Hero and villain are both sitting on $400-plus effective stacks. Villain has hero covered. Villain has been raising small repeatedly.

Hero has 46 and is in the BB. Villain is UTG and raises to $8 ($1/$2). Half the table calls. Hero thinks about 3-betting, decides to just call.

Amazingly, despite this being five-handed it checks through the river and the board runs out A9532.

OOP, I bet small - $10. Villain makes it $30. I make it $110, leaving $300 behind.

I feel like I got a lot of value on this hand and one of the other regulars at the table even said he thinks it was a good play to not shove.

Obviously, if there had been a bet on the turn and more money was in the pot it makes it easier SPR-wise to get stacks in.

Can I really raise the $30 to $410 and get called?

I mean, this is why I chose to play 46 suited against this villain - to play an $800 pot.

I guess if he calls $110 everytime, he needs to call $410 more than 25% of the time to make it more profitable. To determine this, you have to range villain and know his tendencies. Given the action, it's hard to put him on 4x with an UTG raise (unless he passively played A4s post-flop). He could have 22 or 44 (less likely with your blocker). Overall, it's a huge raise that probably only gets called by a 4. I think the way to get more value is to bet bigger on the river. You bet 30 and he raises to 75-90 and then you can shove.

Prob not unless he has a four which is doubtful given his PF raise utg. U prob got close to max value IMO.

it runs the risk of folding out the entire portion of his range that raises this river but doesnt include 4X

if you think you can get value from that range by 3betting a normal amount more often than not, then i think 3betting small is fine

but if you think he's going to fold out that portion of his range and only call with 4X, then shoving is fine

I am shoving in this spot vs a non reg or unknown. I think he shows up with 44 or A4s often enough to get enough of an overlay to make it more profitable than betting $110. Some of the time he has AA, 99 which he may spazz call with at this level if he is a bad player. If its a reg that I play with frequently I like the 110 bet a lot more, although if I bet that against a reg at my home casino he's never calling with anything but a 4, so I shove to get max value.

I think you should have bet the turn. As far as river goes, I think it's really hard to get called for stacks buy an utg that checked twice. I like your raise sizing a lot. I would have lead larger initially though.

No, didn't miss value. 110 is great value to get there. Fish at live are terrible but unless he's SUPER terrible he can find it in him to fold to a shove, cuz you must have the nuts.
Completely player based. I recently saw some one flat shove PF for 450 and a guy think before calling with 99. don't get greedy on those, get him to call

Thinking in terms of "more often than not" is probably a mistake... I think. In a spot like this if I believe villain has 2nd nuts and is at least a little fishy I'm going to swing for the fence to some extent. That may not be shoving in this spot but...

edit:/ I reread the quoted post above and I see Suq was referring to the folding out of non 4x hands not the overall betting decision.

He raised PF but then checked flop and turn. It's like almost never AA,99, 55, Ax or 33 IMO unless V is terribad which... still might qualify him as a swing for the fence victim.

If he might raise 22 or 44 PF, he has rivered a set or the oneliner to a wheel. There are more combos of 44 than 22 he could have.

Half the table called $8 so there is what $40-$48 in the pot? I like a slightly heartier bet. Maybe $20/$25 trying t get called by some random 2P or something. When he raises that bet I'm probably assuming he only calls my 3b with a 4 so that's what I'm going for. If he's fishy I probably go for it and shove.

As played a shove sure seems like such a massive overbet but I dunno...at the same time how different does his thinking have to be to call a shove versus calling $110. I recently had one of those shoves called where I shoved 350 into 80 on a 34567 board holding 89 and got called by 85 so I don't think considering the shove is bad at all. It is villain dependant but I would bet assuming he has a 4.

Besides "raising small repeatedly" did we have any reads on his showdowns? The raising PF thing only establishes that he has a wide range. We need some idea of how he views hand strength. In the example I gave I had seen villain snap call with no thought a river reraise with a non nut straight earlier... that factored heavily in my decision to overbet.

back to the more often than not thing...

I'm guessing if he is going to raise/call a normalish 3b on the river the shove is not -EV but it's only a guess.

Assuming pot is $50+60=110 If you bet $110 he is getting 220:80 or 2.75:1 so he needs to feel he's good a little more than 1 in 4. But he's probably not thinking that way.

If you shove for 410 he is getting 520:380 or 1.37:1 so he would need to think hes good a little more than 1 in 2 and a half times but he's probably not thinking that way.

In terms of your EV we are not concerned with what is already in the pot we have 100% expectation of that. But for the remainder of his stack...

betting 110 wins you 80 when called some % of the time less than 100% but assume it is 100%

betting 410 wins you 380 when called so if he calls a shove 21% (or about 1 in 5) of the time it is neutral EV ($0).

If he calls 25% it's +$15
If he calls 33% it's +$45
If he calls 50% it's +$110
If he calls 75% it's +$205
If he calls 90% it's +$262

I probably also call preflop due to decent price. I don't like being OOP but I'm probably nutmining here.

I'm also not stabbing at it on any street.

I probably just donk the pot on the river. If we hadda bet the pot and he raises then it makes for a trivially easy shove. Course, he mighta not raised a pot sized bet, but oh well, maybe he does.

What do we think is going on here? Is he raising us cuz our bet is so small and he's trying to take us off the pot? I don't think so. He's got others behind him to react. I might be being results oriented (I can kinda see where this post is headed), but his play is most in tune with a rivered set. He's not folding a rivered set. So I'd shove.

I know it's hard to do cuz it's such a massive overbet. And in truth, in real time, I might end up just doing your bet size is well. It's also a little opponent / our image dependent. But overall my guess is that if we shoved the river every time we had the nuts that it would be by far the most profitable line.

ETA: I totally missed the fact that there is also 4-to-a-straight on board. He's never ever ever folding a straight, and even sets might still look us up here. Makes it even more of a shove, imo. The real mistake was the donk size.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Real quick here ... gotta get my posting in for the day!!

Yes, where is the Turn bet? You may have scared off additional value on this River but you also couldve gotten zero value here on River by leading out from the BB for any sized bet with this board. So that 'line' is a toss up. Just the fact that you got a 3-bet call here means you couldve put a bet out there on the Turn, but that is this hand specific.

Shoving is not a good move here IMO unless you have a very stuborn image for your opponent. I think the bet was sized well against any 4 or even a set perhaps but again, opponent dependent (or your image also). I have seen many players fold out of potential chopping situations when someone overbet the pot like this. There is no 'catch-all' line here be it against a reg or fish or unknown. You just have to try and see what you can get away with.

Was this max value? I think if you bet Turn you dont get as much out of him on River in most cases, so from that stand point I think you got max value AGAINST this opponent with his exact holdings. Can you get some to call a shove, sure ... Would you get zero by leading out on River, sure .. this probably hit above an average for the line you took. GL

I think those advocating a turn bet are maybe being a little results oriented? And what's our plan if called and then we whiff the river the vast majority of the time?

We're still OOP in a 5 way pot, I think checking the turn is fine. I'd be more for betting the turn if we were in position and saw yet another round of checks.

Meh, I think I probably would have bet turn with the intent of double barreling river if I missed. A ton of weakness was shown on the flop and we turn OESD and the pot is fairly small, why not make a play for it and retake the initiative.

As played, I'm 100% open shoving the river.

The reason is simple. You said half the table called preflop right? So, that is 5 villains. Out of 5 villains there are 10 card combos. There are 3 more fours in the deck so 45/3 = 15 meaning that there is a 1 in 15 chance that our opponent's single card can be a 4. Given that each villain has 2 cards and we are talking 10 cards total this adds up to 10 x (1/15) - 1/15 = 9/15 = 60%. (I used these stat rules CLICK HERE and also just assumed P(A, B, C, D, and E) was equal to 1/15 as a worse case scenario). Basically there is 60% chance that out of 5 other villains someone else has a four. If we cut this in half due to playable combinatorics involving fours then we can say that 30% of the time one of our villains has a four. And if someone has a four they just are NEVER folding. So we can just jam this mother-father river for stacks and get called by a four around 30% of the time. So basically, it is just insanely profitable to shove. Especially compared to the fact that any decent bet is NOT going to get called by the vast majority of our villains' ranges.

Given how the board played out, its highly doubtful villains have any big aces or sets right? So we are in a situation where betting small for value doesn't really extract value. Conversely, betting big for value will get called at almost the same frequency that betting small will because the only hands that are going to call a high % of the time are fours. And those same fours will call a shove.

Then there is the spazz factor. Someone with 2 pair can spazz out and talk themselves into calling our bet thinking, "Why so much? You must be bluffing..."

anyways, in these situations I absolutely positively love shoving the nuts. Villains are never folding a four and you will occasionally even get looked up by a ******ed set or a spazzstatic two pair that is leveling himself with the whole "Why so much."

EDIT: meant to say river not turn thx bwslim

I think if you bet more on river I think you can get exponentially more in. If I am correct there is ~50 in pot. Bet 20-25 rather than 10. He raises to 75, we can 3b to 225-250 comfortably...EZ game

Having said that. I often bet small into large fields using the theory that it is often easier to get called in 2 spots for small bets than 1 spot for bigger bets. But opponents calling ranges on this board should be super inelastic here so I think we can bet more because we should only be getting called by a wheel or maybe 22.



Please check my WSOP PGC and comment on hands! http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17.../#post38800981

I never considered just open shoving the river, but this isn't a bad plan, imo. Lots of time non-nut 4x hands will simply call a PSB for fear of the nuts, but as dgi said, they are never folding to an outright shove either.

Bro we got there on 5th

Pretty sure that's what he meant.

All in favor of prison raping our villains by open overbet shoving river please raise your hand



This shove has been dgiharris Prison Rape Approved

I think its a too big of an overbet if we shove on the river here. How would we feel if he tank-folds and getting paid nothing when we hit the stone nutz? As played i think your raise size is fine- you could even go a little bit larger.

Though,I like the idea of making a pot sized bet on the river here and just pray that he reraises, and then we can tank-shove allin- putting him in a real tough spot.

Spots that i love to overbet is if the board comes like 5678 and i sit there with 9-10. People wich have a straight here (lonely 9), seem to call about every sorts of bets on the river with this kind of a hand.My experience is that they think about this as the nutz, and they dont fully realize before calling that 9-10 is the only hand wich overshoves on the river on this kind of a board. Yes the situation and the board in this actual hand is similar, but i belive the SPR is to unbalanced. Even very bad villains will have their red lights on with such a monster overbet on the river.

You do realize we are talking about the exact same situation...

there is a 4 to a straight board, we hold the stone cold nuts, if our villains have a 4 they are just never folding...

same situation you describe. So you can overbet shove this river and get called by any four.

This is one of the things I feel I do that most of my opponents do not do, and that is overbet shoving something ridiculous when I hold the nuts. This is the perfect situation for it AINEC.

trust me on this. When you are in a limpy limpy multiway pot that checks through to river and you end up with the mortal nuts and there is a fair chance your opponents end up with the 2nd nuts, for the love of everything that is poker, you need to be shoving.

See the edited version of my last post Dgiharris. Thanks for good thoughts tough, i will start making more overbets in my game- maybe i give the villains to much of a credit. It of course also is V dependant, i have many decent players in my game that i know for sure would instafold to such an massive overbet.

I think the above "may" be a mistake.

One of my biggest leaks by far is occasionally thinking that my villains think as I think. And I think that we 2+2ers sometimes give our villains to much credit since we are naturally biased by what we would do.

And in this case, if our villains have a 4, they just aren't folding. 95% of the time, a LLSNL is just never folding a 4 in this spot. Yes, the pot is $45-ish dollar, yes we have $400 behind, and even given all that, fish just don't care. Fish think in terms of caveman poker and the thought process goes something like, "I haz straight. Straight be good hand. Must call." IN fact, this reminds me of a hand I witnessed last night where the board was

River(340) J Q Q 9 8
V1 shoves remaining $400, V2 tanks for a minute and then calls. V1 shows Q9 for the full house V2 shows KQ and says, "yeah, I had to call."

Really? You had to call? there are no playable combos of Qx that KQ beats. Even QT makes a straight. But V2 just couldn't fold KQ in this spot.

Villains do this all the time. Give your villains a chance to make a mistake and shove these spots a lot more. And when you shove and they fold, don't show.

anyways, my last post on the matter. You really need to be shoving in situations like this REGARDLESS of how big the pot is. Trust me.

In general, I would propose that you shove the nuts 10% of the time regardless of pot size. As time progresses, you will get better at figuring out which situations are ripe for overbet shoving. And this situation is one of them. Doesn't matter if the pot was $10, just overbet shove it for stacks and you will still get snapped called by random fours. Trust me on this

EDIT: My sizing was off on the hand I posted, I also posted it in my donkaliscious thread in more detail

Very interessting arguments, i will note it down and take it into account in my next session wich will be next week. You are one of the posters i respect the most in this forum, so belive me that i listen very carefully when you speak your mind

Your hand example is fantastic, with the trip queens. It shows that what i belive is very true: the most common big leak is these games are that the V just dont fold. They will call with QQ allin pre for 300 BB, because "they just cant fold a good hand like QQ". I can sit in a game and fold for 2 hours straight: and when i pick up AA and 3 bets to 40 BB pre, i still get 2 callers They just wont belive. As you sometimes say (classic): It gives me wood just to think of it"

This.

Someone asked why I only bet $10 on the river and it was designed to entice a bluff raise. FPS. I suffer from it.

The problem with the hand is that I think he thinks we're chopping like 99.9 percent of the time when I raise so he sees no value in 4-betting me. I thought if I raised and he had the 4, he might come back over the top. I mean, the rake is capped so he's not losing money if we're chopping and he shoves so he's just thinking 'He's not folding and we're chopping.'

I, obviously, hoped he would 4-bet the river with a 4.

I think DGIHarris is spot on: This was the spot for it to be a prison rape and I missed it.

This is how often people 4bet the river without the nuts (and without misreading their hand) at LLSNL: Never.

GseriouslyG