I love that you return to that basic hand analysis format once in a while, James! You´re still the greatest and most in-depth/informative poker related channel to help improving my game on RUclips to me!
if he is raise folding that river, than I think its just better to call... and if he wants to go to the end with his str8, than raise to like 250 maybe even more and call shove, or maybe even push all in after that small bet... but i will prefer just call over raise folding...you are giving him chance to bluff you out of pot (but I think he is almoust never bluff shoving that river)
I reckon that villain has A7 hearts or spades. Explains limp - call Explains calling smallish flop and turn bets Explains small bet on river (first aggression) I think villain then sees the $150 dollar bet as weakness and goes over the top as he overvalues top pair.
A couple things worth considering: 1) Villain was passive Pre-flop through Turn, then leads out with a suspiciously low bet (vs. Pot-size). While it could have been that Villain spiked the Ace, the RISK is out there that he's slow-playing a monster. 2) If you just call Villain's River-bet, you drag a nice pot...keeping in perspective...with 9-8 offsuit. If Villain was trapping, you lose a minimum. 3) Because you bet/raised on EVERY Street, you never got any intel other than Call, Call, Call. Maybe a Check on the Turn induces Villain to lead out on the River. A Turn-check (falsely) gives your hand the image as two Overs (AK, AQ, KQ, etc.). Then you can really get a Read based off Villain leading out on the River. Bottom line...having to fold a Straight there was sad...and possibly unnecessary, because of your Greedy River-raise.
James (SplitSuit) Hero got his 1st "assertive" feedback on Villain's River Re-Raise/Jam...and he folds. I'm not trying to be Cheeky, but where's our "Value" when we have to fold?
Running into the top 10% of somebody's range doesn't mean you weren't maxing value against the other 90% which you crushed. Not saying the density in this exact hand is 90/10, but just laying out the framework to insert your own assumptions =)
James I agree with your conclusion, I feel like more pressure should have been applied on flop and turn before the river considering stack sizes at 2:1 and villain limped in. Then if we make the river raise, we need to be prepared to defend with a higher frequency. Definitely a spot where knowing your opponent helps, being able to play exploitatively.
ik this is an old video but I think flat calling has a lot of value; Villains line is very strange here and by flat calling you guarantee that you see his cards; seeing showdowns has a lot of value, I know you want to extract maximum value with a straight here but lets not act like flat calling isn't an option; I think seeing showdowns is such a crucial part of ranging your opponents accurately
My initial reaction was that $150 is a good raise, for the reasons you stated (I actually think going much bigger than this - even to $190 - would push out more hands than could be netted by the extra money when you do get calls). However, after thinking about it more, I think I like a call on the river. I don't think Villain can reasonably be stone cold bluffing here - the bet sizing is way too small. So, the only options are (1) it's a blocker bet with a marginal hand, or (2) it's a small bet meant to induce a raise, because Villain has a boat. At first, I thought Villain's bet was a blocker, but the more I thought about it, the less that made sense. Hero's range is somewhat polarized here - he either has a strong T (or better) or nothing. I don't see any middling hand taking the line that Hero has to this point. So, given the semi-polarized range, does a blocker bet make sense? Not really. If Hero has nothing, then all the blocker bet does is (1) fold out a worse hand or (2) induce a worse hand to raise, which is not what you want if you're blocking in the first place. The dearth of marginal hands in Hero's range means Hero isn't going to be just calling very often. However, a $45 bet makes at least a little more sense if Villain has a boat. If Hero has a solid hand (Tx or better), he will often raise such a small "obvious" blocker bet on the river, so Villain gets more value than he would have if he had just checked and let hero bet. If, on the other hand, Hero has nothing, $45 looks so weak that he may still raise. In most cases, that raise is going to be a lot bigger than an open bet would have been. Further, in the rare instances where Hero has a marginal hand, he'll probably call the $45, which may be more than Villain would have otherwise gotten out of him (either by checking (in which case Hero may check behind) or raising bigger (in which case Hero would usually fold). The obvious pitfall to the small river bet with a monster is that you risk (1) if Hero has nothing, folding out a hand that might have tried to bluff you, or (2) if Hero has a solid hand, getting a call when Hero likely would have bet bigger had you just checked to him. However, the small bet still makes more sense when Villain has a monster than when he has a marginal hand, so I'm not certain it makes a ton of sense to raise. All of this, of course, is placing a thought process on Villain that might not exist. However, I think, because the small bet doesn't make sense for middling hands, we should place more weight on Villain having a monster, which gives greater credence to just calling, rather than raising.
Why not just call the donk on the river?? I mean, given such a small bet, I´m pretty sure we minimize our risk factor by doing that in the long run, right?
Yeah sure, I get what you´re saying! I know what "maximize EV" means, I did that playing cash tables in 2015! But then I lost everything, so for someone who has been facing so much bad luck like me, it´s just not the same! Go check out my BOOM! hand replayer, if you don´t believe me! My nickname on Stars is "Fizzral"!!
we minimize our risk, yes. But we also minimize our profit with a monster hand against a bad player. The reward far outways the risk here. And you would also make yourself super exploitable (not saying this villian could exploit you) by allowing your opponent to chose the size of the river bet, when you would want it to be bigger.
We minimize our profit with a monster hand against a bad player? Really? How bad do you assume, our opponent is in this hand? What range do you assign to him after the river raise? Because I know exactly, what range I would assign to him! And with a striaght, I´m beating less than half of my opponents range, but for this cheap price, I better tend to call, than to fold and never know for future hands (because knowledge about playing tendencies pays off against "bad players" in the long run as opposed to "good players"!)
When we make our move on the river (after he donked 45$ into us), he hasn't raised yet at all. He only called all the way and is now trying to manipulate us into seeing a cheap showdown. He has a very wide range (assuming he's a fish) at this point. He can have pretty much any pair/trips on the entire board. I treat the 98 almost the same as I would a boat here, since I consider it to be ahead of about 95% of his river-donking range, especially to that price.
I hate having to fold to that 3-bet on that river. I hate it so much that it motivates me to go back in the hand to look for previous errors that led us into such a terrible spot. I found one pre-flop - opening 89o isn't horrible on the button, but it's certainly not something I would consider +EV overall. Therefore, I think this whole debacle is best avoided by folding pre-flop. But let's pretend we have 89s to make the pre-flop play reasonable - it wouldn't effect the rest of the hand at all since it's a full rainbow on the turn. I can still find a previous error that, by correcting, we can avoid making this really crummy fold. When Villain donks into us on the river after check/calling every other street, I see that as very polarizing - it's either a boat or a missed draw. Given how few missed draws there are, Villain's range is weighted toward boats (I'd assume that AT is the most likely holding). I don't see much relevance in the absurd sizing since most live players don't view their bet sizes in terms of pot percentages but in dollar amounts instead. Personally, I think we should call that $45 on the river. We're not calling because we expect the pot to come our way after we do, but because we'd be getting information on Villain for a stupidly good price and every once in a while, when we find ourselves in one of the crazier of the crazy towns, we might just be ahead of Villain's 2-pair/trips.
Kesle n never a missed draw. after betting two streets the bet on the river is not enough to make anyone fold. river bet is either a blocker bet or a bet to induce.
I like your comment about never raise-folding the nut-straight here, but I respectfully, but strongly disagree with you statement of VILLAINs range being polarized. After getting iso-ed perflop, bet flop and bet turn at, not even a monster-fish would assume that HERO would fold to a donk-bet of 1/6 pot. This looks like a clear blocker bet to me, either by some Tx or by a random pair. This is a must-raise, and I actually WOULD shove against this bet. It's only a slight overbet, and I also disagree with James here, because if VILLAIN is indeed the fish we think he is, he would moan for half an hour, but he would never fold a Ten here. Yes, sometimes he will snap us off with T7 or even Aces, and it will suck. But I think this is still a much more +EV play than either a) calling his donk (missing massive value and making ourselves exploitable) b) raise-folding one of our strongest hands here. But even given as played: At the end of the day, who knows? VILLAIN may had fallen in love with KT here and 3-bet the river "for value" with it.
Right on +Michel Smiffi My theory here is that it's not even really a blocker bet. Cause what would even block? 88, 99, 7x, MAYBE T9, MAYBE a limped high PP. The villain is just a shit player who thinks the river will check through and is betting to make sure they get some amount of value.
I'm thinking that we had to raise and call if he 3-bet us on that river. Although it seems the villain is very strong ( he has a full house) he might just think we have a big pair or a broadway hand, because our bets could mean that... With our agressive approach pre-flop and on flop and turn we almost never have 8-9, so the villain thinks his 10-8 6-7 J-10 is good. Or it could've have been an extremely elaborated bluff by the villain, I don't know, but I wouldn't have folded on the river, just because it's so hard for us to have a straight on that spot. Thank you if you read this, and tell me what you think too, I would like to discuss it!
Why did everyone seem to think at first that it's a horrible play? Yes raise folding the river is generally a bit bleugh, but in this spot it makes total sense, especially against a normally passive player showing aggression
I would (again, I'm sorry James) disagree with the bet sizing. I think HERO's bet sizing on the turn is not picture perfect, but it certainly makes sense. TT76 is not a great board for the preflop-aggressor, so betting slightly smaller in position makes sense to me. But I think HERO has to shove to river. It's barely an overraise, and unlike James, I am pretty convinced that VILLAIN (if he indeed is a P-fish) would almost never fold a Ten here. He would cry-call after hours, yes, but he would still call.
No need to be sorry about disagreeing with me. But the turn point is important - I don't assume the average live player understands which textures are good vs bad for the OR. So I don't think I need to create a sizing strategy dependent on the texture - I size based upon the range mistakes I assume my opponent is going to make.
James, what are your thoughts on over betting the turned 2nd nuts in this exact spot? Reason I ask is because i sometimes find fishy players tend to call alot in this situation with their 10xs,I have even had a few guys re jam on me and showdown JT KT type hands. thoughts and opinions please, I am in no way trying to insuate that I am anywhere near your level, so please bare that in mind and don't crusify me lol. Ty in advance if you find the time to reply.
The stickier you think they get with Tx, but more importantly hands like 87 and 86, the more valid overbetting the turn becomes. You can get large value from Tx either way, but maxing value from sticky second pairs (which can have more combos in general) is my huge focus.
Is this a complex hand? Because there is so much analysis and after reading the comments for about 10 minutes my head hurts and I'm not sure if I'll ever get a hang of this.
my opinion once V leads out on the river he has a big hand. V liked his hand so much that even though Hero (aka numbnuts) barreled the flop and turn he decided to lead out! Folding was correct but it cost him to find out he was beat. What hands could he have limped in with? 10,7 suited, 77, and lastly A10. One V lead out on river I would have just called.
Villain has taken a weird line in this hand and while he obviously has some kind of Tx or better, it's hard to know if he has a full house or not. AT and 77 both fit the betting perfectly, and while he might have worse, those have to be a huge part of his range. If villain just has trips, he might call, raise, or fold to our river raise, but if he has a full house he always reraises. We are only winning more money here if he has only trips AND decides to call. If he folds we gain nothing and don't get to see his cards, and if he raises we probably have to fold. The possible outcomes here for us raising are mostly negative. In the whole universe of possibilities, opponent calling our raise is the only one that is good and it's also among the least likely. We should just call the river bet (and make sure he shows his hand first at showdown!)
I'm just wondering from a balance perspective is that if hero is folding a straight here and only calling with your full houses is that folding too much of your range? Is the villain ever bluffing here? Hard to say.. Is villain overvaluing trips here? Maybe.. Could he have a boat or quads.. absolutely. Could he be spazzing out with JJ? It is live 2/5 after all.. It just seems like the river line for villain is way too fancy if he has the nuts. That's a super trappy line and he has to make assumptions that the hero is going to raise his bet a large % of the time in order for this line to be more profitable over something more standard.
You are spot on with both points. Yes, hero might be folding too much of his range in the overall sense. But also yes, that villain likely doesn't realize that and is simply playing a very face-up range of hands when he commits after taking this lin.
That depends on what villain's range is like on the river. If, like most players, his bet/3 bet is polarised towards boats/bluffs, then 89 is one of the worst hands to bluffcatch with as it blocks his most likely bluff holdings (J9/J8 in particular and to a lesser extent 87/86/97) and none of his value range. Against that range, we can comfortably raise/fold 89 and not be exploited. If we think that we need to bluffcatch sometimes and can't only call with boats, then it's much better to call with some of your Tx hands than 89 here since they block his full houses. If, on the other hand, he can occasionally overvalue Tx/89 here (unlikely but not out of the question given we know nothing about him other than that he appears to be a fish), then folding becomes quite bad for the price we're getting when he makes a relatively small 3 bet like this.
Hello James, I'm not that good at maths as you and i have a lot of respect for your work but i think we have to call river there is the reasons in my opinion...1) We aren't representing 89 off villain is thinking we have overpear or AK so 2)He have to many combos of tx JT QT KT = 24 combos compare to few combos of full with 66 77 and AT 14 3) the size raise on the river give us the information that if our call is good only 1/3 time its ev+ . Give me your tougths about this analyse if you have time.
Hey Babcok. In order: 1. Is a V who takes that exact line likely to be thinking very much about our range? 2. Is a V who plays QT like that leading up to the river, also then likely to bet/3bet the river with it? 3. Points back to #2 Hopefully that helps =)
Hey James, I want to start playing poker a little more competitively and most of all profitably. My first goal is to get back the 150 Euros I lost on pokerstars playing MTTs and Spin&Gos like your average fish without any deep understanding of the game. My plan is to play 6max hyper turbo sit and gos at 1.50$ or 3.50$ level. What would be your advice for me? I cannot afford an online course which costs more than my bankroll is but a book recommendation would be nice. The only problem is that all the books and audio books and videos dont give me a beginners strategy but talk about mindsets or super specific situations. And thats good and all but I dont have the base to grasp those things or that they could even help me slitghly.
I'm not focussing on making back a loss, it's just a goal that I set. I heard it's important to start with small goals and work up so I figured that a nice goal to start with is to get even with the poker world ^^ I hope it's do-able.
Just a quick point from a teacher's point of view... You said in your first comment that you felt most books/videos just give you mindset stuff...but then you've now twice mentioned a "get even" kind of attitude with poker. Goals are great, but a "get even" mindset will hurt you in and out of poker. Rinse out the old results and start fresh. Make your first goal to earn $150, not because it gets you even, but because $150 is a nice round profit number that is reasonable. If you need help with goal setting, I did a complete podcast on it: redchippoker.com/smart-poker-goals-podcast/
Andrés why not? HERO bet very big on the button. Altough VILLAIN is not in position, I think he can exploit HERO in calling preflop and seeing the flop. This gives HERO a chance to bluff on the flop if he were to miss it. I would like to hear why you think it isn't possible for VILLAIN to have aces here.
After reading all the comments so far I'm not understanding why "fishy" villain suddenly gets credit for a non fishy reraise on the river. Couldn't the reraise just be because hero's betting line looked weak? And why does the 89 hand not have showdown value in this situation making a call of the 45 bet valid?
For me personally, it's for the same reason that I don't give a passive player credit for taking a bet/3bet line on the river with anything other than a nut-dominated range.
OK one more shot at this. My skill level is I'm a slightly better than break even player at small stakes sng's (no higher than $5). When I see this $45 river bet it looks to me like i'm way ahead or way behind and that's why I just want to call it. Is this just totally the wrong way to look at this?
What you are proposing is not unusual - it's safe and gets you the info you want. But I'm looking to max EV and think there is a range of bet/call hands that I can press money from and few hands that bet/shove overall.
i understand what your saying and it all depends on the player your playing against but that 45 dollar river bet looks like such a blocker bet and then hero reraises and opponent reraises.him back .. Tough spot i guess opponent has a full house but i think i woulf pay him off expecially with that 45 river bet just seems weird..
Can you name a few hands that he would take that line with that you beat? If not at least that, then stacking off just because the absolute value of your hand is not going a longterm winning play...
James- a few combos of AK and AQ for starters. Its really a complete guessing game though with no other info on villain. OMCs limp AK/AQ like its their job.
analysing this hand only to find out they had 7, 2 lol but seriously only my opinion for the amount of chips in the pot may have just called that little bet at the end instead of raising. just think if your going to value raise you have to call if they re raise as otherwise your just giving away chips. I could be wrong I don't know but most likely would have just called the 45 if your only going to fold to a re raise.
If villain is really loose and fishy, then this is a bad really common beginner bluff. Villain almost certainly missed some sort of weird draw (check called flop and turn) and then tried to turn it into a bluff when the Ace hit on the river. Hero folding here is criminal
Follow up. Idc if I'm playing against a guy who's never played a hand of poker in his life or against Phil Ivey himself, given how the action went down on every street, I'm never folding nut straight here lol
I am not sure what are we doing. Are we assuming that Villian is a rational player or an irrational one? If we assume Villian is a rational player, is there any value hand in villian's hand that we would not also assume that they would raise to get value out of us on strong pairs like AA, KK, QQ, JJ that we are representing throughout the hand? If we were Villian and had trips or a boat, we would raise especially against the small bet to get value out the strong pairs and 89s. If Villian is irrational then... anything goes really, he can be holding 27o for all we know since he is irrational. I don't like to have huge assumptions over a single hand of the opponent like "he is x fish because he called a min raise then called our re-raise preflop" Simply put, fish can have really strange ideas on how to get value like "slow playing" or bluffing hard on the river just because they say some pro do it once and it was cool. Nothing rational gets here, but we are really high on our range, and only losing to hands that really should have gone for more value on us earlier on the flop and especially the turn. Mean while we are beating a whole lot of value that we don't block that could get here preflop like K10, or AJ. We can't call on the river because we have to raise to get value, or there are too many opportunities to get away cheap on our value hands by simply blocker betting our top end of our range. if we are facing an irrational player, we could just be facing a QJ or KQ that totally lost their draw and decided "the only way to win is to bet" and did a misbet on the river, and went 3 bet overboard to win the pot. Against irrational players there are plenty opportunities down the line to recover your value that it does not justify making wild assumptions because your opponent played weird this one hand. I'd call, if we get beat by a boat, then we lost against a player who clearly does not understand how to maximize value against the kinds of hands we are holding, and we can use that in the future.
i just want to say that 2/5 nl plays similar to 1/2 so there is a 50% chance that he might want to use this ace as a scare card and it seems very possible that he could have flopped trips a boat here is very unlikely & quads almost never limp call with 2 tens pre. I think you might have to pay him off here if he has ace/10 or pocket 7's, 6's. you're almost getting a 3 to 1 here
Depending on how fishy this opponent is I wouldn't doubt to see them 3betting on the river with any Tx hand like T8s,T9,JT,QT,KT, or maybe even some strong aces. Against a regular I can totally see this being a fold, but against fish who severely overvalue trips I wouldn't find a fold here very often with the straight. We're only really loosing to 13 combos of TT, AT, 77, and 66, where as he's gonna be shoving much wider with around 40 combos on this river with the range suggested. Also I'm trying to grind the micro stakes, but I don't have the money to afford a coach right now. Do you know of any forums that I can post hand histories or hand reviews to where people can give me solid feedback?
But why would someone who has been passive this entire time decide they wanted to take trips with a meh kicker to the felt on the river? That doesn't add up imo. As for the forum, come join us at www.redchippoker.com/forum =)
I know this seems rather assumptive in my answer, but from personal experience from playing the micros I have seen various instances were fish will slowplay to the river then raise with what they perceive as a strong range. Also considering that Hero is iso raising very wide, perhaps the fish picked up on his aggression and is valuing more thinly. After consideration your question though I do agree with you more on your side on how this could be a fold. His small river lead usually suggest a made but vulnerable hand though. Also thanks for link I'll subscribe to join.
I think it could mean a monster but could also be a blocking bet with a weak holding where villain wants to discourage a larger river bet from hero. Seems to me that the bet size is rather polarized which is why I really like hero's river raise. I would not have thought about it in-game.
In my experience, most passive players are more afraid you'll fold than they are thinking about getting all your chips. They tend to be single-level thinkers: how strong is their hand. If he's got a monster, he's worried you'll fold because he's not thinking about the fact you've fired into him on every street. He's only thinking about the immediate moment, and he knows he has a monster hand. If he's more of a reg, yeah. If he's capable of thinking about what you've done on every street to that point and trying to block an all-in bet (though there the sizing should be more than that), you've got a tougher decision to make and the raise is probably the right play. But with the fish, he's got something he thinks is big or he's not betting. He might have something you beat, but it's probably 50-50 or worse that you're beating him. That's another reason to bet more on the earlier streets, especially after hitting the straight.
Maybe villain limped with TT and had the deck crippled, meaning the only way he thinks he can get value is to let hero bluff at it. Then obv the river bet is designed to make hero have to call with any showdown value he has or induce a raise from all hero’s air. I think when hero raised river he has to do so with the intent to fold to a reraise, the straight is never good here. Without any info on villain, calling the bet is better then raising because raise folding and gaining no information is a disaster.
If the villain is your typical calling station fish then they are only ever leading the river with something, with this type of player that something can be very wide, and many of these types of players will call 2 streets with AX, however because this type of player rarely bets with nothing I hate the heros 3-bet on the river. I'd much prefer a call especially if he'd fold to a 4-bet shove.
For all the guys trying to make a case for just calling the river in order to exploit a weaker opponent: If you allow a player to set a certain price against you by simply donking into you, even though you would want to bet bigger yourself if checked to, you are the player who is getting exploited at this moment.
while that's true the degree of exploitation is much much lower. if you're winning: you get the $300 pot, losing the value of your raise (here 150) - aka you're getting a decent pot. If you raise, you may fold them out, in which case the result is the same, or they occasionally call you with worse, however that difference (the 150 bet) vs the present value of the pot i don't think is worth the risk. they're making a move on you, one that is difficult to interpret. it's creating a strong bluff situation, so you're potentially getting run out of the pot by a bluff, especially if you're planning to fold to a shove. why put a $300 pot at risk for 150 more value, value that goes to them should you fold? in this scenario you're looking for a call more often than a fold or raise, and getting no info for it. if you're losing: you lose the minimum and get a great price to call the pot, and get info on the villain's play style. a straight here can be beaten by plenty of limped hands. you get to see if they limp pairs, 10-7o, AA, ATs/ATo, even AA or if they make this bet with air to set you up in some way, perhaps as a bluff catch or whatever insanity is going through their minds. none of this is to say you should never bet in this scenario, just that there's plenty ways to reason that a call for pot control and info is a safe way to play it out.
"I wouldn't make straights the part of my range that I take an either/or approach with. Save that for Tx imo." Trips are weaker than a straight, so your calling range seems counterintuitive to me. Is the idea that Tx blocks more of the strong hands in villains range than a straight blocks?
Because I would keep straights in my "certainly giving action range" as a default. So trips are the part of the range that may get "called sometimes, folded some other". 'May' being the operative word depending on my opinion on V's ranges/frequencies ofc.
Dude had AA probably. I would probably bet bigger on the turn and jam the river and get snapped off by AA and be like "wtf?!?! Limp calling son of a bitch! 😭" hahaha. maybe... but then again i do get some massive hero calls from A7+ sometimes... micros are funny like that.
but since hes a fish why would he ever think that hes KT isnt good on the rvr ? and if we dont know too much about him why we reraise the rvr to givve him the oportunity to reraise us back with a worse hand that seems to be one of those 3 combos?i call that rvr and see the showdown vs unknown that seems like a passive fish
The fold is probably right in this situation.. but villain need to only bluff like. 20%of the time or so to make our call profitable. I think. But again I don't think villain have any bluffs here... maybe 97 or 87 as he know he is not good with them. Villain dont understand sizing but would a passive fish fold a connected hand like 97 with so many possibilities? No ofc call. Would a passive fish fold on flop TT7 with 97? No. Would a passive fish fold when the 6 brings him a gutshot ? No he improved. He will call. On the river. A did not help 97 or 87. But he understands he have seemd pretty strong by calling all 3 streets. In a fish mindset calling is superior. Time to start bluffing. But just a small size. That shoukd scare him away. Fish gets reraised. I think fish know 97 and 87 is not good. Time to minclick raise and move the bar up slightly. Seems like something they like to do. But again. It is Most likely a boat here. Not a bluff.
Ok I don't agree with the conclusion of this video, we should be getting more in on the turn for definite. If villain is a fish then he will call more on the turn with his whole range, I agree with the smaller bet size on the turn we are losing value. I really disagree that the line here should be raise fold on the river, whats wrong with just a call? As played what is villain reraising the river with? Do we really think he is raising with K10 here? Or any other 10x hand? We are realistically only ever losing to made boats against 77s, 66s or A10 so the raise fold line means we only ever lose more. I prefer to just call, it's 45 to win over 300 there is so much value in the pot already. We only get raised by a better hand and win enough by just calling when villain has his K10 or Q10 that he thinks he's betting for value...
I think that 2 things hapens the guy have trips and put you in Ax on river, but this too players are the bigger stacks on table and imaging bouth are plaing for some time in this table so the fold here I.ill trust that hero put this guy on ph, but poker players unfortunately see all times warst case scenario I rely think vilan as something like tjs+ so with that litle information I can not say what I do but flop and turn bet are realy not good.
theres enough value in this pot already theres no reason to raise on the river. By that logic you never have to call on the river lol it must always be a raise or fold. well i tell you what theres like a million donks playing online you cant always figure everyone out. Its something called showdown value, ever heard of that? althought villain probably have 77s nice vid tho
Can you please set a reminder on your calendar to come back in exactly 1 year, read this post, and see if you still agree with it? I suspect you may disagree with it later down the line =)
bro i play poker everyday for almost 6 years now. your thought process is right in live poker this might be a raise-fold/call but online its a flat call. may i remind you our hero opened with 98o..our opponent puts him on jacks probably, he could easily have Tx
whatever bro i still believe its a flat call, our hero wanted to just raise but hadnt decide what to do if he gets reraised thats why he sent this video to you. if it was a smaller pot at the river, like 30 dollars, this move would make more sense but now its A 60 BIG BLINDS POT theres no more value to take its like pushing your luck. and again you cant figure out every donk online
Of course villain calls a shove with any ten. Look at how he played the hand lol, he's garbage. And even as played with his river 3bet shove there's still a huge change he had a JT kind of hand and just never considered hero having 98 or sets
I'm sorry, but that raise on the river is simply nonsensical. We're up against a passive fish who called us all the way down and then went for a thin-value donk bet on the river. If you've ever played against fish for even a couple minutes, you'd know this is how 90% of them like to play monsters. I'd bet $20 that the villain had AT, TT, 77, 89, or 66. The value range of a river raise is ridiculously small given the villain's line (only KT, QT, JT basically) whereas that line screamed monster once he donked the river. IF the villain had CHECKED the river, then bet-folding (to a huge raise) is totally fine. But man, this was the most obvious slow-played monster ever. Just call, lose the $45 to the boat and move on. Why set $150 on fire? Come on.
By that logic, you should fold 98o. Since somehow pentapot only the river ONLY means villain has the nuts, why even set $45 on fire by calling? Come on.
The only reason I'd even call the $45 is because we only have to be ahead 13% of the time, which are just crazy-good odds even if we're nearly certain to be behind. And since I expect a chop around 10% of the time plus some rare KT/QT/JT around 10-15% of the time, this is still a necessary and marginally +EV call. To clarify, though, if the villain leads for $100 or more, I would begrudgingly fold.
yeah i agree. Fishes donk with absolutely anything, even their monsters. Id just call the 45 on the river. I was up against one who didnt even bet his full house when he was last to act.
I can also see a certain type of player show up with 3 combos of A7s on the river that he would donk bet as a blocker bet or maybe for thin value vs the JJ-KK part of our range. That makes calling the 45 even more attractive, since it's unlikely he'll call even a small raise with those. I disagree with SplitSuit on this being a good spot to get creative and not use standard lines (because lets face it, the pure default "standard" play is a snap call OTR, see a cooler or a rather random hand you somehow beat, take a mental note of it and move on). Why do I think the spot isn't great? As Noex pointed out, the line looks "scary" nuttish from a fish: he bets a small amount that he expects to get called a lot, making it unlikely to be a bluff. Whats more, he bets on a card that is supposed to suck for his weaker holdings (87, 97, 99, 88) and is likely to hit you if you double barreled, again making it look heavily for value. The question is: what does he donk for value as opposed to what hands does he have in his check calling range, because a passive player wont be comfortable leading all his Tx that didn't boat up the way the whole hand played out. So his river leading range to me is boats, A7s, a very occasional 98 and a few of his strongest Tx hands. Now: do we really expect this to be a raise for value versus this range? No way we beat 51% of his continuing range and we leave ourselves open for an outrageous bluff with blockers like Tx or A7 (that in all fairness we only see from players at a very different level and cannot expect here). Last good point for a flat ( probably because I'm a nit): calling is low variance even if the raise was indeed +EV (unless you could somehow show me how raising here is more than at best marginally profitable, I'll probably won't push small edges with large bets, if I feel I am easily beating a game. (which you should here, come on the guy open limp-calls you in a 5/5 game :D ) Oh I almost forgot: even though we range villain strongly on the river and we aren't in great shape vs his range, folding is not an option at 7 to 1 odds. As someone pointed out previously, a bet of a 100 on the river should have hero fold his hand. Not a great fold, but a disciplined one
I love that you return to that basic hand analysis format once in a while, James! You´re still the greatest and most in-depth/informative poker related channel to help improving my game on RUclips to me!
Thanks Chance! More hand reviews coming throughout the rest of the year =)
Great! Very much looking forward to them! ❤️❤️❤️
if he is raise folding that river, than I think its just better to call... and if he wants to go to the end with his str8, than raise to like 250 maybe even more and call shove, or maybe even push all in after that small bet... but i will prefer just call over raise folding...you are giving him chance to bluff you out of pot (but I think he is almoust never bluff shoving that river)
I reckon that villain has A7 hearts or spades.
Explains limp - call
Explains calling smallish flop and turn bets
Explains small bet on river (first aggression)
I think villain then sees the $150 dollar bet as weakness and goes over the top as he overvalues top pair.
I totally agree. This has A7 written all over it.
A couple things worth considering:
1) Villain was passive Pre-flop through Turn, then leads out with a suspiciously low bet (vs. Pot-size). While it could have been that Villain spiked the Ace, the RISK is out there that he's slow-playing a monster.
2) If you just call Villain's River-bet, you drag a nice pot...keeping in perspective...with 9-8 offsuit. If Villain was trapping, you lose a minimum.
3) Because you bet/raised on EVERY Street, you never got any intel other than Call, Call, Call. Maybe a Check on the Turn induces Villain to lead out on the River. A Turn-check (falsely) gives your hand the image as two Overs (AK, AQ, KQ, etc.). Then you can really get a Read based off Villain leading out on the River.
Bottom line...having to fold a Straight there was sad...and possibly unnecessary, because of your Greedy River-raise.
For #3, while true, you also miss TONS of value against 7x, pair+draws, Tx, etc. Checking for info not going to outweigh value betting imo.
James (SplitSuit) Hero got his 1st "assertive" feedback on Villain's River Re-Raise/Jam...and he folds. I'm not trying to be Cheeky, but where's our "Value" when we have to fold?
Running into the top 10% of somebody's range doesn't mean you weren't maxing value against the other 90% which you crushed. Not saying the density in this exact hand is 90/10, but just laying out the framework to insert your own assumptions =)
James I agree with your conclusion, I feel like more pressure should have been applied on flop and turn before the river considering stack sizes at 2:1 and villain limped in. Then if we make the river raise, we need to be prepared to defend with a higher frequency.
Definitely a spot where knowing your opponent helps, being able to play exploitatively.
the fold made me sad
=(
Does anyone know if ThePokerBnk website is still active and if the strategy articles are still viable? Thank you!
ik this is an old video but I think flat calling has a lot of value; Villains line is very strange here and by flat calling you guarantee that you see his cards; seeing showdowns has a lot of value, I know you want to extract maximum value with a straight here but lets not act like flat calling isn't an option; I think seeing showdowns is such a crucial part of ranging your opponents accurately
I've taken villan line a couple of times and put a big raise on the river. Villan should have pocket 77 or A10, but will never know
My initial reaction was that $150 is a good raise, for the reasons you stated (I actually think going much bigger than this - even to $190 - would push out more hands than could be netted by the extra money when you do get calls). However, after thinking about it more, I think I like a call on the river. I don't think Villain can reasonably be stone cold bluffing here - the bet sizing is way too small. So, the only options are (1) it's a blocker bet with a marginal hand, or (2) it's a small bet meant to induce a raise, because Villain has a boat.
At first, I thought Villain's bet was a blocker, but the more I thought about it, the less that made sense. Hero's range is somewhat polarized here - he either has a strong T (or better) or nothing. I don't see any middling hand taking the line that Hero has to this point. So, given the semi-polarized range, does a blocker bet make sense? Not really. If Hero has nothing, then all the blocker bet does is (1) fold out a worse hand or (2) induce a worse hand to raise, which is not what you want if you're blocking in the first place. The dearth of marginal hands in Hero's range means Hero isn't going to be just calling very often.
However, a $45 bet makes at least a little more sense if Villain has a boat. If Hero has a solid hand (Tx or better), he will often raise such a small "obvious" blocker bet on the river, so Villain gets more value than he would have if he had just checked and let hero bet. If, on the other hand, Hero has nothing, $45 looks so weak that he may still raise. In most cases, that raise is going to be a lot bigger than an open bet would have been. Further, in the rare instances where Hero has a marginal hand, he'll probably call the $45, which may be more than Villain would have otherwise gotten out of him (either by checking (in which case Hero may check behind) or raising bigger (in which case Hero would usually fold). The obvious pitfall to the small river bet with a monster is that you risk (1) if Hero has nothing, folding out a hand that might have tried to bluff you, or (2) if Hero has a solid hand, getting a call when Hero likely would have bet bigger had you just checked to him. However, the small bet still makes more sense when Villain has a monster than when he has a marginal hand, so I'm not certain it makes a ton of sense to raise.
All of this, of course, is placing a thought process on Villain that might not exist. However, I think, because the small bet doesn't make sense for middling hands, we should place more weight on Villain having a monster, which gives greater credence to just calling, rather than raising.
Why not just call the donk on the river?? I mean, given such a small bet, I´m pretty sure we minimize our risk factor by doing that in the long run, right?
switch your default focus to "maximize EV" from "minimize risk" and poker becomes a totally different game.
Yeah sure, I get what you´re saying! I know what "maximize EV" means, I did that playing cash tables in 2015! But then I lost everything, so for someone who has been facing so much bad luck like me, it´s just not the same! Go check out my BOOM! hand replayer, if you don´t believe me! My nickname on Stars is "Fizzral"!!
we minimize our risk, yes.
But we also minimize our profit with a monster hand against a bad player.
The reward far outways the risk here.
And you would also make yourself super exploitable (not saying this villian could exploit you) by allowing your opponent to chose the size of the river bet, when you would want it to be bigger.
We minimize our profit with a monster hand against a bad player? Really? How bad do you assume, our opponent is in this hand? What range do you assign to him after the river raise? Because I know exactly, what range I would assign to him! And with a striaght, I´m beating less than half of my opponents range, but for this cheap price, I better tend to call, than to fold and never know for future hands (because knowledge about playing tendencies pays off against "bad players" in the long run as opposed to "good players"!)
When we make our move on the river (after he donked 45$ into us), he hasn't raised yet at all.
He only called all the way and is now trying to manipulate us into seeing a cheap showdown.
He has a very wide range (assuming he's a fish) at this point. He can have pretty much any pair/trips on the entire board.
I treat the 98 almost the same as I would a boat here, since I consider it to be ahead of about 95% of his river-donking range, especially to that price.
What do you think about villain's line? If he has hands like 77 and A-10? or even bluffs with major blockers like 7-8?
I hate having to fold to that 3-bet on that river. I hate it so much that it motivates me to go back in the hand to look for previous errors that led us into such a terrible spot. I found one pre-flop - opening 89o isn't horrible on the button, but it's certainly not something I would consider +EV overall. Therefore, I think this whole debacle is best avoided by folding pre-flop.
But let's pretend we have 89s to make the pre-flop play reasonable - it wouldn't effect the rest of the hand at all since it's a full rainbow on the turn. I can still find a previous error that, by correcting, we can avoid making this really crummy fold.
When Villain donks into us on the river after check/calling every other street, I see that as very polarizing - it's either a boat or a missed draw. Given how few missed draws there are, Villain's range is weighted toward boats (I'd assume that AT is the most likely holding). I don't see much relevance in the absurd sizing since most live players don't view their bet sizes in terms of pot percentages but in dollar amounts instead.
Personally, I think we should call that $45 on the river. We're not calling because we expect the pot to come our way after we do, but because we'd be getting information on Villain for a stupidly good price and every once in a while, when we find ourselves in one of the crazier of the crazy towns, we might just be ahead of Villain's 2-pair/trips.
Folding pre flop - nope, too tight.
Kesle n never a missed draw. after betting two streets the bet on the river is not enough to make anyone fold. river bet is either a blocker bet or a bet to induce.
I like your comment about never raise-folding the nut-straight here, but I respectfully, but strongly disagree with you statement of VILLAINs range being polarized.
After getting iso-ed perflop, bet flop and bet turn at, not even a monster-fish would assume that HERO would fold to a donk-bet of 1/6 pot.
This looks like a clear blocker bet to me, either by some Tx or by a random pair.
This is a must-raise, and I actually WOULD shove against this bet.
It's only a slight overbet, and I also disagree with James here, because if VILLAIN is indeed the fish we think he is, he would moan for half an hour, but he would never fold a Ten here.
Yes, sometimes he will snap us off with T7 or even Aces, and it will suck.
But I think this is still a much more +EV play than either
a) calling his donk (missing massive value and making ourselves exploitable)
b) raise-folding one of our strongest hands here.
But even given as played:
At the end of the day, who knows? VILLAIN may had fallen in love with KT here and 3-bet the river "for value" with it.
Right on +Michel Smiffi My theory here is that it's not even really a blocker bet. Cause what would even block? 88, 99, 7x, MAYBE T9, MAYBE a limped high PP. The villain is just a shit player who thinks the river will check through and is betting to make sure they get some amount of value.
Matthew Weiss You might need to revise the term blocker bet..
I'm thinking that we had to raise and call if he 3-bet us on that river. Although it seems the villain is very strong ( he has a full house) he might just think we have a big pair or a broadway hand, because our bets could mean that... With our agressive approach pre-flop and on flop and turn we almost never have 8-9, so the villain thinks his 10-8 6-7 J-10 is good. Or it could've have been an extremely elaborated bluff by the villain, I don't know, but I wouldn't have folded on the river, just because it's so hard for us to have a straight on that spot.
Thank you if you read this, and tell me what you think too, I would like to discuss it!
Why did everyone seem to think at first that it's a horrible play? Yes raise folding the river is generally a bit bleugh, but in this spot it makes total sense, especially against a normally passive player showing aggression
Comments tend to skew away from the line taken if hero lost the pot - it's the nature of the beast lol
Ohhhhh- I get you
I would (again, I'm sorry James) disagree with the bet sizing.
I think HERO's bet sizing on the turn is not picture perfect, but it certainly makes sense.
TT76 is not a great board for the preflop-aggressor, so betting slightly smaller in position makes sense to me.
But I think HERO has to shove to river.
It's barely an overraise, and unlike James, I am pretty convinced that VILLAIN (if he indeed is a P-fish) would almost never fold a Ten here.
He would cry-call after hours, yes, but he would still call.
No need to be sorry about disagreeing with me.
But the turn point is important - I don't assume the average live player understands which textures are good vs bad for the OR. So I don't think I need to create a sizing strategy dependent on the texture - I size based upon the range mistakes I assume my opponent is going to make.
James, what are your thoughts on over betting the turned 2nd nuts in this exact spot? Reason I ask is because i sometimes find fishy players tend to call alot in this situation with their 10xs,I have even had a few guys re jam on me and showdown JT KT type hands. thoughts and opinions please, I am in no way trying to insuate that I am anywhere near your level, so please bare that in mind and don't crusify me lol. Ty in advance if you find the time to reply.
The stickier you think they get with Tx, but more importantly hands like 87 and 86, the more valid overbetting the turn becomes. You can get large value from Tx either way, but maxing value from sticky second pairs (which can have more combos in general) is my huge focus.
Is this a complex hand? Because there is so much analysis and after reading the comments for about 10 minutes my head hurts and I'm not sure if I'll ever get a hang of this.
I think if you shove on him 10x will call, fish don’t get away from hands like that especially in 2/5 live.
Great content. Keep it up!
my opinion once V leads out on the river he has a big hand. V liked his hand so much that even though Hero (aka numbnuts) barreled the flop and turn he decided to lead out! Folding was correct but it cost him to find out he was beat. What hands could he have limped in with? 10,7 suited, 77, and lastly A10. One V lead out on river I would have just called.
Villain has taken a weird line in this hand and while he obviously has some kind of Tx or better, it's hard to know if he has a full house or not. AT and 77 both fit the betting perfectly, and while he might have worse, those have to be a huge part of his range.
If villain just has trips, he might call, raise, or fold to our river raise, but if he has a full house he always reraises. We are only winning more money here if he has only trips AND decides to call. If he folds we gain nothing and don't get to see his cards, and if he raises we probably have to fold.
The possible outcomes here for us raising are mostly negative. In the whole universe of possibilities, opponent calling our raise is the only one that is good and it's also among the least likely. We should just call the river bet (and make sure he shows his hand first at showdown!)
I'm just wondering from a balance perspective is that if hero is folding a straight here and only calling with your full houses is that folding too much of your range? Is the villain ever bluffing here? Hard to say.. Is villain overvaluing trips here? Maybe.. Could he have a boat or quads.. absolutely. Could he be spazzing out with JJ? It is live 2/5 after all.. It just seems like the river line for villain is way too fancy if he has the nuts. That's a super trappy line and he has to make assumptions that the hero is going to raise his bet a large % of the time in order for this line to be more profitable over something more standard.
You are spot on with both points. Yes, hero might be folding too much of his range in the overall sense. But also yes, that villain likely doesn't realize that and is simply playing a very face-up range of hands when he commits after taking this lin.
Yeah it's a tough fold and I don't think I'd have done it :)
That depends on what villain's range is like on the river. If, like most players, his bet/3 bet is polarised towards boats/bluffs, then 89 is one of the worst hands to bluffcatch with as it blocks his most likely bluff holdings (J9/J8 in particular and to a lesser extent 87/86/97) and none of his value range. Against that range, we can comfortably raise/fold 89 and not be exploited. If we think that we need to bluffcatch sometimes and can't only call with boats, then it's much better to call with some of your Tx hands than 89 here since they block his full houses.
If, on the other hand, he can occasionally overvalue Tx/89 here (unlikely but not out of the question given we know nothing about him other than that he appears to be a fish), then folding becomes quite bad for the price we're getting when he makes a relatively small 3 bet like this.
Hello James, I'm not that good at maths as you and i have a lot of respect for your work but i think we have to call river there is the reasons in my opinion...1) We aren't representing 89 off villain is thinking we have overpear or AK so 2)He have to many combos of tx JT QT KT = 24 combos compare to few combos of full with 66 77 and AT 14 3) the size raise on the river give us the information that if our call is good only 1/3 time its ev+ . Give me your tougths about this analyse if you have time.
Hey Babcok. In order:
1. Is a V who takes that exact line likely to be thinking very much about our range?
2. Is a V who plays QT like that leading up to the river, also then likely to bet/3bet the river with it?
3. Points back to #2
Hopefully that helps =)
Hey James,
I want to start playing poker a little more competitively and most of all profitably. My first goal is to get back the 150 Euros I lost on pokerstars playing MTTs and Spin&Gos like your average fish without any deep understanding of the game.
My plan is to play 6max hyper turbo sit and gos at 1.50$ or 3.50$ level.
What would be your advice for me? I cannot afford an online course which costs more than my bankroll is but a book recommendation would be nice. The only problem is that all the books and audio books and videos dont give me a beginners strategy but talk about mindsets or super specific situations. And thats good and all but I dont have the base to grasp those things or that they could even help me slitghly.
ThePaull3d why dont you start with just playing your best game and not so worried about making back a loss.
Ready Easy Game and stop focusing on 'getting your money back'. That money is gone, now focus on gaining new money =)
I'm not focussing on making back a loss, it's just a goal that I set. I heard it's important to start with small goals and work up so I figured that a nice goal to start with is to get even with the poker world ^^
I hope it's do-able.
Just a quick point from a teacher's point of view...
You said in your first comment that you felt most books/videos just give you mindset stuff...but then you've now twice mentioned a "get even" kind of attitude with poker. Goals are great, but a "get even" mindset will hurt you in and out of poker. Rinse out the old results and start fresh. Make your first goal to earn $150, not because it gets you even, but because $150 is a nice round profit number that is reasonable. If you need help with goal setting, I did a complete podcast on it: redchippoker.com/smart-poker-goals-podcast/
James (SplitSuit) Thanks for all the advice! I will take it seriously.
Def 7s full or AT
Or just aces
Marius van Gent nah aces wouldnt play it this way
Andrés why not? HERO bet very big on the button. Altough VILLAIN is not in position, I think he can exploit HERO in calling preflop and seeing the flop. This gives HERO a chance to bluff on the flop if he were to miss it. I would like to hear why you think it isn't possible for VILLAIN to have aces here.
Aces lol gtfo....
Who the fuck is gonna flat AA with five people yet to act pre?
After reading all the comments so far I'm not understanding why "fishy" villain suddenly gets credit for a non fishy reraise on the river. Couldn't the reraise just be because hero's betting line looked weak? And why does the 89 hand not have showdown value in this situation making a call of the 45 bet valid?
For me personally, it's for the same reason that I don't give a passive player credit for taking a bet/3bet line on the river with anything other than a nut-dominated range.
OK one more shot at this. My skill level is I'm a slightly better than break even player at small stakes sng's (no higher than $5). When I see this $45 river bet it looks to me like i'm way ahead or way behind and that's why I just want to call it. Is this just totally the wrong way to look at this?
What you are proposing is not unusual - it's safe and gets you the info you want. But I'm looking to max EV and think there is a range of bet/call hands that I can press money from and few hands that bet/shove overall.
thx
i understand what your saying and it all depends on the player your playing against but that 45 dollar river bet looks like such a blocker bet and then hero reraises and opponent reraises.him back .. Tough spot i guess opponent has a full house but i think i woulf pay him off expecially with that 45 river bet just seems weird..
Can you name a few hands that he would take that line with that you beat? If not at least that, then stacking off just because the absolute value of your hand is not going a longterm winning play...
James- a few combos of AK and AQ for starters.
Its really a complete guessing game though with no other info on villain. OMCs limp AK/AQ like its their job.
analysing this hand only to find out they had 7, 2 lol but seriously only my opinion for the amount of chips in the pot may have just called that little bet at the end instead of raising. just think if your going to value raise you have to call if they re raise as otherwise your just giving away chips. I could be wrong I don't know but most likely would have just called the 45 if your only going to fold to a re raise.
What in the world does he have there? AT?
If villain is really loose and fishy, then this is a bad really common beginner bluff. Villain almost certainly missed some sort of weird draw (check called flop and turn) and then tried to turn it into a bluff when the Ace hit on the river. Hero folding here is criminal
Follow up. Idc if I'm playing against a guy who's never played a hand of poker in his life or against Phil Ivey himself, given how the action went down on every street, I'm never folding nut straight here lol
I am not sure what are we doing. Are we assuming that Villian is a rational player or an irrational one? If we assume Villian is a rational player, is there any value hand in villian's hand that we would not also assume that they would raise to get value out of us on strong pairs like AA, KK, QQ, JJ that we are representing throughout the hand? If we were Villian and had trips or a boat, we would raise especially against the small bet to get value out the strong pairs and 89s. If Villian is irrational then... anything goes really, he can be holding 27o for all we know since he is irrational. I don't like to have huge assumptions over a single hand of the opponent like "he is x fish because he called a min raise then called our re-raise preflop" Simply put, fish can have really strange ideas on how to get value like "slow playing" or bluffing hard on the river just because they say some pro do it once and it was cool.
Nothing rational gets here, but we are really high on our range, and only losing to hands that really should have gone for more value on us earlier on the flop and especially the turn. Mean while we are beating a whole lot of value that we don't block that could get here preflop like K10, or AJ.
We can't call on the river because we have to raise to get value, or there are too many opportunities to get away cheap on our value hands by simply blocker betting our top end of our range.
if we are facing an irrational player, we could just be facing a QJ or KQ that totally lost their draw and decided "the only way to win is to bet" and did a misbet on the river, and went 3 bet overboard to win the pot. Against irrational players there are plenty opportunities down the line to recover your value that it does not justify making wild assumptions because your opponent played weird this one hand.
I'd call, if we get beat by a boat, then we lost against a player who clearly does not understand how to maximize value against the kinds of hands we are holding, and we can use that in the future.
i just want to say that 2/5 nl plays similar to 1/2 so there is a 50% chance that he might want to use this ace as a scare card and it seems very possible that he could have flopped trips a boat here is very unlikely & quads almost never limp call with 2 tens pre. I think you might have to pay him off here if he has ace/10 or pocket 7's, 6's. you're almost getting a 3 to 1 here
Depending on how fishy this opponent is I wouldn't doubt to see them 3betting on the river with any Tx hand like T8s,T9,JT,QT,KT, or maybe even some strong aces. Against a regular I can totally see this being a fold, but against fish who severely overvalue trips I wouldn't find a fold here very often with the straight. We're only really loosing to 13 combos of TT, AT, 77, and 66, where as he's gonna be shoving much wider with around 40 combos on this river with the range suggested.
Also I'm trying to grind the micro stakes, but I don't have the money to afford a coach right now. Do you know of any forums that I can post hand histories or hand reviews to where people can give me solid feedback?
But why would someone who has been passive this entire time decide they wanted to take trips with a meh kicker to the felt on the river? That doesn't add up imo.
As for the forum, come join us at www.redchippoker.com/forum =)
I know this seems rather assumptive in my answer, but from personal experience from playing the micros I have seen various instances were fish will slowplay to the river then raise with what they perceive as a strong range. Also considering that Hero is iso raising very wide, perhaps the fish picked up on his aggression and is valuing more thinly. After consideration your question though I do agree with you more on your side on how this could be a fold. His small river lead usually suggest a made but vulnerable hand though.
Also thanks for link I'll subscribe to join.
great video
Thanks Kapoor!
When villain bets the $45 he's got something he thinks can't be beat. So the right play, given it's a passive fish, is a call.
Why are you making the assumption that 1/5th pot = the nuts? Wouldn't a shove indicate that more than pentapot?
I think it could mean a monster but could also be a blocking bet with a weak holding where villain wants to discourage a larger river bet from hero. Seems to me that the bet size is rather polarized which is why I really like hero's river raise. I would not have thought about it in-game.
He described villain as a "passive player," otherwise I'd agree with you. Though it seems too small a bet to be a blocker from a regular player.
In my experience, most passive players are more afraid you'll fold than they are thinking about getting all your chips. They tend to be single-level thinkers: how strong is their hand. If he's got a monster, he's worried you'll fold because he's not thinking about the fact you've fired into him on every street. He's only thinking about the immediate moment, and he knows he has a monster hand. If he's more of a reg, yeah. If he's capable of thinking about what you've done on every street to that point and trying to block an all-in bet (though there the sizing should be more than that), you've got a tougher decision to make and the raise is probably the right play. But with the fish, he's got something he thinks is big or he's not betting. He might have something you beat, but it's probably 50-50 or worse that you're beating him. That's another reason to bet more on the earlier streets, especially after hitting the straight.
Maybe villain limped with TT and had the deck crippled, meaning the only way he thinks he can get value is to let hero bluff at it. Then obv the river bet is designed to make hero have to call with any showdown value he has or induce a raise from all hero’s air.
I think when hero raised river he has to do so with the intent to fold to a reraise, the straight is never good here. Without any info on villain, calling the bet is better then raising because raise folding and gaining no information is a disaster.
If the villain is your typical calling station fish then they are only ever leading the river with something, with this type of player that something can be very wide, and many of these types of players will call 2 streets with AX, however because this type of player rarely bets with nothing I hate the heros 3-bet on the river. I'd much prefer a call especially if he'd fold to a 4-bet shove.
For all the guys trying to make a case for just calling the river in order to exploit a weaker opponent:
If you allow a player to set a certain price against you by simply donking into you, even though you would want to bet bigger yourself if checked to, you are the player who is getting exploited at this moment.
while that's true the degree of exploitation is much much lower.
if you're winning: you get the $300 pot, losing the value of your raise (here 150) - aka you're getting a decent pot. If you raise, you may fold them out, in which case the result is the same, or they occasionally call you with worse, however that difference (the 150 bet) vs the present value of the pot i don't think is worth the risk. they're making a move on you, one that is difficult to interpret. it's creating a strong bluff situation, so you're potentially getting run out of the pot by a bluff, especially if you're planning to fold to a shove. why put a $300 pot at risk for 150 more value, value that goes to them should you fold? in this scenario you're looking for a call more often than a fold or raise, and getting no info for it.
if you're losing: you lose the minimum and get a great price to call the pot, and get info on the villain's play style. a straight here can be beaten by plenty of limped hands. you get to see if they limp pairs, 10-7o, AA, ATs/ATo, even AA or if they make this bet with air to set you up in some way, perhaps as a bluff catch or whatever insanity is going through their minds.
none of this is to say you should never bet in this scenario, just that there's plenty ways to reason that a call for pot control and info is a safe way to play it out.
I would probably just call the donk bet on the river. Then I would have seen his hand and I would have saved money in case he had a boat.
What?) I think shove here one of the best option, he is fish and he nevere folds any Tx hand.
So you're only calling with quads and full houses ? You will have to call some of the time with a straight.
I wouldn't make straights the part of my range that I take an either/or approach with. Save that for Tx imo.
"I wouldn't make straights the part of my range that I take an either/or approach with. Save that for Tx imo."
Trips are weaker than a straight, so your calling range seems counterintuitive to me. Is the idea that Tx blocks more of the strong hands in villains range than a straight blocks?
Because I would keep straights in my "certainly giving action range" as a default. So trips are the part of the range that may get "called sometimes, folded some other".
'May' being the operative word depending on my opinion on V's ranges/frequencies ofc.
Having a ten blocks so many boat combos, which actually makes it much less likely you're beat if you have trips.
Dude had AA probably. I would probably bet bigger on the turn and jam the river and get snapped off by AA and be like "wtf?!?! Limp calling son of a bitch! 😭" hahaha. maybe... but then again i do get some massive hero calls from A7+ sometimes... micros are funny like that.
but since hes a fish why would he ever think that hes KT isnt good on the rvr ? and if we dont know too much about him why we reraise the rvr to givve him the oportunity to reraise us back with a worse hand that seems to be one of those 3 combos?i call that rvr and see the showdown vs unknown that seems like a passive fish
The fold is probably right in this situation.. but villain need to only bluff like. 20%of the time or so to make our call profitable. I think.
But again I don't think villain have any bluffs here... maybe 97 or 87 as he know he is not good with them. Villain dont understand sizing but would a passive fish fold a connected hand like 97 with so many possibilities? No ofc call.
Would a passive fish fold on flop TT7 with 97? No.
Would a passive fish fold when the 6 brings him a gutshot ? No he improved. He will call.
On the river. A did not help 97 or 87. But he understands he have seemd pretty strong by calling all 3 streets. In a fish mindset calling is superior. Time to start bluffing. But just a small size. That shoukd scare him away.
Fish gets reraised. I think fish know 97 and 87 is not good. Time to minclick raise and move the bar up slightly. Seems like something they like to do.
But again. It is Most likely a boat here. Not a bluff.
Ok I don't agree with the conclusion of this video, we should be getting more in on the turn for definite. If villain is a fish then he will call more on the turn with his whole range, I agree with the smaller bet size on the turn we are losing value. I really disagree that the line here should be raise fold on the river, whats wrong with just a call? As played what is villain reraising the river with? Do we really think he is raising with K10 here? Or any other 10x hand? We are realistically only ever losing to made boats against 77s, 66s or A10 so the raise fold line means we only ever lose more. I prefer to just call, it's 45 to win over 300 there is so much value in the pot already. We only get raised by a better hand and win enough by just calling when villain has his K10 or Q10 that he thinks he's betting for value...
I think that 2 things hapens the guy have trips and put you in Ax on river, but this too players are the bigger stacks on table and imaging bouth are plaing for some time in this table so the fold here I.ill trust that hero put this guy on ph, but poker players unfortunately see all times warst case scenario I rely think vilan as something like tjs+ so with that litle information I can not say what I do but flop and turn bet are realy not good.
It really bugs me when I see these analysis given without ever knowing what villain had.
Learn to feel comfortable in the unknown - the info won't always be there =)
Yeah, it's something I'm working on and struggling with. :)
Considering he seems fishy, i think pocket aces would have stuck around til the river
It only amounts to 3 extra combos, so it shouldn't mess up the analysis too much =)
A 10
theres enough value in this pot already theres no reason to raise on the river. By that logic you never have to call on the river lol it must always be a raise or fold. well i tell you what theres like a million donks playing online you cant always figure everyone out. Its something called showdown value, ever heard of that? althought villain probably have 77s nice vid tho
Can you please set a reminder on your calendar to come back in exactly 1 year, read this post, and see if you still agree with it? I suspect you may disagree with it later down the line =)
bro i play poker everyday for almost 6 years now. your thought process is right in live poker this might be a raise-fold/call but online its a flat call. may i remind you our hero opened with 98o..our opponent puts him on jacks probably, he could easily have Tx
But you just laid out a perfectly good reason to raise his river lead for pure value...
whatever bro i still believe its a flat call, our hero wanted to just raise but hadnt decide what to do if he gets reraised thats why he sent this video to you. if it was a smaller pot at the river, like 30 dollars, this move would make more sense but now its A 60 BIG BLINDS POT theres no more value to take its like pushing your luck. and again you cant figure out every donk online
Hey mind reviewing my hand? i sent it on the site.
Hey Joel, if you already sent it in consider in the queue =)
i reckon j10
Of course villain calls a shove with any ten. Look at how he played the hand lol, he's garbage. And even as played with his river 3bet shove there's still a huge change he had a JT kind of hand and just never considered hero having 98 or sets
Stopped at 3:27 villain has A,10 or is bluffing
I'm sorry, but that raise on the river is simply nonsensical. We're up against a passive fish who called us all the way down and then went for a thin-value donk bet on the river. If you've ever played against fish for even a couple minutes, you'd know this is how 90% of them like to play monsters. I'd bet $20 that the villain had AT, TT, 77, 89, or 66.
The value range of a river raise is ridiculously small given the villain's line (only KT, QT, JT basically) whereas that line screamed monster once he donked the river. IF the villain had CHECKED the river, then bet-folding (to a huge raise) is totally fine. But man, this was the most obvious slow-played monster ever. Just call, lose the $45 to the boat and move on. Why set $150 on fire? Come on.
By that logic, you should fold 98o. Since somehow pentapot only the river ONLY means villain has the nuts, why even set $45 on fire by calling?
Come on.
The only reason I'd even call the $45 is because we only have to be ahead 13% of the time, which are just crazy-good odds even if we're nearly certain to be behind. And since I expect a chop around 10% of the time plus some rare KT/QT/JT around 10-15% of the time, this is still a necessary and marginally +EV call.
To clarify, though, if the villain leads for $100 or more, I would begrudgingly fold.
It sounds like we agree on the strategy, just disagree on the ranges/frequency assumption =)
yeah i agree. Fishes donk with absolutely anything, even their monsters. Id just call the 45 on the river. I was up against one who didnt even bet his full house when he was last to act.
I can also see a certain type of player show up with 3 combos of A7s on the river that he would donk bet as a blocker bet or maybe for thin value vs the JJ-KK part of our range. That makes calling the 45 even more attractive, since it's unlikely he'll call even a small raise with those.
I disagree with SplitSuit on this being a good spot to get creative and not use standard lines (because lets face it, the pure default "standard" play is a snap call OTR, see a cooler or a rather random hand you somehow beat, take a mental note of it and move on).
Why do I think the spot isn't great?
As Noex pointed out, the line looks "scary" nuttish from a fish: he bets a small amount that he expects to get called a lot, making it unlikely to be a bluff. Whats more, he bets on a card that is supposed to suck for his weaker holdings (87, 97, 99, 88) and is likely to hit you if you double barreled, again making it look heavily for value. The question is: what does he donk for value as opposed to what hands does he have in his check calling range, because a passive player wont be comfortable leading all his Tx that didn't boat up the way the whole hand played out.
So his river leading range to me is boats, A7s, a very occasional 98 and a few of his strongest Tx hands. Now: do we really expect this to be a raise for value versus this range? No way we beat 51% of his continuing range and we leave ourselves open for an outrageous bluff with blockers like Tx or A7 (that in all fairness we only see from players at a very different level and cannot expect here).
Last good point for a flat ( probably because I'm a nit): calling is low variance even if the raise was indeed +EV (unless you could somehow show me how raising here is more than at best marginally profitable, I'll probably won't push small edges with large bets, if I feel I am easily beating a game. (which you should here, come on the guy open limp-calls you in a 5/5 game :D )
Oh I almost forgot: even though we range villain strongly on the river and we aren't in great shape vs his range, folding is not an option at 7 to 1 odds. As someone pointed out previously, a bet of a 100 on the river should have hero fold his hand. Not a great fold, but a disciplined one