Call or Raise?

[AlexMartin]

Aren't we in danger of folding the best and if we raise/fold here in this type of comp? I've seen people do all sorts of dumb shit. He might jam over with KQ

+1

[willrobrobu]

raise/call for me for sure.

[gouty]

raise/call for me for sure.

I can see an argument for raise/fold or even jam but raise/call seems risky. Calling a 4 bet river with bottom house would usually only beat bluffs and we don't know if this player is that good. I agree with George that if he is good then raising this river may be the only way we can lose the hand.

Still like the flat call. Certainly not a softly played hand IMO.

[muckthenuts]

raise/call for me for sure.

I can see an argument for raise/fold or even jam but raise/call seems risky. Calling a 4 bet river with bottom house would usually only beat bluffs and we don't know if this player is that good. I agree with George that if he is good then raising this river may be the only way we can lose the hand.

Still like the flat call. Certainly not a softly played hand IMO.

I think what George meant wasn't that he might be "good", but that he might massively overvalue his hand and accidentally turn a value shove into a bluff. I don't really agree with this reasoning though, it feels similar to saying we shouldn't raise rivers in general without the nuts because we might be beat. The long term result of it being (imo) a losing play is going to stay the same since we'd have a read on his comfort level at the table (posture, how he handles chips etc.) and live £50+r's don't typically attract the complete novice punters which he'd have to be here for the above to apply.

[SuuPRlim]

i jam

we'd all jam if we had you REP

seriously though given how likely it is he has a flush, and how unlikely he is to fold it raising seems fairly mandatory.

[gouty]

raise/call for me for sure.

I can see an argument for raise/fold or even jam but raise/call seems risky. Calling a 4 bet river with bottom house would usually only beat bluffs and we don't know if this player is that good. I agree with George that if he is good then raising this river may be the only way we can lose the hand.

Still like the flat call. Certainly not a softly played hand IMO.

I think what George meant wasn't that he might be "good", but that he might massively overvalue his hand and accidentally turn a value shove into a bluff. I don't really agree with this reasoning though, it feels similar to saying we shouldn't raise rivers in general without the nuts because we might be beat. The long term result of it being (imo) a losing play is going to stay the same since we'd have a read on his comfort level at the table (posture, how he handles chips etc.) and live £50+r's don't typically attract the complete novice punters which he'd have to be here for the above to apply.

I can agree with all that, but I still think the flush would only call your raise (assuming you are not jamming) and if he 4 bets you he simply must have better than a flush.

I know I bang on about tourney equity all the time, and it kind of appears nitty to just call or maybe fold certain PHA threads. However this is the prime example of tourney equity suicide I mean. That goes double for satellites where there may be many first prizes as most live sats have.

If there is only one seat for first I jam hoping for flush to call. In this situation with multiple seats I call and reap an already juicy pot most of the time and occasionally when I am beat I look like Phil Ivey. Is this correct theory or am I way off base?

[ruud]

Gouty - 100% think in a satellite flatting absolutely best play theory wise where it is all about accumulating chips. I would say that there is an argument even there for jamming to lock up a seat tho. Situation/blinds/players left/ number of seats dependent obv

Think flatting best in all situations tbh. Feels like we may have been coolered and raising just creates the potential for another sick feeling in the stomach if we get jammed on. Yes, we may feel we have an easier decision but that does mean we have put a vast amount of our hard earned stack in the middle, only to have to fold and not even see of we are beat. Therefore I think if I raise in game, and he jams I am likely in a "show me a winner" mode.

Pot size says to me flat. If we win we have a really healthy stack to go to war with going forward. If we lose we still have a stack we can get some play out of and are not straight into push/fold

[Junior Senior]

Just read the op and nothing else before deciding and i think as it is explained and without history or reads its a call. Plenty of players i know where you could jam here and get called off by a flush or worse but would need to know them before jamming.

Raise/fold just sucks here against an unknown so why even entertain it? Again, if i know the player and their game then we could raise fold.

[DMorgan]

Raise/fold just sucks here against an unknown so why even entertain it?

If we give him a river range of straights or better and he jams river with nut flushes and boats then I'd estimate that we're getting jammed on <10% of the time. Even if we always fold when he jams, he only has to be calling his good K-high flushes to make this raise greater EV than calling.

I'd contest that the vast vast majority of players aren't even thinking about jamming their nut flushes, they're just calling which makies this a clear raise imo.

Taking villain as described (40ish, smartly dressed playing a live £50r), which statement do people think is more likely to be true?

a) Villain will play cautiously against river raises
b) Villain will make thin river 3b jams for value

I know which one I'm choosing

[youthnkzR]

Ok its reasonable for him to have a better house, however this bet size seems pretty weak. This, coupled with the fact its so hard to make straights and flushes live, probably leads me to jam.

Raise fold totally out of the question due to stacks. People love to hero call live...etc.

(You've gotta also remember people sometimes over value hands - particularly  live - and therefore if we raise and he jams, theres a small chance he does this with worse).

[railtard1]

i jam

strongly agree with this, especially in a live 50r, vs a well dressed 40 year old :-)

[Tal]

40k in our stack, facing a bet of 10k into 20k pot.

How often do we get called by worse? Why would a flush bet-call? Even those would be Ax hands and he only called pre OOP. I would think it more likely he has a hand that is behind that doesn't call or ahead that doesn't fold.

Seems like a 90% call to me, unless you can read weakness or smell pigeon.

Will now read the other responses and learn how wrong I am...

[George2Loose]

I hate this "people won't call worse" ethos. Let's not raise quads- we don't get called by worse. People call with 89th nuts all the time

[Tal]

I hate this "people won't call worse" ethos. Let's not raise quads- we don't get called by worse. People call with 89th nuts all the time

Ok, fair comment. Let me rephrase:

Villain has defended, check-called, contemplated a check-raise (we think) but elected to call and then led the river for half pot.

If we raise and he calls, are we more likely to see him turn over T9o or A4dd?

[Junior Senior]

need to dust off my smart shirts and tweed sports jackets and look a few years older next time i play. i wanna look like a well dressed, 40 year old and have these internet kids jamming on me.