PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.


No announcement yet.

interesting river card

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • interesting river card

    PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, 0 Tournament, 50/100 Blinds (9 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from

    MP3 (t1005)
    CO (t1725)
    Button (t2495)
    SB (t2195)
    BB (t4197)
    UTG (t3405)
    UTG+1 (t6010)
    MP1 (t2710)
    Hero (MP2) (t2920)

    Hero's M: 19.47

    Preflop: Hero is MP2 with 6, 6
    3 folds, Hero bets t250, 4 folds, BB calls t150

    Flop: (t550) 5, 4, 3 (2 players)
    BB bets t100, Hero raises to t300, BB calls t200

    Turn: (t1150) Q (2 players)
    BB bets t100, Hero calls t100

    River: (t1350) 2 (2 players)
    BB bets t1350, Hero ?

    Villain must have a good hand, but a good hand includes A-5 straight and sets, which I beat as well as flushes which beat me.
    Last edited by DLeviathan; Sat Mar 19, 2011, 09:55 PM.

  • #2
    Based on the action in this hand I would have to put the villian on Ax flush draw, like AcQc or something like that. His betting/calling isn't really consistent with a weaker flush draw like 9c10c. The addition of the gutshot straight draw to his flush draw may be why he chose to bet into you on the flop and then again on the turn. The small turn bet was probably because he missed his draws, but still wanted to build the pot some if he is lucky enough to hit the river. umbup:


    • #3
      The small bet, small bet, big bet technique makes me think two things (besides that you're up against someone who's bad):

      1) He flopped it.
      Range: A6, A2, 76
      Your equity vs. this range = 57.1%

      2) He rivered it.
      Equity (if he was chasing any flush draw or OESD): 70.4%

      Equity (if he was chasing a flush, guaranteed): 0%

      Equity (if he was chasing an OESD with 66, A6, or Q6, or a flush draw with at least one broadway card): about 22.6%

      I think those calculations are correct.

      So, the weird thing is using your reads on the guy to guess what he flopped. Does he have aces and a case of aces-never-lose tunnel-vision? Does he have a suited ATC hand and is blocking in hopes of hitting it inexpensively? Is he after a gutshot, or an OESD? Did he flop a set? Did he river a set? My reads are so much harder to establish when people play like this villain. I'd say that your prior reads on him would definitely be vital here. But ranging people when flush draws are out is definitely a weakness of mine, because you can't really use preflop ranging to say whether they're after the flush, or after something else. And in this case, post-flop ranging is a challenge.

      I would be interested to know more about how you viewed this hand, D, and if you did have any reads on the guy (HUD stats, post-flop tendencies, etc.). Great hand for analysis, btw. It's making me think.


      • #4
        I run a HUD and had a small sample on this villain. So with the understanding that the sample is too small for any firm conclusions, he was loose and passive (around 30% VPIP). He was sufficiently passive for me to be highly confident he is not bluffing the river.

        From the equity calculations, it looks like I must call unless I have a very solid read that the player had a flush draw. If his range contains other draws, then 2-1 on the river is more than sufficient to call with a hand that beats almost everything other than a flush. I think Q2 may be in his range, but obviously that is a very small part of the range.
        Last edited by DLeviathan; Sun Mar 20, 2011, 07:19 PM.


        • #5
          Originally posted by DLeviathan View Post
          He was sufficiently passive for me to be highly confident he is not bluffing the river.
          Judging by how he bet/called and then jammed we know he hit "SOMETHING" the problem, with a limited read on our man, is did he hit the ass end of the straight or the flush.

          We need to look at the raise pre he called with, which in my experience screams "I have an ace". Now is the ace what we think he hit with? Do we think he was calling you down with a wheel draw, and if he was is he posturing to avoid having to split the hit wheel?

          I'm thinking while its likely he was bum hunting the straight, in this case with the jam it's more likely he got there on the flush.

          That being said I would have a really hard time laying this hand down, but most likely look at my chip stack and decide we had enough equity to get away from this potential knock out, bear down and try to move on.



          • #6
            He has Ace 5 of clubs
            3 Time Bracelet Winner


            • #7
              I'd put him on AQ. He could have a flush, but I'd take the chance.

              6 Time Bracelet Winner


              • #8
                Originally posted by DLeviathan View Post
                From the equity calculations, it looks like I must call unless I have a very solid read that the player had a flush draw.
                I don't think you're ever going to have that solid read here, partially because flushes are harder to read than pairs and other rank-based kinds of made hands, and partially because the river obscures flush draws with straight draws. Also, the equity calculations are not really applied in context. If this was the kind of villain who would behave this way chasing a gut-shot, then your equity goes way up. I don't think that would be the case here, because I wouldn't expect anyone to ever chase an ace-low straight or an 87 gutshot (unless they were clubs), but this guy might have thought that way.

                Here's my full analysis:

                The small bets mean one of two things to me: He flopped it, or he was drawing. If he flopped it, he might have flopped something like a set or two pair, but a straight is the obvious unbeatable hand. Since sets and two pair are beatable here, I think the villain would only assume a top-end straight to be good enough to behave this way.

                Now, if he flopped a straight, why would he bet defensively when there's a flush draw? Because he's bad? Maybe. But when the flush actually does get there, why make a pot-sized bet when he's not holding the nuts anymore? He might think that since you're heads-up, the chances of you having a flush are low, but he doesn't seem good enough to pot it on that assumption. I think the 'he flopped it' theory goes out the window here.

                If he was drawing, then what was he drawing to? A straight? Maybe. But if he was drawing to a straight that got there, it was probably the idiot end, and then the guy exacerbates the idiocy by potting when not only flushes get there, but you could also have an ace. So this guy is rarely winning this pot with just a bottom-end straight. He's chopping at best a large portion of the time, and losing a lot more when you have a top-end straight.

                But if he was drawing to the flush, then bingo! Everything makes sense. The blocking bets, and the bet on the river. Any flush would seem like the nuts, and why value bet for a little when you can value bet for a lot? It's just seems probable to me. There's only one more piece of evidence to consider:

                The pot-sized bet on the river. I usually take that to be a massive tell that my opponent has a polarized range (I might be wrong about that, but it's what I believe at the moment). An overbet or jam on the river usually means the nuts, or close to it, but an exact pot-sized bet means that he either has it, or he's bluffing with a likely busted draw. If he had jammed, I would have folded almost for sure. The pot-sized bet would have made me stop and think (and probably call). I think he shows up with an overpair or 76 (no flush draw) a lot of the time here. Most of the time, he probably has the flush.

                That's what I think. I think I've overthought this a bit because of the pot-sized bet, because if not for it being that exact size, I would be almost snap-folding here. I just think it looks way too bluffy though.


                • #9
                  The line signifies a small hand that got large on the river for sure. I doubt he's got something like A5c (flop action is too weak) or AQc (turn action is too weak). Some other flush draw is possible.

                  Meh, I'm not happy about it but I think we have to call for the following reasons:

                  -Given how we played this hand, he's probably ranging us heavily on 88-JJ if he's ranging, so in addition to flushes just a naked A for the 5 high straight probably qualifies as "strong" in his eyes.
                  -Given how we've played, our hand strength is actually at the absolute top of our range, in fact it's over our range as I don't think he ever sees us turning over a 6 high straight.
                  -Given the above, this is a fantastic river card to bluff at, so there may be some weird bluffs in his range.

                  Ok, so I call.
                  Head Live Trainer
                  Check out my Videos

                  4 Time Bracelet Winner


                  • #10
                    When I said I thought he could have something like AcQc I forgot there was a Q on the turn. His turn bet doesn't make sense if he has AcQc with the Q on the turn, so I would have to make an educated guess that he was holding AcJc or something similar... just not AcQc.



                    X Cookies Information

                    We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.