ESPECIALLY not when you're closing the action.

I don't care if you flopped a set and the turn and river put 3 to a flush and 4 to a straight on the board and you're bet into heads up - DO NOT FOLD (admittedly it's a more difficult decision with villains still to act).

If you're right even 1 time out of 10 when you refuse to fold those big but non-nut hands a) the amount you win when you win will be more than the amount you lose when you lose and b) villains will be more reluctant to try to bluff you on the river.

Can you be a tad more specific....than "big pots"

You give the example of 10 to 1. Pretty sure this is close to a no-brainer. But...is there a floor?

What about 7 to 1? 5 to 1?

Depends on the number of players involved in the river. Heads up? I’m bluffing often. 3 way? Much less. 4 way? I’m rarely bluffing; only with very weak hands depending on the make up of my range. 5 way? Never.

To be honest and transparent, I posted this on a bit of an emotional high. Over my last 16 hours of live LHE, there have been at least 12 instances where I was closing the action on the river with only one villain still in the hand, I was absolutely sure I was beat, the pot was at least 10BB (and a couple times 15BB), I called anyway, and I had the best hand at least half the time. A few times the villains flipped over a holding that made absolutely no sense given the board and the action.

To KS's point, I'm not sure I can be more specific. I think for me, I would never fold closing the action with one villain in the hand getting at least 10 to 1 on a call. I can't come up with a scenario where folding would be correct there.

Readless, if I'm getting between 7 to 1 and 9 to 1, I'm closing the action, and there's any chance whatsoever my hand is still best, I probably call, but I'm probably occasionally making mistakes by calling, but at least in those cases I'm learning the villains' river betting standards and protecting myself from getting bluffed in the future.

If I'm playing live LHE and I'm frequently getting into river spots where there are less than 7BB in the pot, I either change tables or go play online. With that said, the smaller the pot the more willing I am to let my hand go.

To bob's point, it's a totally different discussion when there is more than one villain left in the hand. You're getting into the territory discussed in SSHE's "Going for overcalls" and "When you do not want overcalls" territory - a bettor can be bluffing, a caller cannot - these are non-trivial spots that I think Miller, Sklansky and Malmuth discuss far better than I could.

Hope that helped to clear things up.

I'm a big fan of not folding getting big odds for 1 bet. There are some situations where you can know other stuff, but as a general rule it is great -- the maths support the whole concept. Aren't you concerned that there's a lot of recency bias in your statement here?

General assumptions in small/mid-stakes games:

• Villains are typically passive
• Villains don't bluff enough
• Villains miss clear value bets
• Villains are over-scared of scary boards

This is why our more conservative friends on the board advocate folding in spots where many of us say "lol, call".
Some live villains (more than you'd think) just lose their minds in hands sometimes. They just get bored or frustrated and try to win a pot. Thus, once the odds hit 10:1 or whatever, they have enough <random gamble> in their game that you're at the Dan Harrington 10% and can't fold. Some villains don't do this, I've heard.

You play with lawdude, and this may never happen. You play with PrivateJoker's school of live pro, and their "I'm playing 87o UTG differently to mix up my game" hands lead to seeing this stuff at showdown.

Of course. But is anything I said incorrect or unreasonable?

You had a session where half the hands you were sure you were beaten were good, meaning that 10:1 or 15:1 makes every "call for 1 bet on the river" situation lol. This evidence is the questionable part. Generally in LHE, it is incorrect to fold much value on the river due to maths. Check.

Your story of it working out well that you called? Recency bias. It turns out these guys had a bluff button or were willing to value bet two pair on a four straight board. There are some people who can't/won't do so. Then, the tighter people around here are correct that you can make a fold getting almost any odds. I'm a showdown monkey and fine with it, but there are situations where an expert can snap fold a value hand for 1 bet in a 10BB pot. Start here, a spot where every hand the villain could semi-bluff improved and beats your bluff catcher.

I agree with all above. It's never gonna be a "catastrophic" mistake to make a bad call on the river. I'd prefer make a bad call than wonder the rest of the night whether I should have called.

There are times were solid hand reading + history can lead you to making an appropriate fold. Howevever, don't let a small sample size lead you down the wrong path. In reality, it's all a small sample size but you know the guy who would never bluff into multiple players and based on his range couldn't be betting worse and has no missed draws in his range. Even in this situation, pot size may trump your read.

I think a potential change to the title, making it more precise, could be helpful. Perhaps: "PSA: Do not fold bluffcatchers for one bet in large pots heads up on the river" which is still a bit ambiguous because then we would have to go on to define "bluffcatchers" and "large pots."

That's not why I came to post here today though:

I wanted to add that the nature of how the pot got big is important. Let's do some extreme examples:

situation (a) in which I can beat a bluff, but the pot is very multiway:

three limps, I limp 33 on the button, small blind calls, maniacal big blind raises, everyone calls.

24T gives me a backdoor flushdraw

small blind checks, big blind bets, everyone calls.

5o

small blind checks, big blind bets, one call, two folds, I call, small blind calls.

Jo

small blind checks, big blind bets, limper folds, and it's on me with a player behind in the small blind. Pot is large, but I think this one is very close in a strict ev sense because I can beat a bluff.

-----

situation (b) the strangest hand I've ever played:

two limps, I raise KK in middle position, few coldcalls behind, small blind 3 bets, big blind calls, limpers call, I 4 bet cap, folds around to the limper on my right and we go heads up to the flop for many bets.

flop A82r

limper bets, I call.

Ao

limper bets, I call.

To

limper bets and it's on me. I called without thinking about it because:

I think the call is profitable in the long run, but I expect to lose often.

----

or situation (c) the biggest live pot I've ever won:

2 limps, lag raises, everyone calls, I 3 bet 99 in the big blind, limpers call, lag 4 bet caps, everyone calls.

K92r

lag bets in middle position, lady raises, everyone calls, I 3 bet, limpers call, lag 4 bet caps, everyone calls.

J puts up royal draw

lag bets in middle position, lady raises, most of the coldcallers call, I 3 bet, early position limper says "**** it" and caps, everyone calls.

5o

turn capper now throws up his hands in frustration, so I bet. He folds, flop and turn raising woman calls, rest fold. I show and scoop, but I think due to the nature of the pre river action, she had a range that should showdown the vast majority of the time.

Hand 1) I'm wondering if it's better to raise the river than call

Hand 2) How is the pre flop scenario even possible...was this NL?

No. All three hands were 4/8 at Foxwoods.

Generally in huge pots, your whiffs alone will make up more than enough folds so that calling w/ literally any showdown value is (close to) correct.

Example of a hand that could happen in a blown out mid stakes game:

Two people limp, an aggressive MP raises, 2 cold calls, you 3 bet SB with some range, BB cold calls, two callers call and MP caps (which could be a range of monsters and equity hogs like 66, QJs, and the like) and everyone calls.

So now the pot is 14 BB already and we haven't seen the flop. As it turns out, the board runs out 865-J-5.

The action goes check to MP who bets and everyone calls flop (3.5 more bets), same action on the turn but the BB and two upfront limpers fold (4 more bets), and MP bets the river and you see two folds.

You're now getting 22.5:1 on a call, but you look down at your AQ and know you're in terrible shape against his range. But hey, you still beat T9s right? And maybe the worst hand you ever have here is A7s and you can just fold that. So just pay the man his money and occasionally be surprised.

generally this is right. i learned this lesson the hard way b/c i folded bottom 2 in like a 23 bet pot for 1 bet on the river at fw 20/40 a few years ago. i was so so so sure i was beat but was proven wrong. i wanted to fold the flushed turn but i was getting odds to hit my boat so i called and i folded the river only to be shown AA with 1 of the suit and top pair w/ a kicker of that suit where these two morons just went bonkers. i put in lots of action and they never slowed down (the AA guy). woulda been a MASSIVE POT but alas, i ended up kickkkking myself. gave up 2 racks b/c i was that sure i was beat.

also: the people in the hand were generally tight/abc players which is why i was so sure. but in that hand they just lost their minds.

Excuse me for the slight derail, but is A7s really in your 3 bet range OOP in a MW pot like this? Just curious cause the bottom of my range is probably ATs here.

With this kind of action preflop, A7s is probably neutral between calling and reraising.

"two limps, I raise KK in middle position, few coldcalls behind, small blind 3 bets, big blind calls, limpers call, I 4 bet cap, folds around to the limper on my right and we go heads up to the flop for many bets."

If I'm reading this right, a "few" people coldcalled a raise and then folded to the 4-bet, and the BB called the 3-bet but did not put in the 4th bet. Is that how it really happened??? There had to have been more dead money in that pot that in an Enron portfolio.

Lol. Yes that's what happened, amazingly. After the hand the small blind claimed to have folded A3o, which would have won the pot.

The moral of the story wasn't the ridiculous action, but rather I wanted to show how dead money can affect our decisions with bluffcatchers.

What did the other guy who stayed in have?

I've seen some ridiculous decisions at the poker table, but I don't think I've ever seen anything as preposterous as cold-calling a 3-bet from the BB and then not putting in the 4th bet. I suppose it would be worse to cold-call a 3-bet from the BTN and then not put in the 4th bet.

I can't imagine that many players making those types of mistakes to that extreme all in the same hand.

About two orbits into a session where so far the table seems to be tighter than normal, and one villain (who is villain in this hand) seems aggressive and crazy.

Folds to villain in MP who raises, folds to me on the button with AKo and I 3!, SB folds, BB coldcalls, villain calls.

9.5sb, 3 players, flop K85 with two hearts (I have no heart). Checks around to me and I bet. BB folds, villain calls.

5.75BB, 2 players, turn 2h. Villain checks, I bet, he calls.

7.75BB, river 7h, villain donks.

This is a CLEAR call getting over 8 to 1 against a crazy player, yes?
Would you fold to a tighter, more straightforward player?

Pretty easy call especially if you think the villain would CR a flush draw on the flop. I usually payoff such bets on the river. It's too easy for a player to take advantage of a bluff spot here. I do expect to lose a good bit.