This is a continuation of a multi-street What’s Your Play? For discussion of the pre-flop action, please see this post. Flop action is here, and turn action is here.
You’re at a 9-handed $2/$5 NLHE table with $600 effective stacks. UTG is very loose, especially pre-flop, and the whole table is salivating over him. UTG+2 is tight-aggressive bordering on nitty.
UTG limps for $5. UTG+2 raises to $20, and the action folds to Hero in the CO with Qs Ts. Hero raises to $50, UTG waffles a bit and then calls, and UTG+2 quickly puts in another $30.
Flop ($151 in pot after rake) Ks 8d 6d. UTG and UTG +2 both check without much hesitation. Hero bets $75, UTG folds, and UTG +2 calls.
Turn ($301 in pot) Jd. UTG2 checks, Hero checks.
River ($301 in pot) 2d. UTG2 checks, $475 remain in the effective stacks. Hero?
Post your thoughts and preferred action here, and I’ll be back with results and my own thoughts on Friday.
When I see villain check this river, I am very tempted to bet, but before we do anything rash let us think through villain’s and hero’s ranges. Most importantly, I think we can all but eliminate Ad from villain’s range. If he had Axdd, it seems unlikely that he checks both turn and river. We have hands in our range that can call a bet but might check behind (A w/Qd, QQ-JJ with one diamond, etc), so I don’t think villain is checking the nuts often. Also, it is almost impossible for him to have the bare Ad, because if we are excluding AK and AA from his range, what off-suit A’s are calling the flop? A8o seems highly unlikely, as does a float with AQo or similar. So I think his range consists of Kx and QQ-99, turned non-nut flushes, and perhaps some combos of A8s/89s/87s. About half of these hands have a diamond in them, with a few Ks, Qs, and Js. If we feel confident that all hands w/out a diamond will fold to a smallish (1/3 pot?) bet, then a small bet will certainly be profitable. The question is whether it would be more profitable to overbet, targeting most if not all of his range. To do this, however, we would have to rep the Ad. Would that be believable to villain?
I think if we had AdK or AdA, we would most likely be barreling the turn, at least I would, because getting raised isn’t that bad. However, some players do check back these hands on this turn, scared of the flush and wanting to ensure seeing the river. Also, AdQ, AdJ could potentially check back the turn (similar to how we played our turned straight draw). So I think we can rep the Ad. How will villain respond to an overbet shove then? It is hard to imagine him folding the Kd, but against a borderline nit, I would hope for a possible fold from Q and expect a definite fold from anything smaller. So which bet is more profitable will depend on how many Kds and Qds are in his range.
If his range is KQ, KJs-KTs, QQ-99, QJd-87d, and 89s-78s, He has 6/42 Kds, 5/42 Qds, and slightly over half hands with any diamond. So lets compare the equity of overbet shoving (only called by Kd) compared to betting $100 (called by all ds). Shove first: (I hope my math is right!)
EV= (-475 * 6/42) + (301 * 36/42) = +190.14.
For smaller bet:
EV= (-100 * 22/42) + (301 * 20/42) = +90.95
So if we are very sure of our assumptions, then shoving is clearly better. However, the numbers change VERY quickly with any change, especially to villain’s calling range of the overbet. If he is the type of player who gets suspicious of a polarizing bet and calls light, then this is catastrophically bad for us. So the way I look at it, overbetting would be an extremely exploitable bet only to be made if we felt very confident in villain’s calling range.
This analysis has been exploitative for the most part, we should also think about balancing our betting range(s). If we want to have two betting ranges (overbet and small bet), then our overbet range needs all Ads, all Kds?, and appropriate bluffs. For these bluffs, we don’t have any blockers possible, so I suppose we would want to put our absolute worst hands here? or perhaps we should put some marginal hands in case our villain gets really sticky to polarized bets? I feel much less confident with these balancing questions so I’ll leave that to Andrew.
as played, and given the run out, this is a snap over-jam.
i still stand by my earlier assessment that flop is a check (and not entirely convinced that your flop analysis doesn’t in fact make a stronger case for checking it back). with that said, this is definitely the spot to bomb the river. i expect to take it down close to 75% of the time and here BEP is only 61%.
I pretty much agree with all of Nick’s analysis re: can we credibly represent the Ad and how often does V have a flush here.
I’m unsure that I’m qualified to discuss this, but I think it’s really difficult for us to balance two bet sizes on the river, because many of the air hands we can have on this river are hands that we barrel the turn with (based on the rationale Andrew has described). So I’m inclined to use one bet size and I’m definitely inclined for that bet size to be all-in. We are very certain that V is capped here, so we can put him in an unwinnable spot by shoving with nuts hands (probably all Ad and Kd combos, as Nick pointed out) and enough air to balance. So the first question is whether QsTs belongs in our shoving range here, which I think it does unequivocally. Truthfully, we may have the best bluffing hand we can have. Holding a Q removes a Kd combo, and other combos of QTs we might have here block V’s folding range (the 3 combos of KTs not diamonds), but this particular combo does not because the Ks is on the flop and we don’t think KTo is in V’s raising range preflop. So I definitely think from a GTO perspective that using this hand as a bluff shove is correct.
The question is whether we can do better with an exploitive strategy; in this case, that would entail risking less if we can fold out the same range, but my guess would be that even betting $200 or so could very well open up V’s calling range. This is a situation where I’m happy to let someone more qualified do the math on the better move, and even so I’m not too confident in my assessment of V’s calling range. I’m confident he calls $200 or so with all Kd and Qd combos, but I’m not very sure beyond that. I do think it’s easy for him to talk himself into thinking we’re bluffing or at least don’t have the Ad or Kd (hands he may very well expect us to barrel turn with), which means that it may take more convincing for us to get him to fold here.
Thanks, matt, nice post. I wasn’t sure where this came from, though: “We are very certain that V is capped here.” I don’t necessarily disagree, but I don’t think it’s so obviously true that it can be asserted without some supporting argument.
On a 4 suit board there is only 1 combo of sets that didn’t just get hugely marginalized, KK. I’m not sure if that’s what matt is referring to.
Checking turn is going to induce a lot of calls by pairs with diamonds, and UTG2 will have some KdXx hands here a lot of the time so in all I think his range is going to almost always be sets no flush and diamonds running 9 to A. This is actually an uncapped range as UTG2 has all hands to the nuts in his range although you can make the argument that Ad is probably very heavily discounted.
Perhaps my perception is skewed, and maybe this is not good enough reason to develop a strong assumption that V is capped. But I am highly, *highly* disinclined to believe that V checks the Ad on the river here (not to say that it would right or wrong to do so). I find that a lot of people at roughly a live 2/5 skill level have a really hard time checking from out of position on the river with their very strong hands and risking the possibility of having the river check through; I think this is even more the case after no money went in the pot on the turn. I suppose there is a subsection of supposedly nitty players who fall into the “trappy” bucket as well, although it doesn’t seem like we have enough information in-game to make that determination with any amount of confidence. But all things considered, I would really expect the Ad to just lead river rather than risk having to turn over the nut flush (possibly to light jeering and/or embarrassment) at showdown when the river goes check-check.
Several things about this river.
1) First off we have air in our range as played so I’m pretty disinclined to just shove as it does look like nuts or air 100% and if I’m UTG2 with QQdx I’m going to be thinking “does he really shove Kd?”
I don’t think so, I think he only shoves the Ad and air here. I call. That’s my thought process. As UTG2 with the Kd I would also be thinking that hero isn’t expecting me to check Kd twice and my line looks so weak there has to be a much higher chance he is bluffing. That’s just my thoughts.
2) What do I do when I have Ad or Kd here and I’m value betting against worse diamonds and sets? Does shoving seem like a great play? Against a nit am I really going to shove the nuts on a 4 diamond runout against a range that is marginal (sets and 9-Q diamonds)? I think I’m probably always value betting around $130-215 depending on the player. Against a nit my value sizing is always at the lower end, and I expect his calling frequency to be almost equal whether I size 130 or 175.
3) Live, I’m really going to reach into the bag of tricks here. Did he check quick, does he seem nervous, did he check his cards again, if I start reaching for chips does it get his attention. It is an absolutely fantastic spot to be using live reads.
4) I don’t think jamming is bad, but you are in a spot against a tight player where you can expect a valueish looking bet to fold out a large part of his marginal range which is going to be 99/TT/JJ and sets, and the stronger part of his range to be calling shoves and large bets enough of the time that the risk is probably not worth it. We are really just left wondering how often he calls any bet with QQdx here as we assume he almost always calls with Kd.
Therefore without a read, I’m going to make it look like I have the Ad here and bet $155, his calling range is going to be:
100% Ad combos, Kd combos
70% Qd combos
40% Jd combos
0% 9-Td combos and sets
The Ad combo is irrelevant because he is always check raising you, so the smaller the size the better, and he isn’t check raising with anything else. So sizing smaller seems to target the largest part of his range we want folding, saves the most money when we get check raised and instamuck, and really just gives a good price on our bluff which only has to work 33%.
Bryan,
Sounds like in (1) you’re saying that you wouldn’t shove as a bluff because it will look suspicious and get called by any bluff-catcher, but in (2) that you wouldn’t expect a shove to be called when you’re trying to value bet the nuts.
Based on Andrew’s reasoning on the turn, his checking range on the turn should include a lot of one diamond hands. He should clearly be value-betting here with his strongest flushes as well as the correct proportion of bluffs. Depending on bet sizing, it’s quite possible that villain will call only with flushes, meaning that blockers are not particularly possible (a careful range analysis might mean that certain ranks of cards block more one-card flushes than others, but that will be a very small consideration compared to the amount of showdown value we have). Hero has close to if not exactly 0 equity, so this hand almost certainly belongs in a bluffing range.
The question is sizing. When Hero holds the nuts in position on the river, it is often correct to shove, and I believe that is the case here. Villain is unlikely to hold a bare Ad after checking twice, especially after calling flop. I also don’t see him having many two diamond hands, as he would probably check-raise flop with most of these. Kdxd might check-call flop, and could potentially check turn, though I think a bet is more likely. One diamond hands likely to check-call the flop are KQ, QQ, TT, 99. Villain could also easily hold KQ, QQ, TT, or 99 without a diamond, as well as KJs, perhaps KTs. I wouldn’t expect a tight aggressive player to be calling a 3-bet out of position with any hands that flop a pair of 88s. I would expect 88 and 66 to check-raise flop, so those are out as well.
Overall, I’m putting villain on all KQ, QQ, TT, and 99, plus KJs. This range is very close to 50% flushes, so if we jam, the unexploitable response is to fold a bit over 60% of his range, which probably means folding his 9 high flushes and all non-flushes.
This makes K-high flushes possible value shoves, but blocking a lot of his calling range means betting smaller might just be better. I think Hero should be value-betting less than all-in with K and Q high flushes, and checking back smaller flushes.
Considering which bluffs to shove vs. bet-fold, we want to consider which hand will play back (call or raise) only to the smaller bet. These are probably 99 with a diamond and bluff catchers like sets, two pair. K, 9, 8, and 6 are blockers to this range, but kings should probably be checked back for showdown value, so I think Hero should be choosing bluff-shoves from hands like T9, 9s8s, 8s7s, 7s6s which I think will be in his range and have no showdown equity. Our hand also has 0 equity, but I believe it plays better as a smaller bet-fold.
What size should we be using for our smaller value bets and bluffs? Unfortunately, I’m out of time for careful analysis today, but my guy tells me something like $130. I feel this will be enough to make him fold one pair hands, yet only needs to work about 30% of the time. I know I’m doing what Andrew warned against in previous posts (throwing out a number with little justification), but I hope that the analysis I did do makes this a worthwhile post despite the poor finish.
Thanks for the hand, Andrew. I have been away from the blog for a bit and didn’t get a chance to chime in on the other streets, but have found it a very interesting hand and really appreciate your analysis.
I just realized after posting that I first discounted sets, but then included them as possible bluff catchers. I do think that 99 and KJs are the most likely hands to call a smaller bet but not a shove, meaning that 9 is the most important blocker (probably checking for showdown with Jacks as well as Kings). I still think this is a bet-fold, but rethinking our opponent’s range, I think we need to bet a bit bigger to make top pair fold. Still trusting intuition due to it being my bedtime, but now I’m thinking more like 150-160.
Oops! On waking up, I realize I interpreted the blocker situation backwards. Hands that block 99 are more effective as bet-folds, because villain is less likely to have the hands that play back specifically against a smaller bluff. Hands that don’t block 99 would be more effective bluff-shoves, and that’s what I think we should do here.
Mark, while I agree that you often want to shove a balanced range of nuts and bluffs on the river, there are some exceptions. On 4 flush and trips boards, blocker effects are limited and the nuts are usually a significant portion of both players ranges such that if you offer too steep a price to your opponent (i.e., overbet shove), it’s correct for her to only call with the nuts. Certainly, if the pot were 1 and you had 1 million in stacks, shoving the river as the IP player seems very dubious, as you win 1 if you have nuts or villain doesn’t have nuts, but lose 1 million the times when villain has nuts. Even if that’s only 1% of the time, bluffing the river is massively -EV, and shoving is a suboptimal betsize with the nuts.
More theoretically sound players may correct me if I’m wrong.
Thanks Andrew for such a great site/blog/etc., and for all the hard work/time you put into it. And thanks to everyone who shares their thoughts on Andrews blogs. Its great to read your thought processes on hands, learning so much from everyone. Its so helpful to see what i should be thinking about at each stage of hand, and i love seeing all the different opinions on certain lines and the reasoning behind those thoughts. So Big thanks to everyone who participates and of course the best coach. You guys are more helpful than you realize, lets have a great year!
TPE Member
Ryan-BogeyB13
You should post! You’ll learn more just be exercising the thought process of posting than passively reading.
Thanks Bryan, ill try and post some comments/questions in future hands. I understand concepts discussed, but still have a hard time thinking about them “In the Moment”, thats why its so great for me to compare my thinking to you guys. Ill try and be more active in future posts
Most players can’t do deep analysis in the moment, I can’t at least. You have to practice it relentlessly in your offtime until you develop some intuitive feel for similar situations.
I bet half-pot. Hero just needs a fold 1/3 of the time and I think he will get that. I don’t think a shove is very much more likely to get a fold.
I really agree. No need to weight your risk/reward too heavily towards risk on this runout. His hand as played looks like a showdown value pair, he’s mucking a decent percentage of the time here to a bet. Given the fact that he was noted to be a borderline nitty, even something like TdTx will fold just as easily to a half potter as it will to anything more.
This is ostensibly a good bluff spot given table images but I am checking this back a healthy amount against unknowns or fish.
I don’t see him checking the nut flush on the river.
Since hero doesn’t have any blockers, and the way this hand was played, ak with the K of diamonds is a higher possibility now or high pocket pairs with a diamond. I never see him call you with KQ offsuit preflop and I don’t see a capable TAG not raising you on the flop to set up a possible turn shove with nut flush draw.
What does he call you with preflop, on the flop and check both the turn and the river with one card to a flush? I think hero shoved weakness/absolute strength and polarized his range with the turn check. Now hero can represent a nut flush or mediocre strength hands and air.
I think vilians range consists of High pocket pairs-maybe with a diamond, AK with a diamond and mediocre hands that will fold to your bet.
The way this hand was played, hero can still represent a flush and I think should bet. Sizing should be on the smaller end since either vilian has it or he will fold to a decent bet. I think 1/3 of the pot is good enough because I see no reason to risk more. K high flush is probably not folding to a half pot bet and anything less than that will fold enough times againstt a capable player to make this a profitable play.