Cash - big overbets and putting people on ranges

[Moskvich]

Been playing quite a bit of nl cash recently, though am still pretty new to it. Have a couple of questions, general and specific, about putting people of ranges and calling big all-ins with less than the nuts.

Two examples, both playing short-handed (5 players) though on a full ring table.

$0.25/0.50 cash - villain and I both have around $100. Villain loose-ish, a gambler but not an idiot.

Two limpers, I limp on the button with A8o. Flop A88. Checked round. Turn is a 2. Checked to me, I bet about $1.50, fold to second limper who calls. River another 2. Second limper pushes all-in. What do you do here?

$0.50/$1 cash. Villain has $260, I have $175. Vilain seems pretty solid, haven't seen him do anything really out of line - he picked up a big pot earlier but I'm afraid I couldn't tell you how.

Villain limps, I call behind with T8h, sb passes bb checks. Flop comes Q95. Checked round.

Turn J. Villain checks, I bet $2.50, BB folds, Villain min raises to $5. I call.

River A. Villain pushes. Do I call $170 with my 2nd nut straight?


Comments on my play very welcome, but obviously what to do on the river is the main reason I'm posting.

And generally - against someone who isn't totally reckless - your average unknown player say -  what do you need to call a massive river overbet like these?

Thanks for any comments. What I did/results etc to follow later.

[TightEnd]

I had a big problem in this type of situation too and sought advice from a player well known for good advice in these parts

In essence, the view was that at these levels big overbets are invariably "nut" type hands with villain looking to get as much in pot as possible and hoping you have too much to put the hand down or read it as a tournament type "overbet=bluff". Since then I have been far more cautious in these situations, though of course game/player dependent to an extent.


example two looks like a nailed on K 10 to me, min raise on turn, push on river.

example one I would have a hell of a time passing and putting him on AA or 22...he could have 8 x and think he's got close to the nuts

[Bongo]

He's ahead of 22 in example one though, and AA seems less likely as he holds an A as well. I think i'd have to call/

You're right, example 2 looks very much like a king ten to me too.

[TightEnd]

He's ahead of 22 in example one though, and AA seems less likely as he holds an A as well. I think i'd have to call/

You're right, example 2 looks very much like a king ten to me too.

no, 22 gives him runner runner quads

[Bongo]

I didn't even notice the river had been dealt 

[WellChief]

Call first one probably fold the second but its player dependant.

[Moskvich]

Yes, clearly player dependent. I wonder if anyone would be able to put a figure in some sort of guesstimate form on how often the pusher has the nuts in these situations. My suspicion would be that it might be relatively low at very low stakes - say maybe 40-50% - but much higher, say 75-80%, at low-to-medium stakes. Perhaps it gets lower again at higher stakes as players get trickier. Dunno though, never played them.

Thanks for the answers, any more?

If you can't be bothered with a long though-out post, a quick "I'd call" or "I'd fold" would still be of interest to me.

Cheers.

[doubleup]

1st hand - as he is not an idiot, I would have to put him on A8 or AA - so you have to put him on AA a miniscule amount of time, to justify calling for a split of the small pot.

2nd hand -easy fold.

If players are bluffing with either of these hands, no problem, they will eventually do it at the wrong time.  As soon as I see a player doing this I loosen up a lot and try to play as many hands as possible in position against them.

[pswnio]

Call the first, hope to be good enough to fold the second one day. There's a reason I don't play cash

[Moskvich]

1st hand - as he is not an idiot, I would have to put him on A8 or AA - so you have to put him on AA a miniscule amount of time, to justify calling for a split of the small pot.

Well yes... But isn't the question (ruling out 22 for a moment) whether he would do this with any 8 more often than he has AA? With 2 As already out it's less likely that he has AA, from a purely statistical point of view. I don't think he has nothing here, but I suspect that a bare 8 may be more likely than AA. At these stakes, I think a bare 8 may immediately think he's splitting the pot at worst since the running has removed most kicker trouble from the equation.

[doubleup]

I think a bare 8 may immediately think he's splitting the pot at worst since the running has removed most kicker trouble from the equation.

If you judge that he is a bad enough player to hold that view you can call, it depends on how well you know the player - I would let the small pot go unless I was pretty sure that this was a persistent overplayer.

[AlexMartin]

big big overbets are made with the pure nuts. EG 1 is a call, eg 2 is a pass
the overbet with the nuts is imo, a spectacularly effective bet. Dont pay em

[Moskvich]

Thanks for the answers. I got them both "wrong" at the time, but am glad to hear that most would have done the same. No 1 i called and got shown AA. Ah well. Makes Rounders more credible at least. No 2 - on the turn I thought he might have a set, but obviously feared KT. With the bet on the river I couldn't see past KT and folded. He showed - AA for a rivered set. Ah well, again.

[doubleup]

Thanks for the answers. I got them both "wrong" at the time, but am glad to hear that most would have done the same. No 1 i called and got shown AA. Ah well. Makes Rounders more credible at least. No 2 - on the turn I thought he might have a set, but obviously feared KT. With the bet on the river I couldn't see past KT and folded. He showed - AA for a rivered set. Ah well, again.

Hope you made a note on #2 - he's money in the bank    

[AlexMartin]

Thanks for the answers. I got them both "wrong" at the time, but am glad to hear that most would have done the same. No 1 i called and got shown AA. Ah well. Makes Rounders more credible at least. No 2 - on the turn I thought he might have a set, but obviously feared KT. With the bet on the river I couldn't see past KT and folded. He showed - AA for a rivered set. Ah well, again.

Hope you made a note on #2 - he's money in the bank    

yep, buddy list him. Mug