Game is $5/$10/$20 no-limit hold ’em, effective stacks are at least $10,000. Villain is extremely nitty, but it’s paying off for him because he keeps coolering people who can’t bring themselves to fold when they’re obviously crushed. He doesn’t seem intimidated by the stakes exactly – he bought in for a lot and doesn’t seem shy about reloading – but I guess he just figures he’s getting paid off so easily on huge hands why play anything else? He’s not big on slowplaying, I’ve seen him bet big with monsters when he’s likely to get paid off (ie flopped trips in a multiway pot).
Most likely he sees me as a tough player who bluffs too much. We haven’t had any significant clashes, mostly because he plays so few pots. This, by the way, makes him very convenient to have two seats to my left.
Action folds to me in the small blind, I open to $60 with 5d 4c, big blind (also extremely tight, which is why I think I can raise this) folds, and Villain calls from the straddle.
Flop ($130 in pot) As Kc 2h, I check planning to give up, but he checks behind.
Turn ($130 in pot) 3d. I bet $90, he calls.
River ($310 in pot) Ks. What’s your play and why?
Post your preferred action, as well as your response to possible Villain actions (e.g. what will you do if you bet and he raises?) here along with any other questions, comments, etc. I’ll post my own thoughts and the results on Friday.
Merry Christmas!
I would bet about 2/3 pot, $200 and fold to a raise. If Villain is as nitty as you say, he will not be raising just trip Kings on river, IMO. He will call. IF he raises that leaves combos of AK/22/33 in his range. Since you two are heads up and you think he views you as bluffy, this could be a time where he woke up with a decent hand in the straddle and slow played it to let you continue “bluffing” ie, not betting his hand on flop or raising you on turn.
If you feel he sees you as someone who bluffs too much, I would be tempted to overbet here , say $400. Your hand is very disguised and it might induce him to call you down wider.
If he is that nitty to me if he raises this is an interesting spot. I maybe wrong but if he raises, I think it is 3-bet fold. Reasoning is that your hand is so disgused, he could never put this in your range and you could get value from a king. However if he is truly that nitty, he is not 4-bet shoving worse hands.
This may all be terrible as I play very badly.
I would overbet as well. Your probably gonna get called by most. Ks. And if he raises you could easily fold
Off the top, the only plausible hands that can have hero beat are 22/33/K2/K3. So there is that.
Overbet/fold to a raise is an interesting possibility and one option. The problem with this might be it doesn’t get paid by an ace. And villain very well may have more top pair than trip kings, to a degree that betting less than pot optimizes our payout when multiplied by the frequency with which he calls :). Why might villain not have AX? Because he checked back flop.
For an “extremely nitty” live player, top pair no kicker isn’t an autobet in this spot, and villain doesn’t think they are slowplaying to check back, not violating our other stipulation that villain doesn’t slowplay. But just because an AX check back is possible that doesn’t inform us of how often they actually do it.
In fact, Andrew’s flop check informs us a little bit, that he thinks even with nut-equity here, villain smacks flop a lot.
I think this is a clear check-raise. Large.
1) it is not inconceivable villain peels turn with JTs/QJs, about 8 combos, that could bluff. checking wins a bet here, a tiny consideration given combos, bet size, and likelihood, but its one in favour of check-raise.
2) villain will bet/call all sorts of KX, but not raise should we bet into them (hence overbetting) However, overbetting 500 or 600 is one thing, if we check and he bets 150, can we not make it larger than any overbet we were planning on leading with?
It seems to me if you say to me, hey Gareth, but we can make it really big by overbet leading, I can say, yeah but I can make it +10 of that by check-raising and give him a better price to call and get called by a similar range, if not an identical range, ie KQo-KJo-K9s. Its like some sort of poker Hilbert Hotel argument.
3) the issue of aces. I don’t really think we should focus on when villain has top pair much. By overbet leading we impair our ability to get paid by AT the higher we go and the smaller we go we win less from a non raising range of KX. So 250 might be called by all AX, KX, 500 might fold all but AQ and 650 only called by KX. But we can check-raise KX to 1,200 if we want! Basically, bets from AX when we check are bonus it seems to me. It will happen sometimes and that adds to our coffers just like when villain bets QJs. Assuming villain will pay off 250 with AX is not enough for us to make a lead of that size if they just flat KQ v that lead.
Check-raising is pretty easy to play, villain bets, we check-raise big, they three-bet, we fold, they call, we win. One key is to not be discouraged the times it checks through and htey show A9. We only need to have KJ call 1250 once for every five times they check back A9. Normally I think the Brokosism that we should value target hands that are second best to ours could lead to the neglection of a villain’s entire range, esp if they are making calling errors, calling 3rd and 8th best hands as well as 2nd best. But I think in this spot it is the perfect guide, and the map says check-raise!
If he has air, he folds because nits don’t usually bluff. We would have heard from him by now if he had a monster that beats us. I’d say we get value from marginal hands like weak Ax which he may call with thinking you bluff too much or Kx which is the nuts.
May as well shoot for the stars and target the Kx. I think a bet of 600 gets called by both and I’d call a raise.
First thought was to overbet/fold but Gareth convinced me otherwise
My .02:
Check-raise? No. I think it’s suboptimal to check-raise here, given the number of mediocre/showdown hands in his range (pocket pairs, weakly played Ax) and the assumption that he will raise us with Kx (and a certain percentage of air) anyways. It’s time to bloat the pot, not time to hope to extract a few extra bucks from his air. When we fire a bet, we represent a Ax, a Kx or effective air like 66 or worse. Remember our bluffy image and use it to our advantage!!!! Just say no to checkraising here.
Folding? NEVER!* What about the nuts in his range? Of course we don’t have the absolute nuts, but if we trust your reads [“bet big with monsters”], villain would almost NEVER play a flopped set or AK this way. If he has a slowplayed AA/KK/AK (which I highly doubt, given the call preflop), he would fire flop 100% of the time to get “missed value” so when he doesn’t do that, we can almost entirely rule out those monsters. If he is as nitty as you say, he almost never has K2 or K3 here after the tight BB comes along. WHAT FULL HOUSE CAN HE EVEN HAVE, then? If he has 33, then so be it, it’s a cooler, I’m more concerned about extracting more value from KJ, KQ, KT, K9 and Ax.
Overbetting? Sure, why not. That was my play before I gave it a lot of thought, but I think it comes down to how disbelieving he is of you-If there is a good chance he makes a crying call with Ax and 88-QQ, go for it. If he has no problem folding mediocre hands, I lean towards a …
Two thirds to pot-size bet? Yep, MY play is a bet/raise/call that will ensure calls from middling hands and probably still get a raise from Kx.
*Standard disclaimers apply here: if I get an extreme strength kind of live tell, then I would consider folding to a shove or a near shove.
That’s how I would have played it, right or wrong.
I’m not at all convinced that villain’s range for calling a river check-raise is identical (or close to identical) to the range with which he calls an overbet. The check-raise just looks so much stronger – I think he could easily get away from at least a good portion of his trip kings if you check-raise big, whereas he’ll rarely, and perhaps never, fold these hands to a lead out overbet.
He may see Andrew as overly bluffy, but I think he’s a good deal more likely to put him on a bluff if he leads out with an overbet. And because that might look bluffy, there also a very decent chance of calls from aces, and even pocket pairs like 44-QQ.
Even bluffy players can get credit for a hand when they make strong-looking plays, and a river check-raise is definitely a strong-looking play. Moreover, nitty players are more likely than average to fold to such a play, and thus seem like the worst type to use this line against for value.
But even if he calls with just as many trip king hands with either play, I think because the lead out overbet can look so bluffy (it can be saying to villain “well you clearly don’t have an especially strong hand here so I’m just going to bet big and take this down”) you’ll potentially get so many more calls from other hands (ie aces and pocket pairs) that it would be more profitable just to lead out with the overbet rather than risk it checking through.
If you factor in what I think is the very real possibility that this nit manages to fold a few of his trip king hands once you check raise (especially if you check-raise big, which is surely the only reason for attempting this play) then I think the lead out overbet becomes clearly the better play.
Totally agree with JDD, except that I’m entirely convinced that his call on the turn rules out 33 from his range as well. By the river his range is pretty much narrowed down to KQ-K9+AQ-A9+A2-A5s. I would overbet big here like 600, call whatever raise he throws at me. I’m also thinking that your perceived image may induce him to try bluffing you out of the pot with his missed draws like QJ, but admittedly thats less likely than him value raising you with Kx.
Merry Christmas!
I usually have trouble narrowing ranges enough to help in the decision making process. In this case, I think the range is very tight. Eliminate AA, KK,(no pre-flop re-raise). Eliminate AK (no pre-flop re-raise or flop bet). Therefore AQ, AJ, A10, KQ, KJ or pocket pair (eliminate Ax and Kx would have folded pre-flop).
I would bet pot on the river expecting a call only from KQ or KJ, fold from every thing else. Pocket 2’s would have bet the flop and pocket 3’s would have raised the turn. I would fold to a big river raise knowing that this analysis was wrong. He would only raise with a full-house.
Well, Andrew seems to be leading us on here when he says, “Villain is extremely nitty, but it’s paying off for him because he keeps coolering people who can’t bring themselves to fold when they’re obviously crushed.” So I am left wondering if we should be realizing we are “obviously crushed” if he raises the river :). Anyway, I like how Chris Clough describes why betting is better than checking so for me the main question is how much to bet and what to do if he raises. I agree with those who have said to overbet the pot but I am on the side of calling any raise he makes. The only cooler hand I could see him having is 33 and you never know, he might not even raise that because he’s still beat by our strongest raising hands.
Not having read the responses thus far, it seems like his range for calling you would have to be something like 22+, ATs+, AJ+, KJ+, QJs, JTs. This keeps him sufficiently nitty, and given your read that he is no fan of slowplaying (and doesn’t tend to think you have a hand) I think this player is going to be 3-betting the top of his range. My impression is that he will consider only hands like QQ+ and maybe AK (possibly AKs) as viable hands for putting in another bet, given that he seems to not want to adjust from his comfortable area of nitdom.
Given that he checks behind on the flop, we can eliminate As from his range as well as 22, but I think that his Kx combos are still in the mix.
The 3 on the turn would be a great card for his 33 combos, but his election to simply call your turn bet seems inconsistent with your description of this player. Therefore I think his most likely hands to be calling your turn bet are Kx and 44-JJ (QQ if he flats pre).
Finding the last K on the river makes me inclined to at least consider putting out a sizeable overbet (Brokos Bomb?). He has no K2 or K3 in his range and AK seems highly discounted given his flop play (and turn play for that matter). I’m also guessing he’s seen you overbet already which may make him inclined to call you down with even less than Kx here since you’ve described him as being a bit suspicious of you.
I bet $555. I think if he raises here, he’s repping slowplayed AK and 33 (95%) and slowplayed AA and KK (5%). It seems unlikely given everything you’ve described about him that he’d be slowplaying those hands at all, but especially not versus you, given your image. So the real question is this: is he capable of bluff-raising a river overbet? I think it’s not very likely. Nor is he very likely to be slowplaying here. There might be some physical/timing/sizing tells that could help in this situation.
One other consideration would be to check the river and to let him bet his Kx for value and then to raise him with the knowledge that trips and two pair are the vast bulk of his range and that he will likely pay off because of his suspicions.
I think the villain’s preflop range may be a bit wider than is assumed here despite his nittiness, given the fact that he merely completes the straddle and he may not, in fact should not, fold his decent Kx hands against our aggressive image after the action folded all the way to us in the sb. Besides, he has position on us and this may induce him to defend his straddle with a wider range than is customary for him.
Merry Christmas everyone!
Start with V’s range:
Pre-Flop: If I assume that he’s nitty, he likely has one of the following:
-good A
-a low or medium pair (a high pair he would 3bet since he doesn’t slowplay),
-a broadway hand.
Flop: If you assume that he doesn’t slowplay, he likely no longer has an A or 22. Range is now:
-a pair (not 22)
-broadway
Turn: Since he called, he either has a pair and doesn’t believe I have A or K, or he has a K and doesn’t believe I have an A. Assuming he doesn’t slowplay, that would likely mean he’s raising if he has 33. So his final range is:
-a pair: 44-88
-broadway w K: KQ, KJ, KT, perhaps K9
-broadway w/o K: maybe QJ, QTs or JTs
So the big assumption is that he’s not slowplaying, which blows away everything that beats me (except perhaps K3 if I’m also over-estimating his nittiness). Given that he thinks you bluff too much, I’m inclined to believe that if I bet he’ll do the following:
-Raise if he has a K
-Call if he has a pair
-Fold otherwise.
If you check I think he’ll do the following:
-Bet if he has a K (and probably call your raise)
-Check otherwise.
Given that you’ll win more if you bet first (i.e. when he has a pair), I would bet at least the amount I was betting when he thought I was bluffing, maybe a little more to make it look more like a bluff. Let’s go with $275.
Now for the last part: If he does indeed raise my bet, do I simply call, or re-raise? (Folding is out unless the raise is an insanely high amount: if he has a K then a raise for value is perfectly reasonable if he suspect we have an A or small pair.) That depends on two things I believe:
-What are the chances that he calls the re-raise? If he has KQ, then I would think he will call, otherwise he may finally bail out.
-How confident am I on my range-determining abilities? The answer should probably be: you should be very confident, of course, because you’re an ass-kicking player! But I’ve made a lot of assumptions, and there’s always the chance that’s one’s a little off, or V’s smart enough to mix it up at the right time. So I tend to be cautious in this regard; perhaps this is a leak.
My final answer:
Bet $275, and call if he raises.
Why not underbet?
Let’s see: Villain calls preflop, checks flop after Andrew checks behind, then calls the turn.
If he is as nitty as described then I don’t see him calling the turn with anything less than Kx very often. For the same reason he should not be slowplaying monsters too often neither so I narrow his range to a lot of Ax and Kx.
By underbetting I encourage/induce raises not only from Kx but a lot of Ax as well. I could see villain raises with a lot of big aces here that would have just called to a bigger bet. Occasionaly you will miss value from ace-rags like A9 and A5suited but those should not happen too often. Like I said it is more likely that Villain might 3bet with A10, AJ, AQ and definitely Kx. On rare occasions you might even get a bluff from a missed gutshot like QJ/Q10 by betting weak!
Here’s how I see the hand played out on the river a lot of the times:
I bet $140, Villain 3bets to $425, I 4bet to $1250, if villain 5bet I can fold my hand comfortably.
Preflop: Based on your read of villain being extremely nitty, but not slowplaying, I going to guess that he 3bets here with hands like QQ+,AK, and calls with 22-JJ, A8s-AQs,ATo-AQo,KJ+,QTs+,JTs-98s.
Flop: Villain may slowplay a strong hand given that he thinks you bluff too much, but I don’t think this is the most likely flop. I would guess he bets any A or 22 about 90% of the time, which puts his range at 33-JJ, KJ+,QTs+,JTs-98s, plus about 4 combos of top pair.
Turn: Villain certainly calls with his Kings and probably most of his pocket pair (he thinks you are bluffing). If he has top pair, he may just call hoping to induce another bluff but I would guess he raises a set now. Despite his read I doubt he’s calling with queen high given how nitty he is, so his range is something like 44-JJ, KJ+, 4 combos of top pair.
River: When the king comes, villain’s range includes 16 combos of trips, 4 combos of top pair, 48 combos of pocket pairs. I think he will raise with trips, so we can try to bet an amount that will be called by lower pairs. My guess would be that might be around 120-140.
If he raises, I would plan to call unless he did something absurd. There is a small chance he slowplayed a set or called pre- and then slowplayed AK, so I certainly don’t want to play for stacks, but I would be happy calling up to maybe $1000 raise or so.
I bet pot.
He is described as ‘nitty’ which does not mean passive, but shares some traits. I would expect him to want to 3bet vs a player who he sees as bluffy with AK pre flop. He may or may not 3bet AA thinking he can be trappy. I would weight this about 20% or so.
Really these two hands are the only two we are worried bout right?
Another reason I expect a 3bet from him pre flop is that he is straddler. He might think that you are ‘attacking the straddle’ which would disguise the strength of his hand when he comes back at your raise. Plus he might correctly suss out your expectations of his getting tired of your ‘bluffs’.
So, tricky nit or just nit, he figures to have reasonable reasons to raise you pre flop. On the flop, with him in position, I feel that he may slowplay the whole way. It is a dry board, and 54o is not a big part of your range.
So, if you bet pot, what are you trying to get to call? Any Ace. I think a pot size bet would get paid off by an Ace, given your image, and his perception of you.
If you catch him with a King, which to me is very consistent with his call Pre Flop, call call line, I would expect a raise with most of them. He is described as ‘coolering’ people who won’t fold. This could mean he bets out on the river, or it could mean he raises. Hard to tell. Either way, I expect him to raise his good King/kicker and just call with his bad Kings (suited I expect) I would also expect him to have a slight number of K2/K3 Kd2d Kh3h are the only two that I could imagine.
So bet size is set, now what if he raises?
If he raises pot or less, I call. He could be overvaluing a K with good kicker, and will fold to my 3bet probably. Nits are afraid of putting money in bad, and so I expect to NOT get paid much when ahead after he raises my river bet. The times he has AK, or K2/K3 are minimal if my expectation hold true.
If he raises big? hmmmm, now I am torn. He does not seem the type (nitty) to put big money in bad, right? I am wondering if he raises big, what does he think I have? If he has a King, obviously I must have the Ace, or will be folding. (2’s and 3’s are small part of my PF range also in his mind maybe). So a huge raise would mean either a bluff, an over valued hand, or another cooler.
I would think nits would NOT want to take a chance of losing a whole lot rather than winning more. I feel nits of all players are LESS likely to overbet raise light or over value hands either IP or OOP.
with this reasoning, I would fold to a 2x PSB raise or more. If he has outplayed me, fine. But deep stacks call for a little more caution I think.
which
I think I like a b/3b/f line. We bet around 150$ to get value from various hands he’d be bluffcatching with. We size it small enough that he’ll feel enticed to go for value with trips and raise us. If and when he raises, we raise back, around 2/3 pot. Our value target for a river 3-bet is various trip type hands: I think he’ll find it hard to fold KQ or KJ (all combos of which are still in his range) against your river 3-bet, given your image.
If we get 4-bet on the river we can fold comfortably: we expect him to almost never 4-bet the river as a bluff, both because he’s not particularly bluffy, and because our range still contains lots of boats: slowplayed AA or KK, turned A3 or 33. He can’t even have blockers that will significantly decrease the amount of boats in our range. And he won’t 4-bet for value with any hand worse than ours. So if he does 4-bet the river, we can fold without worrying about it too much.
I’m fine with Gareth’s x/r line as well, but I think the line I propose gives us more value from strong trips. It does give us less value from air. But I think he has a lot of trips in his range OTR because of his pre-flop range and the texture, so I suspect that mathematically it is more important to extract from strong trips than to get an extra bet from air.