
Preflop and flop bet sizes don't matter as well, they call if they like their hand.
Vs 2, im only cbetting flop if i hit a piece of the board. checking back on complete whiffs like ak
I do generally play that way.. concerns me a little I'm not sure I really understand why though, especially acting 2/3 versus 2/4 or 3/4. That board should be a range check HU OOP, and I'm not sure the true logic behind betting more multiway with more left to act (more draws to charge or fold?) but it feels "right".
Part of my concern is how much betting flop narrows my range by the river.
Does he actually? That's one of the things that motivated this thread.
At the table, I was thinking a lot about what rank of club might stick around for what bet size. Thinking about the hand later, I'm not seeing almost any small clubs in V's range. Flush hands feel like they are Jx with a club (probably A, K, or Q, maybe T), Ax suited that chose not to raise (discounted), and pocket pairs with a club (plausible there is some 99 and worse that stuck around for two streets small). V doesn't have a fish's "any ace, any s00ted" flatting range here, and I doubt he has something as weak as A8o (which still would be a high club)... A3o with the club 3 seems inconceivable from him.
Btw, not sure if this is the case for your pool.But at the place I play at, ppl are more willing to call 'big' river bets in small pots than 'small' bets in big pots.Ie. people prefer to call 100 or less bets whether the pot is big or small.Once bets get more than 100$ then they start folding more on river. Doesn't matter if it's 1/5 pot or pot size.Preflop and flop bet sizes
I think you mean "players play the number of dollars in the bet, not fraction of pot"? If so, yeah, much of my pool does that and it's pretty universal IME at LLSNL. That was another consideration in not actually betting pot or more on the river, as $50 plus tends to play as "serious, big bet" almost regardless of pot size.
What makes you think this? There are a lot hands that the solver bets at least 1/3 of the time, and that's against a GTO opponent who's going to raise you A LOT more frequently than will some low-limit rando.
What makes you think this There are a lot hands that the solver bets at least 1/3 of the time, and that's against a GTO opponent who's going to raise you A LOT more frequently than will some low-limit rando.
J high boards are generally bad for an earlier position raiser, and checking...
GTOw 9max 100bb LJ open and BTN call ... LJ checks the flop 88.9% ... and it's mixing to an extent that humans probably never could get close to.
Some of it's patterns could maybe be implemented, some less so:
It likes QcTc about 50% more than QhTh, and about 3x more than the other two QTs hands.
But then KTs swaps the clubs vs. heart frequencies and then K9s still prefers hearts but basically never bets diamond or spades.
T9s is bet roughly the same amount by all suits.
No hand gets close to 33% frequency, although everything is bet for 33% pot. JJ and A3s are about the highest frequencies, at maybe 20% of the time.
Then we opened way larger, and there's 3 people in the pot instead of 2. Also EV of check or bet 33% pot looked very close for all the hands I could see.
So range check seems like an okay approximation IMO.
As to the question ... I heavily dislike questions like "wtf should my range be here" mainly because you are turning a normal post of "here is the combo I turned up with" into a much more complex "I have 233ish combos, do any look like this line?"
Eg. Turn I would probably bet more or check. River is a weird dynamic in that I'd likely be very flush heavy on the river, so V should probably fold non-flushes to a third pot bet.
As to the question ... I heavily dislike questions like "wtf should my range be here" mainly because you are turning a normal post of "here is the combo I turned up with" into a much more complex "I have 233ish combos, do any look like this line?"Eg. Turn I would probably bet more or check. River is a weird dynamic in that I'd likely be very flush heavy on the river, so V shoul
See, I appreciate getting into discussions like your point here though 😀 In this case I'm less interested in knowing what I should have done with my specific cards and much more interested in thinking about the story I was fitting into, especially because I think I was completely wrong at the table to be thinking about all the low clubs V could hold.
If you're betting bigger (polar?) on the turn, does that include thick value like sets? Are you expecting V to raise with the nuts even facing a bigger bet, and folding a set to it? I imagine top pair has to check then?
As played, I think my value is fairly clear - at least I knew what I was trying to rep even at the table: AJ/KJ/AA/KK/QQ with a club, plus maybe a bit of QJ/JT/TT/99 with a club, and I guess A3cc. I don't really think I have other two-club combos that bet the flop unless we're really supposed to be betting out the draw, but that feels like we're just charging ourself. The rest of my range honestly feels like the above without a club, plus JJ/88 and maybe A8s.
Villain's range actually feels like it's kind of similar except can have more draws that are calling my bets: lots of two-club hands with a high club make it to the turn but hopefully would have raised it, T9s is in the mix too... and obviously missing combos that would have 3b pre.
I don't have a node-locked solver I can go plug that into to ruminate on, so I'm a little unsure if going polar is right, and particularly what to pull for bluffs.
If you want to know the actual result...
Spoiler
Villain went deep, deep into the tank, looking for tells and agonizing. He eventually tossed in the call.
I had decided to turn KJss into a bluff here, honestly in a moment of irrational "can't let this pot get away from me" syndrome. It was a quiet night, so this was my biggest loss hand and so what I picked to study.
Villain turned over the two remaining Jacks for top set, and made a comment about thinking he slow-played them into oblivion... which, yeah.
If you're betting bigger (polar?) on the turn, does that include thick value like sets? Are you expecting V to raise with the nuts even facing a bigger bet, and folding a set to it? I imagine top pair has to check then?
Not all sets are equal.
Yes, you should often check one pair, two pair and straights on a flush board OOP. Esp. vs. a competent reg.
Yes, I wouldn't be shocked if a 1/2 rando raised all flushes to a bet on the turn.
V as described maybe not, esp. as there's really only T9s/54s non-premium flushes (and Tc9c is super likely to raise flop).
Also even the worst players can sometimes just call Ac9c on turn, because they expect to have the nuts and position on the river.
The reason people get away with betting way too much on this kind of turn is that too many 1-2 players are spew calling lots of off suit hands preflop, and so don't hit flushes on the turn as much as they should. But you are still playing a guessing game, and have to autofold your hand to a raise.
But that wasn't the read you had on V so what do you expect to get called by on the turn that is worse than your hand? QcJ? Turn bet is basically a bluff already, IMO.
Also, see:
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/170/l...
Spoiler
To be fair, while I dislike turn with your hand river is probably good as you should have very few bluffs on river (assuming you don't spew turn so often that river is overbluffing).
Saying that I'm not sure that river 55 is the same as 85 from V's POV.
The reason people get away with betting way too much on this kind of turn is that too many 1-2 players are spew calling lots of off suit hands preflop, and so don't hit flushes on the turn as much as they should. But you are still playing a guessing game, and have to autofold your hand to a raise.But that wasn't the read you had on V so what do you expect to get called by on th
At the table, I was mostly still on fishing autopilot: bet/fold turn and brick rivers small, collecting value from the really wide calldown range of most fish. The club river shook me out of that.
For a small turn bet, I think there is still some range that calls worse, probably mostly at the edge of his PF flatting range: QJ/JT/T9s/98s, TT/99, A8s, possibly even A3s. Competent though he may be, I think this V is still significantly underbluffing a raise, so I have some comfort in betting anyway since it's a really easy fold.
With more consideration though, I now realize we're probably at a pretty bad nut disadvantage OTT with V having way more flush combos and I'm not even convinced we still have a range advantage. What I utterly failed to consider at the table is how tight the ranges have gotten given actually-competent ranges getting to the flop and assuming that any complete air is long gone.
I'm not sure I love a big turn bet here since it seems really liable to run into a big flush, but with all this thinking I might be moving toward checking range on this turn. Assuming it's a correct inference that our pure club draws checked the flop, we might just be behind here.
Spoiler
If betting wide and small OTT, my final thought is that bluffs probably need to be a small-frequency mixed strategy to avoid a spewy quantity of bluffs.
On the actual hand, I suspect V would have called 85 too, as I think it really just came down to being emotionally unable to fold a flopped top set. Ironically I think he would have folded a small club for 55, if that were a possible hand.
