Hand of the Week: 666 (River)

19 thoughts on “Hand of the Week: 666 (River)”

1. We’re losing to exactly 33 and 64 (the latter of which seems quite unlikely given pre-flop), and we’re chopping with a 6. That said, there don’t seem to be many value hands that would pay us off (hard to see him getting here with 44 unless he’s lost his mind, ditto over-pairs, and I think it’d be bad for him to pay off a big bet). I think in general, our hand is so face-up that we almost certainly have to bet small, if we bet at all. I think I would bet no more than 1/4 pot, figuring that a) that might elicit a bluff-raise with a frequency that he doesn’t have enough combos of value to balance and b) more importantly, on the chance he got here with a big pair (particularly AA or KK, where he can hope we have other, dominated over-pairs), the only chance we have of being paid is to bet small.

   • I think its also important to note that the only 6 left in the deck is the 6 of spades, and it’s a 4 of spades river….so for him to have 64 it has to be 64o, which seems…..even more unlikely. So its basically….the one combo of 33 we lose to.

2. I find it hard to believe that we can bet for value here. What bluffs can we have, especially after calling the turn? The best candidates for this might be overpairs that happen to be in our flop raising range, continue vs a 3b and call the turn, but there just can’t be many (if any) of those. I also think it’s reasonable to suspect that Villain won’t call without a hand that at least chops with us, even at the necessarily very small sizing we’d have to use for value (although I’m wary of making assumptions about how any truly strong player will react to anything, it seems damn near impossible for Villain to reach this river without 6x or better for value as played). Using small sizing may also elicit a check shove, which could put us in a very tough spot.

   The case for betting I think relies more on the idea that we have the opportunity to bluff Villain off a chop than it does that we can get called by worse. K6s does not block Villain from having 6x (as opposed to us having 7s6d, 6d5s, As6d), thus keeping more 6x in his range and giving us more incentive to try to bluff Villain off a chop, probably by overbet shoving. Additionally, although it’s plausible for both players to have 33 in their range, we may have it more often following a check by Villain on this river. If Villain ever plans to bluff rivers, it would seem as though he really needs to have the quads combos for value.

   I initially went into this post planning to argue for just checking down, but the more I write about shoving as a bluff, the more viable I think that option is. 33 is only one combo, one that we can have more plausibly than Villain, and while Villain isn’t necessarily capped, he’s done some things that make his range really narrow.

   PS- just wanted to note how much I enjoy these posts, and how much I feel like I benefit in my own game from reading the thoughts of Andrew and others!

3. I think the first thing I want to say is a very simplistic observation. When you have 3 of kind on the flop with a top tier kicker with no immediate straight or flush available you have a monster hand. How many times do you hear about 3 of a kind being destroyed vs hands like TPTK or two pair getting destroyed by the river? (it’s not even close) I’m looking here to get a lot of money into the pot and raising the flop bet gets it done. If my opponent has 33 here or 64 by river I’m going to be tipping my hat. I feel those hands would be at the fringe calling range of the Villain given his SB position and my button bet. And I only think he’s calling with A6,56,67,46 and a few others (lazy to figure all) when suited which makes it even less likely he has a 6. 33 is obviously possible, but given the fact that Villains range is probably stronger than heroes it’s possible he would even throw away a hand like that. Now, I know it’s possible that some of you would say he would have 3 bet if he had QQ+ or KK+, I would still think it’s possible he might just call with a big pocket pair given it could have a lot of value vs a button raise by just standing betting after the flop I also think that there are a lot of small suited connectors and gappers villain might call with and hope to connect with the flop. After the flop I really think Villain is betting a big pocket pair or straight draw or has a smaller 6 or 3 where he lucked out when the bored paired (in the case of him having a 6 in hand). I would have been a little bit scared on the turn if a straight card came vs pairing, but I would probably still have to hold my ground a bit. Lastly, I would like to make a bet in the range of 1/3 of the pot to induce the other player to possibly reraise me on the river. Thanks for the great post.

4. I’m not too concerned about villain having 33 or 64s (but not ruling them out) because I think he probably have played it a bit differently, e.g. like bombing river aiming to get max value from hero’s 6x.

   I think the value target should be the possible AA/KK/QQ which the villain could have slow played preflop. I think betting 1/3 pot (or thereabouts) will look like a value bet to the villain so I think I would prefer hero to tank and over bet all in. This could result in the villain even folding a chop.

   Hero could get to the river 6x/64/33, some over pairs and even strong Ax (ambitious and/or a bit spewy maybe). Because villain checked the river, he may think the hero is capable of turning a hand with showdown value into a bluff and level himself into calling. This might be a bit ambitious thinking though!

   We could bet small (1/4 or 1/3 pot) as thin value and/or aiming to induce a spaz, but this is read dependent and as the hero views the villain as decent he may just view this for what it is. The villain could have some random bluff but i think its very likely, given he’s oop on the flop versus 2 tough opponents with uncapped ranges who easily could have flopped monsters.

5. I fail to see how a competent villain is 3 betting this flop with a hand like JJ. Which means, on this river he has very few medium strength hands. He either has bluffs that have given up or 6x or 33. If we think he is a good player, his 6x combos are only really a6ss.

   So on the river he has 1 combo of a hand we chop with, 1 combo that’s slow playing and a bunch of bluffs. If these assumptions are correct, checking back is vastly higher ev than shoving or betting small.

   A small bet is pointless here imo. Either we shove to get him off a chop or we check back. I don’t think he has enough hands that chop with us that will fold now. So I will check back.

6. Even If he has all 4 combos of a6ss 76ss 56ss 86ss..our shove will require that he folds all of them to show more profit that checking back.

   Shoving can only be correct if he has many off suit 6 in his range. But again the kind of player that plays 6xo from small blind is not the one who will fold a top full house on river.

   Check it back please. We also force him to showdown his hand when he is bluffing. This hurts his image and forces him to tighten up. We should be glad when good opponents on our left tighten up due to bad image.

7. I bet $1600 (40%) and call off if he shoves.

   I get and respect the comments opining that villain can only have these exact 2 or 3 combos, yada yada. But there may be a leveling war occurring from villain’s perspective. He may have removed all 6x from hero’s range (incorrectly) and thus he may be much wider himself. So when villain checks river I still want to give myself the opportunity to extract more value.

   So I want to bet large enough that it looks like I at least COULD be bluffing AND ALSO give villain the opportunity to make a weird checkraise bluff. I don’t think that’s especially likely, but it’s also not likely that villain is checking river with 33/64 (when he could just jam river for 1.5 pot and get called by all of our 6x).

   Interesting spot tho, and I’m curious to hear what others think.

8. I think this is a spot to jam $6000 to get villain to fold his chops. The key is that we have the 6d, so villain can’t have 6d4d, while if villain has the 6s, hero can have 6d4d

   As a preliminary matter, I don’t believe either player has 64o or 63o here. Andrew explained in his earlier post that SB can’t profitably flat that wide in the blinds and has indicated that K6s is a marginal open from the button. If K6s is near the bottom of his opening range, I don’t see how 64o or 63o can be opens. 64s is in both ranges going to the flop, but only hero can have it by the turn. 63s, the ideal jamming hand to get a chop to fold, is not possible on this board.

   Hero’s pure value range for a jam on the river is {66,33,64s}, which is only 3 combos. Villain’s check-raising range (which would also call a shove) may have these hands in it (excluding hands that bet the river), but hero of course blocks the only possible combos of 66 and 64s, leaving villain only 33. 33 is a reasonable hand for villain to check-raise the river for value, because it doesn’t block any 6x value targets.

   If villain has the 6s and we jam a range of {64s,33 and some 6x}, villain needs to chop at least 75% in order to call. If hero jams with his entire range consisting of 6x+ {33,64s,A6s,K6s,86s,76s,65s} and villain holds 6s, then he will lose to {33,64s} and chop with {A6s,K6s,86s,76s,65s}, in which case he is chopping 71%. Of course, when villain holds 6d, then he will lose to {33} and chop with {A6s,K6s,86s,76s,65s}, in which case he is chopping 83%. That means villain should call a jam with naked trips holding the 6d and fold to a jam when he has naked trips holding the 6s.

   So when hero holds the 6d, he should jam $6000. Villain will fold 4 combos of {As6s,8s6s,7s6s,6s5s} and call with 1 combo of {33}. The EV of the jam will be $2000 ($4000*.80-$6000*.2). Even if we take 86s out of villain’s range, we still profit from jamming with the 6d here. If hero checks back, then against the relevant range of {As6s,8s6s,7s6s,6s5s}, 80% of the time he will win $2000 in a chop and 20% of the time he will win nothing. So the EV of checking against that range is only $1600. Even if villain has overpairs which are planning to fold to a jam, hero is winning the entire pot of $4000 against those hands whether he checks or jams, so they increase the EV of both lines equally and are a wash.

   The alternate to jamming would be to bet small to try to get a crying call from bluffcatching overpairs. However, if hero gives villain good enough pot odds to get villain to widen his bluff catching range to include overpairs, the size of the bet will need to be considerably smaller than a bet of $2000. So betting small is going to have a lower EV than a jam.

   • I had like a 1400 word post written where I debated the merits of checking back, betting small to induce, and bombing it to blow V off of a chop. Based on hand combos, there’s only one combo of 33 (loss for us), one combo of As6s (most likely hand for V to have that chops with us, based on suits given), and….maybe some over pair combos (likely 77-TT unless there is some weird dynamic) that would pay off a small bet. Based on how the hand played out, I think Andrew is the one who has more nutted hands, as it would be….pretty sick of him to raise/call, call turn, with the intention of bluffing V on the river on THAT runout (although if any live player is capable of getting to the river with a balanced range in this spot it’s Andrew). Since he has a 6, V’s most likely hand for value is 33, since 64o is super unlikely. We also block 66. Sean did the heavy legwork in his post, and he swayed me towards jamming to blow 6s off a chop. Holding the 6d is way better than the 6s, since the 4s makes 64ss impossible for V. With the caveat that sometimes we jam and get called by 33, the math (that Sean did-thanks Sean!) says that the higher EV is with jamming, although it is higher variance than checking since sometimes we get called by quads.)

     • Last point, since I’m rambling and it’s 11:30 on a Friday: According to the post, there is roughly 7k behind with a 1970 pot on the turn when 33 makes quads. V bets 1050. If V bets 1350 or 1450 into the 1970 pot, they are WAY closer to making a pot-sized shove on the river. As played, it’s kind of a weird SPR by the river that makes getting stacks in hard to do without either an over bet or a raise, which…I’m not sure, but I would say it leans away from V having a stack able value hand like 33.

       • (Especially since Hero’s hand looks a lot like 6x after the flop action)

   • To be clear, the reference to “naked trips” is meant to be 6x, excluding 64 for a better boat.

9. Feels like hero shoves and Villain calls with AA.

10. I think it might even be worth considering rake here.

    I think a lot of villains calling range is 6x so if we bet say $1000 we lose $100 when we get called by 6x and chop (assuming 10% rake). Perhaps occasionally we get a call from a big pair but I think that it’s probably close to 10% of villains calling range such that betting small and checking is very similar EV. I don’t think villain would check quads or 64.

    The other option is jamming but I think that runs into a similar issue. If we jam for $6000 we lose $600 in rake when we get called by a 6. We gain 0.5*4000 = $2000 if we bluff villain off a chop. So basically it comes down to whether villain will fold 6x more than 600/(2000 + 600) = 23% of the time. Again I’m assuming we’re never beat here but I think that’s reasonable as I see no reason for villain to check the river with better.

    In summary I think checking vs betting small is similar EV and I think jamming may be slightly -EV.

    • 10% uncapped seems very high.

    • I play online, so I don’t have a good sense of what live rake is, but 10% uncapped rake seems insane. I can’t imagine Andrew would sit at such a table.

      • “I can’t imagine Andrew would sit at such a table.”

        He would not. You’re right, Leo, that in such a game this would be a no-brainer check. But that sort of game would be all but unbeatable no matter good you are.

11. This is a weird spot, that I think I usually get it wrong. So saying that:

    My first thought is to check behind, pros:

    . We wanted 4 bets on the flop, and weren’t too happy with 5, and that’s what we’ve got now.
    . Villain “should” have a hand as good as ours or a bluff.
    . Do we take this line with 66, 64 or 33? The former, maybe? But the later two seems less likely to just call flop/turn.
    . Betting small feels terrible, if we get raised. Also not obviously the right play if he hero calls worse.

    But then after a lot more thought, shoving has a lot to go for it:

    . Villain can’t have the nuts (from his POV).
    . Villain shouldn’t have 64o, so the only hand that beats us is 33.
    . Checking the river with 33 would be weird, without a read that we’ll shove any 6 but maybe not call with them?
    . It’s good for the metagame if we overshove a 6 and villain check/calls with a 6.
    . It’s probably good for the metagame if we overshove river and villain folds AA, and no cards are shown.
    . Villain can’t make a calling mistake if we don’t bet.
    . If villain takes this line with worse and is going to hero call it then he’s as likely to do it with 1.5x as 0.25x pot.

Comments are closed.