Villain is clearly bluffing on the river- his line makes no sense with any strong hand except 44, and even that may not call a river shove (it’s a lot more plausible for me to check a set on the river than for him to do so, given that I could be going for a check-raise whereas he is closing the action.) The problem is that so am I, and I am pretty sure he’s bluffing with a pair. That doesn’t mean I have to let him get away with it, though:
PokerStars No-Limit Hold’em, $6.00 BB (6 handed) – PokerStars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
SB ($1959.40)
BB ($628)
UTG ($1069.20)
MP ($1539.40)
Hero (CO) ($1464.60)
Button ($1522.80)
Preflop: Hero is CO with K, A
2 folds, Hero bets $18, Button calls $18, 2 folds
Flop: ($52.20) 2, 5, J (2 players)
Hero bets $33, Button calls $33
Turn: ($118.20) 10 (2 players)
Hero checks, Button checks
River: ($118.20) 4 (2 players)
Hero bets $99, Button raises to $360, Hero raises to $1412.40 (All-In), 1 fold
Total pot: $838.20 | Rake: $3
Results:
Hero didn’t show K, A (nothing).
Outcome: Hero won $835.20
Villain floats a lot, so I was actually planning to check-raise the turn expecting him to bet a lot of draws and such. When he doesn’t bet, he announces that he has showdown value, almost surely a pair. Thus, I bet the river to rep a whiffed check-raise or a one-pair hand playing pot control. Apparently I convinced him, because he turned his middle pair into a bluff. Would be pretty sick if he had tanked and called me with like 33 turned into a bluff and then a bluff-catcher!
Andrew, do you think he is that much more likely to be bluffing with a weak pair which would fold to your all-in re-raise rather than with a busted draw (like 78s). I’m trying to understand if/why re-raising all-in on river is higher EV than just calling. Seems to me that turning a weak pair into a bluff is more unusual … but perhaps that just has to do with different stakes we play at 🙂
It’s not impossible, but I think he’d usually bet the turn if he had a draw with no showdown value like 87. His turn check most likely indicates a pair rather than a draw.
Interesting. Thank you. And a follow up question: given that you decide he probably has a weak pair that he is turning into a bluff and you decide to raise – why do you overbet and push? Why not just raise it to like $950?
Good question. A smaller raise might work, but I’m conscious of what I’m representing, which is really TT/JJ at this point. I would definitely shove those hands, and generally I think it’s important to bet big any time you are repping a strong, narrow range. When you actually have it, you want to get a lot of money in the pot, and when you don’t have it, you need to give Villain some encouragement since he won’t intrinsically be inclined to believe you.
if he bet/calls turn what rivers are you continuing on?
I would be check-calling non-spade rivers.
Interesting, never even considering c/c river but that makes a lot of sense.
My main ‘worry’ would be that once you check river you never have a hand stronger than JT, and as a result he can probably valuebet AJ since I doubt you ever c/r turn with a 1 pair hand this deep.
But, people prob check back AJ instead of bet river.
He may or may not value bet AJ, I wouldn’t be shocked either way, but FWIW I’d also be check-raising sets on blank rivers if I check-raised turn.
Yeah the more I thought about it, that’s what I’d figured you’d do. cool hand.
Why wouldn’t you think he had As3s?
Hey Jimmy,
I’m not Andrew but…
Even if you put A3ss in villain’s range, that’s just a single hand combo. The vast majority of villains range here is bluffing.
Also, I think Andrew expects A3ss to play differently, either by raising the flop, or by betting the turn once Andrew checks.
It’s important not to get caught up in putting your opponent on a single hand, but a range of hands. If Andrew’s opponent only legitimate hands are 44 and As3s, but could be bluffing with any pair medium pair he thinks is too weak to call, combination wise he’ll be bluffing way more often than he’ll have a hand worth calling, making the river bluff profitable.
You did a pretty good job for not being Andrew 🙂