$5 NL HE MTT: River decision in a $5 tournament

[sitingman]

Game

Hold'em

Game Format

No Limit

Table Format

MTT

Buy-in

5

Game Options

1. Turbo

Currency

$

Hi,

Is this an easy fold on the river or a bluff catcher?

Its a $5.50 hyper tourney.

GGPoker, Hold'em No Limit - 250/500 (75 ante) - 6 players
Hand delivered by CardsChat

UTG: 9,643 (19 bb)
MP: 18,304 (37 bb)
CO: 22,474 (45 bb)
BU (Hero): 36,286 (73 bb)
SB: 9,624 (19 bb)
BB: 13,531 (27 bb)

Pre-Flop: (1,200) Hero is BTN with A♠ T♣
2 players fold, CO raises to 1,000, Hero calls 1,000, 2 players fold

Flop: (3,200) A♥ 9♠ 4♦ (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets 1,056, CO calls 1,056

Turn: (5,312) J♥ (2 players)
CO checks, Hero checks

River: (5,312) 7♣ (2 players)
CO bets 3,984,

 

[fundiver199]

Preflop
If you call here, both players in the blinds have a good reshove spot. ATo is not strong enough to enduce, so I prefer 3-betting. Its a CO open, so his range should be wide, and you should have lots of fold equity. And if you face a 4-bet, its an easy fold. I would rather call with ATs, since the hand play better postflop.

Flop and turn
Its a very dry flop and a way ahead way behind situation. You are unlikely to get 3 streets of value from worse, so the plan here is to make 2 bets go in, and you do that by checking back flop or turn. Because the flop is so dry, my preference would be to check back flop, but its not a big mistake to check back turn instead, as you did.

River
The plan was to make two bets go in, which mean, that in theory this is a call. However his sizing is pretty large, and its difficult to find logical bluffs. In real time I probably make one of those "because I have to" calls. But I actually think, this line smells a bit like a rat. If he missed completely, why is he not C-betting this board and trying to represent the A? I think, he has a lot of sets and two pair here, and if you folded, I think, it was a good fold.

 

[canbora]

He thinks you're weak and he's trying to steal. He probably has Ace-rag, or weaker

What I've found in most cases is when you play at higher stakes and or higher buy-ins you have better players. Better players know the game and they know the reasons why you do the things that you do and they don't assume. You both use this information to do a little dance back and forth. The classic "I know that you know that he knows that I know....so therefore....!"

When you play at lower stakes people are less experienced and they go off of more natural human instinct. In this case you've shown a lot of weakness and he's trying to push you off of the pot. You didn't show him any strength with your ace 10, which is probably the better hand or at least it was when you started. Let's review. You called a min raise on the button. And you bet only a third of a pot. Then you checked. That doesn't sound like a lot of strength to me.

The other exception is this is a hyper inexperienced player and they just nailed something super strong and they want to get value. The last card to gave them a set or two pair and they know nothing about value betting and they want to bet everything.

But I'll bet it's the former rather than the latter.

 

[fundiver199]

He thinks you're weak and he's trying to steal. He probably has Ace-rag, or weaker

He can certainly get to the river like this with Ace-rag. But Ace-rag would be a thin value bet for him not a bluff. And for that reason I think, most players would go for a smaller sizing like 40% pot rather than almost 80% pot, as he did. His goal would not be to get specifically AT to fold, but to get called by hands like QJ or T9. Any one pair hand below top pair.

What I've found in most cases is when you play at higher stakes and or higher buy-ins you have better players.

This is true, but a $5 MTT is still fairly low stakes, and in my experience the bluffing frequenzy does not go significantly up until stakes like $22 or maybe $16.5. Also this is not a spot, where he can apply ICM-pressure, since its only for 12% of heros chips.

You called a min raise on the button. And you bet only a third of a pot. Then you checked. That doesn't sound like a lot of strength to me.

This is true and the main reason for calling. However the problem here is, there were no draws on the flop. So what did Villain call the flop with, which now has no showdown value and need to bluff? On a flop like A96 with two diamonds, I would snap call this river bet. But here I am strugling to find the logical bluffs. Even so I probably still call in real time against an unknown opponent, mainly because its a low buyin, I have shown weakness, and sometimes people bet a hand, that should check for showdown value.

The last card to gave them a set or two pair and they know nothing about value betting and they want to bet everything.

Or he flopped a set or two pair and slowplayed it. Or he turned it with JJ or J9. In both cases he hoped to check-raise the turn but did not get this chance, since Hero checked back. And to make up for lost value he bomb the river.

 

[300HPGOD]

Pre: I very much agree with Fundiver here this is a perfect 3 bet spot. We want to play the hand heads and we could potentially get some better hands to fold like a small pocket pair. Depending on your image at this point you might even get AJ off here to fold do I think overcalling brings in a lot of fold flop when we miss and when we do hit we still have to be careful about being outkicked where 3 betting allows us to take the lead in the hand and shut out (usually anyway) the blinds. I much prefer 3 betting here than calling.

Flop: I think you can do either here but if I bet Im going to put some thought into it and think about what type of player am I going against. If Im readless I check or bet as you did here but if I am against someone who I think is decent and thinking I may bet bigger here (counter-intuitive) as I want them to be thinking why would I bet large here if I had Ax and gets their bluff catching wheels spinning. In the end, I think checking is fine, I think betting as you did is fine and if you have the reasons for deception I think going bigger here is fine too.

Turn: I dont love a heart coming but the board does not have any straights yet. Villain dependent on betting here or not but I think if I bet its going to be small but I like checking here with the intention of calling river... especially if I went bigger on the flop and now check the turn to look even weaker. Betting here should fold out worse so theres an equity denial argument to be made but I think in the long run you get the most chips in the long run by checking here.

River: I like Fundivers thinking here as well as its an astute point that why didnt villain c bet on flop to rep a hand? I do think there are some times (depending on image of players in the blinds and if they know about re-jamming or not) that villain on the cutoff here could have been trying to steal pre flop and then shut it down to then change their mind to bluff river when we checked turn. Its a bit of a stretch but not impossible. The sizing villain makes it is interesting and maybe they believe we would not check back turn with Ax seeing that another heart came so they are bluffing. I dont hate calling here as it was my plan on the turn when we check and I think I would call here in game. If we are not bluff catching here then we really have to ask ourselves why we arent betting turn for some small amount. So Im calling here, expecting to win some and lose some. I think a fold in this spot is fine too for the reasons Fundiver stated but Im on team call since that was my plan on the turn and the river brought nothing in (but also true that should mean less bluffs). Interesting spot for sure

 

[fundiver199]

If we are not bluff catching here then we really have to ask ourselves why we arent betting turn for some small amount.

The purpose of pot control is not only to induce bluffs. Its also to keep the opponents range wide enough, that we can bet the river for value if checked to. In this spot if we go bet, bet, bet, we are not going to have the best hand more than 50% of the time when called against most opponents. Of course there are exceptions, like if CO is a huge fish, and we can also keep his range wider by using small sizing. But in general we cant get 3 streets of value, and this is the main reason, we pot control.

So if we think, we only beat a bluff, when he bet the river for this sizing, and there are no natural bluffs due to the flop texture and flop action, then its fine to not bluff catch. Of course this is an exploitable strategy, because any AX block a lot of fat value and is surely supposed to call against a GTO opponent. But there are very few GTO opponents in a $5 MTT, and thats why we can overfold in spots, where there are no natural bluffs.

Position matter here to. Lets say we called from BB and the flop got checked. We lead the turn and check the river. Now its way easier for him to have a bluff, because he could float us on the turn. But as the preflop raiser he is really not supposed to ever check-call the flop without either a made hand or a draw. If he has complete air, he is supposed to either C-bet a flop, which is great for his range, or give up and check-fold, even to a small bet like the one, Hero made.

 

[300HPGOD]

The purpose of pot control is not only to induce bluffs. Its also to keep the opponents range wide enough, that we can bet the river for value if checked to. In this spot if we go bet, bet, bet, we are not going to have the best hand more than 50% of the time when called against most opponents. Of course there are exceptions, like if CO is a huge fish, and we can also keep his range wider by using small sizing. But in general we cant get 3 streets of value, and this is the main reason, we pot control.

So if we think, we only beat a bluff, when he bet the river for this sizing, and there are no natural bluffs due to the flop texture and flop action, then its fine to not bluff catch. Of course this is an exploitable strategy, because any AX block a lot of fat value and is surely supposed to call against a GTO opponent. But there are very few GTO opponents in a $5 MTT, and thats why we can overfold in spots, where there are no natural bluffs.

Position matter here to. Lets say we called from BB and the flop got checked. We lead the turn and check the river. Now its way easier for him to have a bluff, because he could float us on the turn. But as the preflop raiser he is really not supposed to ever check-call the flop without either a made hand or a draw. If he has complete air, he is supposed to either C-bet a flop, which is great for his range, or give up and check-fold, even to a small bet like the one, Hero made.

Don't disagree with any of the above but betting small on the turn can be a form of pot control too in the sense that its like a blocker bet for the river. It may, in many cases, stop our opponent from leading river for value or for bluffing since they feel we will 3 barrel river. Then we check back river for the pot control. This allows us to still get 2 streets of value at times, although small bets of value and also villain can fold turn since they think they will get tripled. Im not saying thats what I would always do or often do but I think its a plan thats applicable here expecially if we think we will face a lot of bets on the river and we dont think we will bluff catch often going to the river. If we get check raised on the turn then its an easy pitch and also allows us to avoid a river decision that we wound up facing.

I totally agree on the exploitation part as well since our hand is similar in strength, imo, to AK since we do we really feel villain has AK or AQ and played this way, so if we are folding A10 here are we folding AK and I think the answer would be yes (maybe Im wrong on that so please everyone give your thoughts on what we do here if we had AK instead of A10). Therefore, we are folding all top pair hands in this spot on a board where no draws came in. I understand that should mean less bluffs but if our opponents pick up on that fact we think that way then they will do the reverse of what we think which is to bluff every dry board and not bluff wet boards. Yes, its a $5 tourney and Im way over thinking it but its worth a mention.

 

[fundiver199]

Don't disagree with any of the above but betting small on the turn can be a form of pot control too in the sense that its like a blocker bet for the river.

Unless of course the opponent is capable of check-raising the turn as a bluff. And this is why, pot control usually means checking back flop or turn.

This allows us to still get 2 streets of value at times, although small bets of value and also villain can fold turn since they think they will get tripled.

Exactly. Checking back flop or turn weakens our range and can result in some hands calling a river bet, that would otherwise have folded on the turn.

Im not saying thats what I would always do or often do but I think its a plan thats applicable here expecially if we think we will face a lot of bets on the river and we dont think we will bluff catch often going to the river.

My plan here would definitely be to call a river bet, and the only thing, which makes me reconsider this, is his sizing. If he had used smaller sizing, then he could have a worse hand for value, but I dont see A8 or worse bet 80% pot on the river for value.

If we get check raised on the turn then its an easy pitch and also allows us to avoid a river decision that we wound up facing.

Folding top pair to a turn check-raise after making two very small bets is also very exploitable. So if we are worried about getting exploited on the river, we cant do this either.

I totally agree on the exploitation part as well since our hand is similar in strength, imo, to AK since we do we really feel villain has AK or AQ and played this way, so if we are folding A10 here are we folding AK and I think the answer would be yes (maybe Im wrong on that so please everyone give your thoughts on what we do here if we had AK instead of A10).

We probably dont even have AK or AQ in the first place, since we would have 3-bet them. So this hand is in fact very near the top of our range, and there is no discussion, that from a GTO perspective its a clear call on the river.

Therefore, we are folding all top pair hands in this spot on a board where no draws came in. I understand that should mean less bluffs

The lack of draws, that can call a flop bet, means, that the hands, which are supposed to be bluffed on the river, are something like maybe bottom pair. But a low stakes MTT player typically dont turn made hands into bluffs, and this is why, its fair to assume, this is an underbluffed spot.

 

[makisaa]

I don't think you need to fold here, because comparing with both stacks, betting is not so big. So he might holds an Ax, or two pairs or even one pair. You could play the hand

 

[ADRI7HO]

I think you should call on the river if the hand has reached this point.
It will either end in tears or laughter, but I would choose to call here and hope for the opponent's Aces weaker kicker card.

 

[fundiver199]

Hi,

Is this an easy fold on the river or a bluff catcher?

Its a $5.50 hyper tourney.

GGPoker, Hold'em No Limit - 250/500 (75 ante) - 6 players
Hand delivered by CardsChat

UTG: 9,643 (19 bb)
MP: 18,304 (37 bb)
CO: 22,474 (45 bb)
BU (Hero): 36,286 (73 bb)
SB: 9,624 (19 bb)
BB: 13,531 (27 bb)

Pre-Flop: (1,200) Hero is BTN with A♠ T♣
2 players fold, CO raises to 1,000, Hero calls 1,000, 2 players fold

Flop: (3,200) A♥ 9♠ 4♦ (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets 1,056, CO calls 1,056

Turn: (5,312) J♥ (2 players)
CO checks, Hero checks

River: (5,312) 7♣ (2 players)
CO bets 3,984,

Any chance we might get a reveal of the result? After all this discussion it would be fun to know, what you did, and if you called, what he actually had

 

[eetenor]

Hi,

Is this an easy fold on the river or a bluff catcher?

Its a $5.50 hyper tourney.

GGPoker, Hold'em No Limit - 250/500 (75 ante) - 6 players
Hand delivered by CardsChat

UTG: 9,643 (19 bb)
MP: 18,304 (37 bb)
CO: 22,474 (45 bb)
BU (Hero): 36,286 (73 bb)
SB: 9,624 (19 bb)
BB: 13,531 (27 bb)

Pre-Flop: (1,200) Hero is BTN with A♠ T♣
2 players fold, CO raises to 1,000, Hero calls 1,000, 2 players fold

Flop: (3,200) A♥ 9♠ 4♦ (2 players)
CO checks, Hero bets 1,056, CO calls 1,056

Turn: (5,312) J♥ (2 players)
CO checks, Hero checks

River: (5,312) 7♣ (2 players)
CO bets 3,984,

Solver prefers call to raise preflop 77%C solver likes us raising A9 A8 and flatting AT-AQ most often
The reason is the typical thing we learn from solvers- When we raise we often get worse AX to fold and better to call and that puts us in dominated spots post flop for stacks
As played the solver has 100% call river-- the solver Villain has a lot of bluffs that regs do not have like Q8 86 Q5 and the solver has very few better one pair AX hands that bet but many small AX hands that bet like A6 A5 for this sizing so we have to decide if the V is capable of these hand choices???

When playing against weaker V hand clarity is a strategy that we can use on turn when they have too few bluffs and too few thin value bets on rivers.

The solver would have us bet turn 36% of the time. Vs weaker players who do not have complex bluffing strategies we could increase our turn bet frequency significantly for river clarity vs this player type--if we did so we would bet a half pot size which the solver does not use-- the solver uses 9.8bb sizing 45% freq in this spot on turn but we the half pot size bet vs typical V is fine here- solver checks 50% but we could bet 65% freq vs a V as described above. That is why we would reduce our sizing.

 

[fundiver199]

Solver prefers call to raise preflop 77%C solver likes us raising A9 A8 and flatting AT-AQ most often

Thanks for sharing this analysis. I assume, you did not input exact stack sizes into the solver? In this case I think, it makes a difference. If everyone was 40BB, the blinds can not reshove, and this mean, they will do more calling. Which we highly prefer, if we call with a hand, that dont want to call a 3-bet.

As played the solver has 100% call river-- the solver Villain has a lot of bluffs that regs do not have like Q8 86 Q5 and the solver has very few better one pair AX hands that bet but many small AX hands that bet like A6 A5 for this sizing so we have to decide if the V is capable of these hand choices???

This is exactly the point. Does the average human $5 MTT player check-call flop with complete air like Q8 or Q5, mainly so that he can bluff river, if turn gets checked? I dont think so.

The solver would have us bet turn 36% of the time.

Seems fair enough. Others have made a reasonable case for a small turn bet.

 

[sitingman]

Any chance we might get a reveal of the result? After all this discussion it would be fun to know, what you did, and if you called, what he actually had

I posted this hand because as I called their river bet I said to myself I bet they have A9 or AJ and Villain showed A9o.

Thanks for all the discussion on this hand! I'm glad I wasn't completely out of line for calling.

 

[canbora]

I lost track of this thread.

Ok..so now we can figure out what he did and why most likely. He slow played the flop...I'm betting the turn scared him in thinking MAYBE you had two pair or better. Althuogh thats thin. Calling a min raise on the button is pretty safe. But still.

After not betting on the river, he was trying to get max value but not going overboard in case you reraised .......maybe. I can think of other possibilities too.