Hi all,

Been playing 2/5 more regularly (although this applies to 1/3 too) and in many pots I play I get to showdown as the pfr in spots where I could have bet river but chose not to for pot control (or playing scared?) reasons.

I'm wondering whether I am giving up too much info and should risk value-owning myself in order to deny Vs information about my hand.

For example, I often bet my OP/TP over one or two streets and check behind river figuring the draw(s) bricked and I won't get a third street of value from worse.

Anyone else think about this?

One example: raise red AA in SB to $35 over two limpers, BB and BTN call (both OMCs).

Flop ($100): K-Q-9hh. I check, they check. Turn: 4d. I bet $40, BB calls, BTN folds. River: 3h. I check, BB checks JJ.

Thanks,
DT

You'd need to post examples, besides sometimes it's true that you can't get value, while others it's too nitty.

I added an example.

Yeah the river check is pretty awful against this player type IMO. Like you can safely bet/fold; your equity is 0% if raised. OMCs are also going to show up with a lot of hands strong enough to call a bet but not strong enough to bet themselves in this scenario.

It'd be hard to get three streets of value w/ this hand on this board since you rep this board so well and your opponents don't. But once the flop checks around, you have a very easy 2 street value bet. I'd rather go bigger on the turn to charge hands like JT and then size down on a blank river to induce calls from weaker portions of his range.

tao says what is your equity aa kq9 is 51%
not knowing your equity is dumb

thanks tao.

I'm more concerned about the nit trap for OP than this TBH.

Like you see tons of live players do this. They raise preflop. Someone calls. The flop is KQ4 w/ two hears. They bet 1/2 pot and get called. Turn 6. They bet 1/2 pot and get called. River 2. They bet 1/2 pot one more time. Other player shows them KJ and folds. So they go "Wow he folded the next pip worse." So rather than by adjusting by adding more 3 barrels to their range, they just check the river more. Suddenly you're just playing like everyone else, not value betting enough, generally playing too passively, because rather than attempting to exploit our opponent's folding mistakes, we just opt to show down and let the best hand win. And since w/ rake, the average player loses, then we lose if we're the average player.

You should risk value-owning yourself to get more value.

Like the old adage says, if you're not value-owning yourself you're not value-betting thin enough. Since a valuebet only needs to be called by worse half the time (and at low stakes we're not getting bluff x/r'd off rivers nearly enough to worry about it)

It's probably pretty hand dependent. Even your example isn't quite like your OP (in your OP you feel like you're checking behind too much, whereas in your example you're OOP, plus only one bet went in postflop). And if all the draws bust and your opponent can ever bluff then you might be better off check/bluffcatching anyways (although you'll sometimes feel stupid when you run into a worse made hand that would have paid off a bet).

It's also pretty image dependent. If you have an OMC nitty image, you might want to setup more spots that show weakness to encourage your opponent to blow you off your hand and not blow them off weak hands. If you have a laggy image, obviously you should lean towards betting for value.

It's sometimes really hard to avoid being results oriented. Yesterday I got in a weirdo pot where the Button open limped and I just check Kxs in the BB (these type of HU limped pots are rarely played at my table). I flop the second nut flush, then flopped top pair pairs on the turn, but I get in just one small postflop bet attempting to turn my hand into bluffcatcher. If my opponent had nothing, I look like a geenyus. But instead my opponent had flopped second pair, and I look like (am?) a moran.

Gfinelinebetweenmoranandgeenyus,imoG

There is another advantage of betting the river that is often not considered. If you bet and the villain folds, you don't have to show your hand. The villains don't get to see if you were value betting the whole way or bluffing. Since many villains don't look at pot odds, they'll often fold to tiny bets when they have nothing.

As for the hand, smh at not betting that flop.

No reason not to get two streets in your example. I'd push for more value river bets until you actually start getting shown better then pull back to try to find the sweet spot.

Meant to say "only needs to be good half the time when called", doesn't matter how often your valuebet just gets a fold

+ a big number.
This.
Imo, you should also bet flop in that KQ9hh flop as well with AhAx against two OMCs.

(I still understood and fully agree. I started winning a lot more once I started value owning myself more often)

Semi-grunch

In the example you should bet a lot bigger on the turn imo.

Most people aren't good enough to bluff raise the river, and play way too wide of ranges. Bet 1/4 to 1/3 pot on the river with every hand you think is the winner but want to check back, and you'll had a huge % to your winrate.