How to Play Bad River? - MTT Poker Strategy - Multi Table Tournament Poker Forum

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy No Limit Tournaments

How to Play Bad River?

Post Reply Subscribe

...

01-17-2017 , 12:11 AM

Kev1498

journeyman

Join Date: Jun 2016 Posts: 291

I set myself up on the turn to rip it in on the river, but I am not sure how to play a bad river like the club. If I check to him I leave myself in a weird spot where he probably turns a lot of his decent showdown value into a bluff, and I am left in a disgusting spot.

Party, $5 Buy-in (400/800 blinds, 75 ante) No Limit Hold'em Tournament, 9 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite. View Hand #37583452

MP3: 101,719 (127.1 bb)
Hero (MP1): 26,681 (33.4 bb)
MP2: 3,281 (4.1 bb)
CO: 25,318 (31.6 bb)
BTN: 26,383 (33 bb)
UTG+2: 14,211 (17.8 bb)
BB: 29,925 (37.4 bb)
SB: 53,782 (67.2 bb)
UTG+1: 78,700 (98.4 bb)

Preflop: Hero is MP1 with 6

UTG+1 folds, UTG+2 raises to 1,600, Hero calls 1,600, 3 folds, BTN calls 1,600, SB folds, BB calls 800

Flop: (7,475) 6

(4 players)
BB checks, UTG+2 checks, Hero bets 3,289, BTN calls 3,289, 2 folds

Turn: (14,053) 2

(2 players)
Hero bets 5,288, BTN calls 5,288

River: (24,629) 5

(2 players)
Hero bets 16,429 and is all-in, BTN folds

Spoiler:

Get the Flash Player to use the Hold'em Manager Replayer.

Quote

01-17-2017 , 06:09 AM

DutchCourage

adept

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 831

I think I'd bet smaller but committed to a reshove. May still be called by Kx and protects you somewhat against non-nutted flushes. Your shove folds out worse hands but not better ones imo.

Quote

01-17-2017 , 02:10 PM

jbgutrock

centurion

Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 192

Bet 7K on turn, I do think the shove otr folds worse and better calls. The stack sizes make this hand difficult to play. My other thought is shove turn or check turn and value bet river. A top pair, two pair might call after a turn check.

Quote

01-17-2017 , 03:43 PM

wowsooooted

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 5,090

i think hes pretty committed otr with 16k behind and 24k in the middle

So i proly would shove thinking im going to get looked up by a committed K.

if we check river doubt he turns hands w decent SDV into a bluff very often when the board is that scary and he can just check behind and win the pot some % of the time.

Is anybody x/f river seeing he doesn't have many bluffs and is likely not v betting a decent K?

Quote

01-18-2017 , 03:44 AM

DutchCourage

adept

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 831

X/f river here 0%. If shoved on it's kind of gross, which is why I'd value bet here. Plus, at the $5 tourneys v may think Kx is good here so I don't rule out him betting that. Also, checking river looks like Kx afraid of the flush that completed - I think v has a fair amount of bluffs tbh.

Quote

01-18-2017 , 06:52 AM

jjpregler

old hand

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,974

I ran this through Flopzilla and the results were that if the villain will call with top pair, then this line is fine. If folds top pair, then you only have 19% equity against his calls. When you value bet, you want to have <50% when called.

Quote

01-18-2017 , 11:48 AM

DutchCourage

adept

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 831

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjpregler

16k bet to win 16k+16k+24k=56k translates into being right 16/56=29% of the time to be +cEV I would think? Add fold equity and the shove is def. + EV, discussion is really about whether it is MOST +ev.

Quote

01-18-2017 , 12:28 PM

jjpregler

old hand

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,974

I did not say it was a -cEV bet. Game theory basics shows that bet that has less than 50% equity when called is less EV than checking. So checking has a higher expectation than betting if he folds his top pairs and the equity is less than 50% when called.

This is an excerpt of an initial draft of an article I am writing for a training site explaining this:

Quote:

Let’s first look at this in a simplified example. Imagine this simplified scenario, we get to the river, our opponent checked to us and we can either bet or check. Let’s ignore our opponent being able to raise in this simplified version. The pot has $100 and our only choice to bet is $50 or to check. His only option when we bet is to call or fold. In this example, he has 40 hand combinations left in his range. 20 hands fold to the bet, and 20 hands call the bet. This first example he will beat us with 10 hands and 10 hands we will win. 50% of the time we win the $100, 25% of the time we win $150, and 25% of the time we lose $50:

50% * $100 + 50%[($200 * 50%) – 50] = $75 cEV

The value of a check in the same spot is:
75% * 100 = $75 cEV.

So we can see from the math, that when the number of hands that we beat versus the number of hands that beat us are equal, then it has identical expected value with checking.

If we adjust the scenario to move only one hand from the hands that beat us to the category of hands we beat, we get the following equation:

50% * 100 + 50%[($200 * 55%) - $50] = $80 cEV.

The section of the article is explaining the concept of value on the river and the concept of:

Quote:

bet that when called, the number of hands that call the bet that your hand beats is greater than the number of hands that call the bet that beat you.

Quote

01-18-2017 , 12:48 PM

DutchCourage

adept

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 831

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjpregler

All well, but that assumes he will check 100% of his range AND is 50% for the example used. I think you need to redo the figures for this specific hand to come up with the right %. I'm at work so can't do it now ;-)

Quote

01-18-2017 , 01:04 PM

#10

jjpregler

old hand

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,974

It does not assume anything about his action. If he checks we get to the river with good equity, if he bets than that is another math problem we need to solve. Do we beat his range often enough to call? And if he will bet with a wider range than he will call,then obviously check/calling is better than betting.

Whatever he does will not change the fact that when it is our turn, checking is higher cEV than betting.

Quote

Post Reply Subscribe

...