[low] Weird spot facing out of turn river bet with over-pair at 1/3
Thought this river spot was interesting. Let me know what you think.
Parx Philly. Sunday evening. 1/3, $100-$500 buy-in.
i mean the smaller you raise the more likely he is to call. this is important as you have nowhere close to the nuts
idk i dont have much of a plan for a jam as i don't think it happens often. id err on the side of folding but you could randomize if you want. i dont think xrai is a particularly good size with our hand but i have no real sample here to draw on. i think you are pretty toast vs b3b ai here and you have much stronger hands in your range presumably
mdf looks like v would be risking 300 to win 400 so if you're truly paranoid that v is either going for some insane thin value bet otr turned into b3b all in minraise bluff or over valuing something, you'd want to call around 58% of the time. i think this is a truly horrible way to evaluate this particular spot and i would just look at it logically and assume he has 0 bluffs as thats a truly crazy play that your base case should be no one is doing until proven otherwise and it would be very difficult for the player type listed to overplay something facing this sort of line so i would mostly fold (the spot in general).
tbf we dont have that many stronger hands but tt and discounted 22 along with like 98ss and kq i think show up. really doubt this is a spot where range and blockers and stuff matter though. in practice bet small / 3bet all in is a line you almost never see and very few people even have in their arsenal. especially in a spot like this where this isn't clear blocker effects in play (like a 3 flush board) i would imagine its incredibly underbluffed. i get this is a once off because of the out of turn bet but idk man.
if i had to make it 120 otr i would take my time and stack up multiple stacks of 60 and make an exxagerated show that i thought i was only calling so he feels stupider about his out of turn bet. i would not actually do this
It’s worth thinking through again the impact of the out-of-turn action.
So, for instance, if you had just bet 120 and he raised would you call? I suspect not.
I mean, is he more likely to bluff 3bet river simply because your min-click (to earn what you would’ve earnt if betting first) reopens the action?
The mere fact that he now has more opportunity to show absolute strength is what makes the out-of-turn blocker bet advantageous.
As an angle, however unethical, it’s an effective way of getting a cheaper showdown/thin value.
I ended up jamming, laying V 2:1 on a call. My reasoning in game was that V would very rarely be bluffing in this line, but I could be. I also didn't think I could ever fold to a 3B getting 3:1.
V went deep into the tank, muttering about me repping jacks full. I took that as a sign my jam was good, and that he might have Jx that calls. Eventually he did flick in the call, and showed KQo, no flush suit.
Sucks for me that I ran into the top of his range, but if he's calling with KQo, I think he's calling with any Jx combo.
If he barely wants to call with KQ he probably doesn’t call with worse than QQ
See, I think he's a thinking player who understands blockers and relative hand strength. If he has Jx, he blocks JJ. If he has JT, he blocks JJ and TT. Any combo of Jx or Tx with a K or Q in it blocks boats and straights.
KQ isn't the nuts. If he's going for thin value, which is what this seems like, I think all his thin value hands that bet the river are likely to flick in the call with this action, because all his other thin value hands block the nuts.
KQ is actually the one hand that doesn't block me from having a boat, so if he calls with KQ, knowing I could have a boat, then I think he definitely calls when he blocks boats and straights. I think he calls with all his KJ, QJ, and JT, and it would be pretty hard for him to fold AJ.
It's a weird situation for him when he thinks action checks to him, because it's unlikely I'm going to check the river with a boat after I bet the turn. Once he realizes I didn't check, and he bets out of turn, as submersible said, I'm still uncapped.
He could be betting small with KQ or Jx hoping to get a crying call, but then when I raise, he has to ask what hands in my range are strong enough to raise. His Jx obviously loses to KQ and all my over-pairs, and KQ loses to all my boats. But if he thinks he induced me to raise as a bluff by betting small and out of turn, he kind of has to call down with a lot of his JX, and maybe even some TX, and definitely JT.
I actually think KQ is a harder call for him than JX or TX, because it looks a lot like I have a boat when I jam, and JX and TX block more of my thick value than KQ, which really doesn't block anything, and could just be a chop.
i doubt he b/c the river with jx more than 10% of the time vs jam. jt im at least open to hearing arguments for him calling. it seems like you're over thinking things here in an attempt to avoid accepting you may have made a mistake (standard docvail thread). you're playing 1/3 vs randoms and you treat these hands like theyre chess matches against nose bleed regs lol.
again. the smaller you raise the more likely he is to call. this is important as you have nowhere close to the nuts
Doc, you jammed or check-jammed?
Say BB folds and we raise to $160. If BTN 3B's, are we folding?
I'm asking with the assumption that we're raising for value with what we think is the best hand. It would seem to be a disaster if we raise/fold and V is just over-valuing a worse hand.
Yes, would fold to 3b shove... In small stakes games most players, when confused and having a medium strength hand, will default to calling not reraising.
But if he thinks he induced me to raise as a bluff by betting small and out of turn, he kind of has to call down with a lot of his JX, and maybe even some TX, and definitely JT.
Curious to know whether you believe he intentionally bet-out-of-turn to induce a raise? It sounds like Villain's a relatively experienced player, given what you say about his understanding of blockers etc.
On the other hand, why wouldn't he want you to bet first and then just raise/shove, given the strength of his hand?
Like I said I'm just curious because it's hard to establish how often players angle in general.
Curious to know whether you believe he intentionally bet-out-of-turn to induce a raise? It sounds like Villain's a relatively experienced player, given what you say about his understanding of blockers etc.On the other hand, why wouldn't he want you to bet first and then just raise/shove, given the strength of his hand?Like I said I'm just curious because it's hard to establish
I don't think he intentionally bet out of turn to induce a raise. It wouldn't make sense when I bet the turn.
If I thought he was angling, I'd have to think about what he's trying to accomplish. He could possibly be hoping for a cheaper showdown than he'd get if I double barrel for 2/3 pot or more, or he could be trying to induce a raise.
I don't think I'd give him credit for a monster here. I think JJ and TT are automatic 3B's pre, and I think he isn't taking this line with 22 or even just 2X. If he has a monster he wouldn't want to risk me folding when it looks like I might bet again. He should want to give me every opportunity to put money into the pot, not scare me out of it.
So that just leaves him with bluffs and thin value. And I don't think he's going to try to angle when he has thin value or a bluff. At least not with an out of turn bet. More likely he'd try to feign strength by acting as if he planned to call no matter how much I bet, by making a show of gathering calling chips as I was cutting out my bet.
Based on this logic and card removal, I was weighting his range heavily towards bluffs and worse value, which is why I jammed. I think the way this played out, I look pretty polarized, or at a minimum I could have more bluffs in my range, so he has a to call with more of his thin value.
