Should I hero call when villain's line makes no sense?
Hi all, had this in an $11 online tournament last night, not long after the bubble - about 300 players remain. I had just moved to this table and have so have no history with any of the players. Folds to villain (20bbs) in the HJ who opens for 2bbs. Folds to hero (40bbs) in the BB with Q♣3♣, hero calls.
FLOP (5.5bbs)
3♥A♣5♥
Hero checks, villain checks.
TURN (5.5bbs)
3♥A♣5♥2♠
Hero checks, villain bets 1.375 bbs, hero calls.
RIVER (8.25bbs)
3♥A♣5♥2♠2♣
Hero checks, villain bets 8.25bbs. Hero...?
I found this whole line very suspicious. First of all, he checks back an ace-high board, despite being the preflop raiser - IIRC this should be a pretty high frequency cbet board. Perhaps he checks back with some of his worst top pairs or KK, but generally I would expect him to be betting often here. Then the deuce comes on the turn and he bets tiny - my first thought was that perhaps he now feels comfortable enough to bet the weak top pairs/KK with which he checked the flop, but doesn't want to bet big because he's betting a little thin. He has some 4s in his range but really not many - pretty much just the three combos of A4s (I expect pocket 4s to cbet this board most of the time, but even if he does check them back sometimes it's still only 6 additional combos - in other words, there are not many 4s in his range). I also figured there are very few bluffs on this turn that somehow managed to "pick up equity" with the deuce - maybe exactly pocket 6s, but again I would expect those combos to cbet the flop. If he had a flush draw I would expect him to bet it from the flop most of the time. Then on the river it gets really spicy as he bets full pot after the board pairs. So his range from flop to river appears to have gone capped -> thin value -> polarized which just doesn't make any sense at all given how the board ran out, and I've found myself with a pure bluff catcher on the river where I'm facing a potsize bet and there doesn't seem to be many bluffs at all in his range. If he was betting pocket pairs from KK to 66 on the turn I would expect him to check them back on the river as they are probably too thin to value bet. So what to do?
13 Replies
That is a strange line but the polarized sizing means you're either bluff-catching or crushed by a monster. I wouldn't be entirely shocked to see AA here, for example, from an opponent who doesn't think in terms of ranges. His thought process could be something like, "Flopped top set and don't want to scare him away, bet small on a harmless turn, now on the river I'll try to make it look like I'm bluffing a missed flush draw."
This is one of those spots where I'll usually call because I want to see what the hell he's doing.
What do you think his bluffs are?
I wouldn't be surprised to see something like A4s as well.
I'd lead the turn strongly and plan a big river barrel - you have more 4x than he does, he prob doesn't check back an Ace - put him to the test with say 88. As played I'd probably call this - line makes no sense although you'd think this would be a great flop for him to bluff.
That is a strange line but the polarized sizing means you're either bluff-catching or crushed by a monster. I wouldn't be entirely shocked to see AA here, for example, from an opponent who doesn't think in terms of ranges. His thought process could be something like, "Flopped top set and don't want to scare him away, bet small on a harmless turn, now on the river I'll try to ma
Yes I agree AA makes some sense, checking back flop because he "has too much of it", then betting small on the turn to try and squeeze out some value, then going for shameless value on the river and hoping that I have 4x or a smaller house.
I'd lead the turn strongly and plan a big river barrel - you have more 4x than he does, he prob doesn't check back an Ace - put him to the test with say 88. As played I'd probably call this - line makes no sense although you'd think this would be a great flop for him to bluff.
Interesting idea. My default thought in these spots is that I have decent showdown value with my pair here, and I'm just going to try and get to showdown as cheaply as I can - which was going fine until he decided to bomb the river. But I agree there is a lot to be said for attacking his flop check and applying pressure with a broad range of bluffs, I'm just not sure that 3x is the best combo to use - but I could be wrong. Also agree that his line is super weird and stinks of value - I can't find many natural bluffs for him on the river at all.
I will typically cbet 100% of the time with this type of flop HU and in position so its unclear what is going on. AA is a possibility because it is unlikely to get called. But there are also people who don't cbet when they miss or when they have a PP and overcards are on the flop.
I probably would lead out the turn to make it look like I hit the straight. As played I get the call because Villain can have any two broadways and we can see what happens on the turn. I do think that A4 would be cbet most of the time. 44 is questionable though and could have been checked on the flop.
On the river the bet sizing is polarized as noted. So it can be a bluff. Its hard to know whether this is an overbluff situation though. I would have expected a lot of bluffs on the flop. Here I doubt that it is a PP that is betting pot. It is possible that it could be AA/55/33/44/A2/A4/X4s hands that either smashed the flop or got there. It could also be a bluff that missed entirely but I don't understand why the turn bet would be so small if it was a bluff. I also don't understand why somebody would be bluffing in this spot because the board smashes BB's range and we can have a lot of straights, trips, and boats. So I would fold here.
What do you think his bluffs are?
I wouldn't be surprised to see something like A4s as well.
Yeah, it's a good question what his bluffs can be on this river, especially because I'd expect him to cbet with most of his flush draws on the flop, so he doesn't have many of them in his range once he checks back the flop. I loaded the hand into Pio and after checking back the flop IP is meant to check back on the turn about 70% of the time. It came back with the following output for betting small on the turn:
Seems like it's value betting AA-77, A4s and a fair amount of Ax that checked back the flop, and drawing bluffs from Kx, Qx, Jx and Tx combos, and 98s and 87s.
Once OOP calls and checks the river, IP checks back with 55% of hands, and bets pot with the following range:
Pretty much all Ax that arrived at the river are going for thick value, as well as all straights and full houses (of course). A lot of the Kx is giving up, but the weakest Qx, Jx, Tx and suited connectors are used as bluffs. IP is betting a pretty wide range of value hands - all Ax - and so needs to balance that with a large amount of bluffs as well. Note that all pocket pairs from KK to 66 are checking back and taking their showdown value, as expected.
My exact combo, Q♣3♣, is meant to fold river:
And before everyone loses the plot over my apparent big blind defending range given the image above, please n.b. that AA, AK and all the other strong hands that should be 3bet preflop are also extremely low frequency calls, which means they are included in this range.
I will typically cbet 100% of the time with this type of flop HU and in position so its unclear what is going on. AA is a possibility because it is unlikely to get called. But there are also people who don't cbet when they miss or when they have a PP and overcards are on the flop.I probably would lead out the turn to make it look like I hit the straight. As played I get the
Interesting, yes I agree it should be a high frequency cbet as the ace high flop provides the PFR with a lot of fold equity. Pio is only cbetting about 60% of the time, but that's because it is perfectly balanced:
It's a good exploit to cbet ace high boards at a much higher frequency than that.
Pio had OOP betting turn around 56% of the time, but my exact hand Q♣3♣ does not make the cut, and checking is given as higher EV than betting:
I'd argue that most human players are massively value heavy on this river as played, but that's just my personal take. It's very difficult to find bluffs on the river having checked back flop and bet tiny on the turn - from a human point of view it just doesn't make any sense at all that there can be many bluffs here. As indicated in my previous post above, Pio indicates most pockets pairs from KK to 66 are checking back river, and I think most human players would do the same (being concerned about Ax after getting called on the turn).
I agree that the small bet sizing on the turn massively reduces the combos of bluffs in villain's range and that therefore this is definitely a value heavy river situation.
Pio had OOP betting turn around 56% of the time, but my exact hand Q♣3♣ does not make the cut, and checking is given as higher EV than betting:
Solvers play aggressively with hands that have multiple ways of improving and passively with ones that don't, so this isn't surprising. Your hand is only drawing to a straight on this board.
Most Villains will have very few bluffs in this line. As mentioned the AA trap is a fairly obvious one for value. Some might be checking back their weakest Ax, and A4, maybe with a heart is actually not a crazy check back; it is losing to other Ax, doesn't really need much in the way of protection, and probably can't get 3 streets of value.
Some of the stuff that is mentioned as potential bluffs, like a random QJ just always bets this flop in my experience.
Bottom line, I can't find the bluffs, and can find the value here, and I am a station.
I'd fold and feel pretty good about it.
Solvers play aggressively with hands that have multiple ways of improving and passively with ones that don't, so this isn't surprising. Your hand is only drawing to a straight on this board.
Yes, agreed. Not only does my hand not have many ways to improve, but it also has plenty of showdown value - so can just try and showdown cheaply, and doesn't benefit from increasing the pot size given its hand strength.
Most Villains will have very few bluffs in this line. As mentioned the AA trap is a fairly obvious one for value. Some might be checking back their weakest Ax, and A4, maybe with a heart is actually not a crazy check back; it is losing to other Ax, doesn't really need much in the way of protection, and probably can't get 3 streets of value.Some of the stuff that is mentioned
Yep this is pretty much what I think too, and I did end up letting it go.
I think that's fine. The line doesn't make a ton of sense without a monster, but a random player in an $11 I would expect to be more tilted to "heh heh, I have AA and I'm gonna be tricky and trappy with it" than "I have balanced my ranges to the point where this bluff should look like AA."
