flush river board

[snoopy1239]

I'm happy to bet half the pot. Any more, and I think he may fold many hands that we are beating. I'm not worried about being reraised by a weaker hand, that rarely happens in this situation from my experience. As for checking to allow him to bluff, I don't like this either as most hands that call bets on the turn and river of this board will have a some sort of piece and simply be checked down.

[Royal Flush]

Lead 50% snap the raise!

Inducing ftw!

[TightEnd]

Lead 50% snap the raise!

Inducing ftw!

I believe the term you are looking for is

"gay bet to induce shove yo"

no need to thank me.

[noble1]

yeah, if we are bet/folding we are pretty much assuming that he calls when hes beat and he raises when hes beating us, so betting 3/4--> full pot makes more $$ the times we are ahead... and for us to actually bet in the first place, we have to assume that the frequency with which they call us with worse is >50%, so theres no really harm in betting more.

If we starting going down that road whereby "but he knows he can push us off the hand with a raise".. then we can bet and then call, but we dont have any reason to assume he will turn reasonable hands into bluffs

Check calling here is likely worse than check/folding because his valuebetting range is probably better than our c/c range, and hes not going to bluff that often... what hands does he get to the river with in this manner, that will bluff the river if we check? In general, better hands bet, showdown value hands check.. given the board texture, and the flop/turn action.

i can see your logic a little bit,but with no read on what villain has actually got a 3/4 pot bet wont be called by anything that we are beating,where as if we check call we induce bluffs and he may think his ace or 2 pair is good... thus we keep a semblance of pot size control oop against someone who we have no clue of his holdings..and keep our losses to a min if indeed we are beat.  With a good read jam it in if we are fairly sure we are ahead but i cant see the point in spewing cash
by guessing..

[bolt pp]

yeah, if we are bet/folding we are pretty much assuming that he calls when hes beat and he raises when hes beating us, so betting 3/4--> full pot makes more $$ the times we are ahead... and for us to actually bet in the first place, we have to assume that the frequency with which they call us with worse is >50%, so theres no really harm in betting more.

If we starting going down that road whereby "but he knows he can push us off the hand with a raise".. then we can bet and then call, but we dont have any reason to assume he will turn reasonable hands into bluffs

Check calling here is likely worse than check/folding because his valuebetting range is probably better than our c/c range, and hes not going to bluff that often... what hands does he get to the river with in this manner, that will bluff the river if we check? In general, better hands bet, showdown value hands check.. given the board texture, and the flop/turn action.

i can see your logic a little bit,but with no read on what villain has actually got a 3/4 pot bet wont be called by anything that we are beating,where as if we check call we induce bluffs and he may think his ace or 2 pair is good... thus we keep a semblance of pot size control oop against someone who we have no clue of his holdings..and keep our losses to a min if indeed we are beat.  With a good read jam it in if we are fairly sure we are ahead but i cant see the point in spewing cash
by guessing..

"I can see your logic"

"But i cant see the point by spewing cash by guessing"

you clearly cant see the logic, DUCY?

[totalise]

yeah, if we are bet/folding we are pretty much assuming that he calls when hes beat and he raises when hes beating us, so betting 3/4--> full pot makes more $$ the times we are ahead... and for us to actually bet in the first place, we have to assume that the frequency with which they call us with worse is >50%, so theres no really harm in betting more.

If we starting going down that road whereby "but he knows he can push us off the hand with a raise".. then we can bet and then call, but we dont have any reason to assume he will turn reasonable hands into bluffs

Check calling here is likely worse than check/folding because his valuebetting range is probably better than our c/c range, and hes not going to bluff that often... what hands does he get to the river with in this manner, that will bluff the river if we check? In general, better hands bet, showdown value hands check.. given the board texture, and the flop/turn action.

i can see your logic a little bit,but with no read on what villain has actually got a 3/4 pot bet wont be called by anything that we are beating,where as if we check call we induce bluffs and he may think his ace or 2 pair is good... thus we keep a semblance of pot size control oop against someone who we have no clue of his holdings..

Given that you say you have no clue of his holdings, you seem awfully assured that he wont call with any hand that we beat. People LOVE to assume that people have nuts-or-nothing on boards like this, dont fall into their trap and let them be right.

You can generally infer something about his holdings, you know hes not likely to have fk all and you know hes not likely to call two streets with nothing, hoping for a scare card to ping right off on the river so he can steal the pot, so with those inferences, its a lot easier to narrow down his ranges. A lack of infornation doesn't mean that you shouldn't try and make assumptions, it just means that the lower the amount of available info, the higher the margin for error is.. but you cant just go around assuming nothing and just hoping to bink your way into showdown without even caring what he has, especially given the way we got to the river!

[snoopy1239]

Betting to induce a raise doesn't really work here. His range for this move is so thin. If the jack hadn't arrived on the turn, the perhaps middling pocket pairs might spaz out, but apart from that, and a very unlikely double float, most other inferior hands will just flat call, even if you min bet. He could have 6-4, K-J or something, but compared to the likelihood of him holding top pair, I feel a value bet on the river is the way forward. If he raises, fold, the draws have made it and anything else would just flat-call.

[snoopy1239]

yeah, if we are bet/folding we are pretty much assuming that he calls when hes beat and he raises when hes beating us, so betting 3/4--> full pot makes more $$ the times we are ahead... and for us to actually bet in the first place, we have to assume that the frequency with which they call us with worse is >50%, so theres no really harm in betting more.

If we starting going down that road whereby "but he knows he can push us off the hand with a raise".. then we can bet and then call, but we dont have any reason to assume he will turn reasonable hands into bluffs

Check calling here is likely worse than check/folding because his valuebetting range is probably better than our c/c range, and hes not going to bluff that often... what hands does he get to the river with in this manner, that will bluff the river if we check? In general, better hands bet, showdown value hands check.. given the board texture, and the flop/turn action.

i can see your logic a little bit,but with no read on what villain has actually got a 3/4 pot bet wont be called by anything that we are beating,where as if we check call we induce bluffs and he may think his ace or 2 pair is good... thus we keep a semblance of pot size control oop against someone who we have no clue of his holdings..and keep our losses to a min if indeed we are beat.  With a good read jam it in if we are fairly sure we are ahead but i cant see the point in spewing cash
by guessing..

There are a couple of problems here. One, even without a read, top pair is still a likely holding considering the betting pattern, and certainly a hand that can call a value bet on the river. Secondly, there are too few spanner hands that he can hold in this situation to bluff with if we check, thus making checking to induce a bluff pretty pointless.

[noble1]

my point was that a 3/4 pot size bet will not be called by 1 pair or 2 pair with the river card that has arrived.
anyone think that he will call these if we 3 barrel ?

[totalise]

my point was that a 3/4 pot size bet will not be called by 1 pair or 2 pair with the river card that has arrived.
anyone think that he will call these if we 3 barrel ?

yup I do.. but thats not the point, the point is, that people DONT think he will bluff the river, given how he got there.... and that the times he bets, he cant have air, and a high % of the hands he bets, for value, will have you beat.. compared to hands that he can CALL With, that he will presume are bluff catchers... like Ax/2 pair etc.  What is your range, overall, to bet this river? because you are making it out to be air or flush.

[noble1]

we can go round and round in circles here,you say i cant deduce that he wont call a 3/4 pot with a worse hand than ours yet
you cant deduce he will    there is no read except he has called 2 streets and yet you say lead out but give no idea of what villains hand range is..

we have showdown value here which is why i prefer the check on the river and call a reasonable bet by villain if he bets out.
Why wont he bluff river if we check,do you have a reason to think this?

[totalise]

we can go round and round in circles here,you say i cant deduce that he wont call a 3/4 pot with a worse hand than ours yet
you cant deduce he will    there is no read except he has called 2 streets and yet you say lead out but give no idea of what villains hand range is..

we have showdown value here which is why i prefer the check on the river and call a reasonable bet by villain if he bets out.
Why wont he bluff river if we check,do you have a reason to think this?

its been explained so many times already.. how is he getting to this river, with a hand that has to bluff to win? look at the flop action, look at the turn action, look at flop texcture, look how it matches to turn/river texture..what hands are bluffing here? and if he wont bluff, how often does he have a hand, of value, that will fold to a bet, but will v-bet the river?  I can make a lot of deductions on this hand, based on past experience with players that could well fit this persons player perspective...  given that he is, full stacked, at a 50bb min table.. so you can make a lot of pretty reasonable assumptions, and whilst they wont ever be as solid as direct reads, they are going to be a lot stronger than this "I just want to get to showdown without thinking" perspective.

this seems like classic late-night-poker thinking... get to river, scare card hits, insta go into check-call mode.

[noble1]

i assume you think the check call is wrong then
please expand a bit more on the benefits of leading out on river with a 3/4 pot bet,as i cannot see the point you are trying to make in favour of this?

[totalise]

i assume you think the check call is wrong then
please expand a bit more on the benefits of leading out on river with a 3/4 pot bet,as i cannot see the point you are trying to make in favour of this?

just re-read the thread about that, it covers it all perfectly.

[bolt pp]

i assume you think the check call is wrong then
please expand a bit more on the benefits of leading out on river with a 3/4 pot bet,as i cannot see the point you are trying to make in favour of this?

has to be a level