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.

$11 7.5K : JJ BvB : Marginal value bet on river vs villain's line and board runout

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • $11 7.5K : JJ BvB : Marginal value bet on river vs villain's line and board runout

    Hi Dave n crew, one of the aspects of the game I've been working on alot is value betting marginal spots on the river. This hand I thought was quite interesting... and wanted to gauge some views from it. 30 hand sample. 23/11/11/- FCbet 100 (2) FlopAF 2 TurnCbet 100 (1) TurnAF 4 River AF 2 Reads: -Seen villain clickback 3bet oop with ATo from SB. -Seen villain double barrel Q paired board with AA HU and showed cards on turn. -Seen villain over pot jam turn on a paired AA non broadway board, HU. -Villain vs me, checked back a made 2nd nut FH on turn OOP. (I made nut FH on flop). Villain lead out 1/10th pot on river. Villain would see me as: 13/11/16/44 Preflop I choose to call not cold 4, as UTG villain has shown to have a wide raising range, and has been seen to fold his min raises to a 3bet 100%(4) times. He does have a raise/fold range <20BB stack. Here is my thought process as I play this out. I'm looking at this not in terms of preflop play, but with what board textures/runouts may/may not assist with villain's range. FLOP When villain bets around 50% here... Villain can have: monsters = wide (KK, 66, 77, AK, AA) marginal = PP, AQ, AJ, AT, Kx non diamond draws/air = Adx, Acx backdoor, Kdx, nothing~cbet 1.Once I call the flop, it may/not to villain be clear that A high for villain non-diamond is not the best. 2.I also would have more perceived draws in my range than villain. 3.Villain would have more air in his range, that he would be betting the flop with, rather than calling with. Hero can have: (perceived range) monsters = wide (66, 77) marginal = Kdx, Kx non diamond, PP draws/air = Adx, Acx, good Aces, diamonds, T9, T8, 89. Turn Villain double barrels under 30% pot. As I have more draws in my range, villain would need to bet out more to price me out of hitting my draws, so I can likely remove combo of Ks. Because he has reduced his betting, although consistent with his TurnAF, I am moving off that he has 66full and 77full. It is possible he may want me to be pricing me in with draws (he has shown to check down FHs), but I am more likely to discount that he does not have 66/77 full by not continuing to build a pot from a made hand on the flop - as any of my perceived draws may not get there on the river; losing a street of value. He is continuing to bet out on a board where he is likely to be called, since the K does not change what was on the flop. So his air range can be really eliminated now. Villain can still be semibluffing with the nut flush draw, although it is possible he can check back here as well. Is there any credit we gave villain on flop, that he may not want to bet on the turn? This likely falls in the lower PP range. 22-55. PPs without a diamond, would be more likely to bet, but maybe not at 30% pot. It is still valid that villain can bet for value twice here as the likelyhood of my perceived holding with a K is less likely now, with a paired K board. I've excluded AA, from his range as he is betting more than 30% for value as per read. Villain's reduced continuing range: monsters = 66full, 77full (discounted) marginal = 88-TT, QQ draws/air = nut flush diamond When I choose to double float, I'm opting this line to see the river and villains bet. 1. I can opt this line with the nut flush draw, considering half of his possible PP 2 outers are dirty if it rivers the diamond. 2. If he perceives me as having 66/77full, Id want to raise here because if he thinks that I think he is likely on a draw, I may not get another bet from villain if a diamond doesn't peel on the river. 3. But villain has seen me check back the nut FH before IP, vs his 2nd nut FH. 4. Possible that villain may see - since I've played passively until now - my holding is not something I may not want to play for my stack. Hero can have (reduced perceived continuing range): monsters = marginal = PP draws/air = Adx, good Aces, diamonds, T9, T8, 89. River Villain checks. 1.Draws did not get there. 2.22-55 just got counterfeited with higher PP. 3.There are no marginal hands that transitioned to monsters. 4. Villain has not shown they have ability to be tricky here check back a FH on the river, so I can remove 66/77full, Kx, off the list. Villain's river range: monsters = none marginal = 88-TT, QQ draws/air = nut flush diamond PP are now heavily weighted with a b/b/x line... so out of 22-55(4), 88-TT(3), QQ(1) PPs likely in villain's range there are 4 (50%) instances where his PPs are counterfeited, and 3 PPs unders to my JJ. Considering the majority of his marginal holdings are more likely to be PP and of those PPs, all but 1 are unders to my JJ... after these exclusions, is shoving here optimal to extract value from any PP and maybe even Ad holdings villain decides to call off with? [Not to be results orientated] I don't consider it as turning my hand into a bluff here. To villain, my perceived river range is heavily weighted with busted draws, Ax, and PPs. And because of the exclusions, I am value betting a marginal holding against villain's marginal, versus checking down for showdown value. Thanks

  • #2
    id rather see a check back on the river, but for thin value i tend to make lighter bets, nice post to read be interested to hear one of the experts opinion on it umbup:


    • #3
      Hi Marc, Very nice, detailed analysis. umbup: I do have to quibble with statements like this however:
      ...although consistent with his TurnAF
      Villain has no turnAF. The sample size is 1. You shouldn't make a mental link of consistency here any more than you would say the turn bet was wildly inconsistent with a turnAF of 0 if it was (0/1). Ok so on to the hand... I think you've broken it down nicely. The turn is not really clear if he's strong or weak, he could be allowing you to draw cheaply sometimes when he's full. I don't discount FH's here from his range (you did so because you saw the small bet sizing as a failure to try and build the pot, but I disagree... not in concept, but in the case of this scenario... when you call this bet there will be 9825 in the pot and only 7376 behind, so he can feel like he can still get stack value if you have a decent pair or get there, and you may semi-bluff shove over the bet). That being said, most of his range is not FH's I agree, and since he has played AA strongly twice on paird boards already (one with QQxx) I feel like he's got a lot of QQ- and ace high's here just following through. So folding to the turn bet is out of the question imo (and to this silly small sizing we should be continuing with a very high frequency, like 80-85% of our flop continuing range imo). I think both shoving and calling are valid. I kind of like shoving personally as it denies him a chance to realize his equity with a naked follow through like AcQc, and gives him a bad price on his few draws. Additionally, he can put us on a draw as you noted, and call off with 88-TT/A7 type hands feeling we are semi-bluffing. On the river as played it's really not a big deal either way going for thin value imo... I agree with your reasoning and it's not a bad spot per say, but the penalty for being wrong is much harsher in a tournament than a cash game and 25bb's is still a lot to work with (a lot more than zero anyway lol). So I lean slightly towards checking this back. As for executing thin value, I don't really like the shove. We are targeting 88-TT and ace high, while still being beat by QQ/AA/tricky Fh's (including A7). So I think it's really important to be getting some of that thin value from the ace high hands or it's too thin. So if we go this route I like about 2K, and fold to a check/shove. Again, not a big difference either way imo and I lean towards checking back because if it goes wrong, I'd rather have 25bb's than 18bb's, where as if it's right, 64bb's doesn't materially affect our long term chances over 57bb's (there's more to lose than gain imo).
      Head Live Trainer
      Check out my Videos

      4 Time Bracelet Winner


      • #4
        Thanks bonez/Dave on the comments.

        Re: point about my TurnAF comments. Yes, I am conscious with the sample instances when I make a decision point, and I have just not articulated that well here.

        With the whole river scenario...

        I am asking in this situation, what would I be able to do at the table now with 80bb vs 25bb vs 18BB vs 0bb against a range where I've.

        0bb not much

        25BB, Still alive yes, and can work with it. I am seeing a clear separation with the 11's than with the micros though. To consistently run deep over n over with 25BB at this stage, maybe more difficult than I'd like. Ofc, I see this as natural progression in moving up stakes, but comparing to the micros, I can run 25BB all day blind and still run deep (slight exaggeration) but I can distinguish between the 2 stakes more clearly now.

        18BB, Maybe I could 2000-1/3 pot with a b/f line. Then I'd be confined to push/fold mode now, and still at least 1 hour to get ITM.

        80BB, for me is not different to 45-50BB but 80BB nonetheless, is great obv. Checking back and winning with what's in the pot gives me 60ishBB. So maybe in this instance checking back is correct based on what I've just said, and to what you and bonez lean towards.

        TBH I don't think I asked myself this during this hand.

        With bonez's and your comments of checking back here, yes I've tended to do that sometimes in the past, but I'm really looking getting that edge with thin value betting by drilling down on hand reading, which is why I only 3table max these days.

        But there is definitely a very thin line when value betting a marginal vs a villain's marginal here, considering all the exclusions in villains range. It's something I'll still pursue in practicing and improving on.

        Jamming turn:
        Based though on villains reduced continuing range OTT, I'm leaning towards jamming moreso now, for the reasons you mention Dave.

        As a side note to the river shove though, I am in essence depolarizing my river range here, as with a previous hand vs villain, I did shove nut fh vs his 2nd nut fh when he donk led the river.


        • #5

          The other thing to look at, is the hand from the opp's perspective. With QQ, they're absolutely going to 3-bet pre. When the opp flats, that tends to make me think they don't have AA or KK, as those should 4-bet.

          The flop is K high and the opp only calls. AK or KQ should raise in order to price out a diamond draw, so now I'm discounting Kx from their range.

          The turn is another K and the opp calls again, so it looks like a draw or pair lower than a K.

          The river misses the straight and flush draw... so if I'm holding QQ, what do I want to do? I've got what figures to be the best hand and the opp will fold their misses to another bet. The best thing I can do is to check and see if the opp will bet the river.. and with what should be the best hand, it's a snap-call for me.

          John (JWK24)

          P.S. As played, I'd shove the turn in your shoes and if it got to the river, I'm checking it down since I have showdown value.

          6 Time Bracelet Winner


          • #6
            Hey there John... I don't not agree with you there also.
            And I would be inclined to checkback moreso here vs villain with no prior history.



            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.