No announcement yet.

Should I shove for thin value?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Should I shove for thin value?

    6-max zoom 16NL

    SB 100bb
    BB 100bb
    LJ (Hero) 100bb - AcKh
    HJ xx bb
    CO xx bb
    BTN 100bb (eff)

    LJ (Hero): Raise to 3bb
    HJ: Fold
    CO: Fold
    BTN: 3bet to 10bb
    SB: Fold
    BB: Fold
    LJ (Hero): Call

    Flop: Ad 7h 8h (21.5bb)
    LJ (Hero): Check
    BTN: Bets 6bb
    LJ (Hero): Raises to 18bb
    BTN: Calls

    Turn: Ad 7h 8h 8d (57.5bb)
    LJ (Hero): Bets 22bb
    BTN: Calls

    River: Ad 7h 8h 8d Qh (101.5bb)
    LJ (Hero): ??

    Preflop: Fairly standard. Definite argument for a 4bet with my hand here but not keen on playing a large pot OOP and tough decision if I get 5bet jammed on as practically zero bluffs in villain's range at these stakes.

    Flop: A really good flop for both my hand and my range which was nice. I could lead here but villain likely to have a high cbet % in this spot as the 3bettor preflop.

    Turn: A really good card for me right? I have a lot more 8s in my range than villain and I'd probably have some backdoor flush draws in my flop x/r range that improve here. Not sure about the bet size here though... I was trying to set it up for a straightforward shove on any river blank but maybe not the best approach?

    River: Not a blank, but not an awful card either. How many flushes should villain really have? We block the Kh and the Qh is now out there so AhJh and AhTh seem most likely but do we think villain would 3bet flop or raise turn with a hand this strong instead of flatting? Obviously AQ is in villain's range which would be bad news for me but all the potential straight draws have now missed (probably only T9s in villains range but still important to keep in mind).

    What should I do? Shove and go for max (albeit thin value) or look to check-call giving opponent chance to bluff? Or have I gone majorly AWOL on my thought process here?

  • #2
    I think your thought process is good. You only have 50BB back on a 100BB pot so it kind of looks like you set up to go all-in on the river here anyway. I like a value jam here mainly because if you check I don't see you folding if he jams (in the vacuum of no extra info provided), so given the following...

    He's going to jam all the hands that beat you (except a chance that maybe AQ doesn't jam depending on player), so that's the same result whether you jam or check.

    If you jam he folds hands that might bluff, but what hands are those? The flush draw came in so that's in the first category. The straight draws are not as likely to have made it to the river since you bet turn and he now has to worry about getting reverse implied for both a potential flush and boat if he hits. So giving him a chance to bluff doesn't make a lot of sense.

    That leaves marginal hands that will check behind if you check to them. Some of those hands (i.e. AX) have a good chance of reluctantly calling your jam. All AX except AK and AQ will chop there and he might just cry call with one (again player dependent).

    TL;DR I think if you're beat you're losing your stack anyway, he's unlikely to have many bluffs if you check, and if you jam you might get paid by AX that would check behind if you check. So jam.

    The only caveat is that in a live game if you check you get to take a read and make a game-time decision based on any reads you pick up if he jams. There are definitely some players that I know would not bet unless they had trips+ there and wouldn't call a jam without trips+ so betting into them would be very bad. You didn't provide any player info though so...


    • CrazyEddie
      CrazyEddie commented
      Editing a comment
      good thought process ? I think that is the mark of a weak player .

  • #3
    Thanks for taking the time to write a thorough response mate.

    Your point about the lack of bluffs in villain's range, and therefore why we shouldn't try and give him a chance to bluff, is really good and something I need to pay more attention to in-game going forwards.

    What did you think of the size of the bet on the turn? I think if we were deeper, say 200bb to start instead of 100bb, then I would have preferred to be closer to 40bb. Not sure how we should be adapting our bets as our stack gets smaller and the SPR gets lower...


    • reeeeeeper
      reeeeeeper commented
      Editing a comment
      I like the turn bet size. If you bet more you might as well jam because your follow up river bet will be too small. With the size you bet you still have a half pot bet on the river. Like JPB though I would have 4b pre and made life easier. After 4b pre you can bet 1/3 stack flop and jam turn and be done with it. Or, he folds to any of those bets or jams on you. In any case, I get the idea of not wanting to bloat pots OOP, but here the SPR will be so low on the flop that you're actually neutralizing his positional advantage by making your decisions simpler and more straightforward.

  • #4
    I agree with all of reeeeeeper’s logic on jamming river. How come you’re not 4betting pre? Seems preferable to calling and playing oop unless you have a specific reason against this player.
    i also don’t know how I feel about the raise on the flop. Solver approved I’d imagine but I feel like in real low stakes games this raise folds hands like AJ, AT that we want sticking around. Open to disagreement there.


    • #5
      Originally posted by RealJPB View Post
      How come you’re not 4betting pre?
      Playing AK post-flop in pots with multiple preflop raises seems to be a very specific weakness of mine. I guess because it straddles the line between premium and marginal in a lot of situations and I can't ever seem to get it right. Therefore I am probably subconsciously playing this too passively preflop to avoid this situation. This is clearly a mistake because I must be missing out on value.

      I'm glad you challenged me on this, it gives me something specific to work on.

      Originally posted by RealJPB View Post
      i also don’t know how I feel about the raise on the flop. Solver approved I’d imagine but I feel like in real low stakes games this raise folds hands like AJ, AT that we want sticking around. Open to disagreement there.
      Hmm so I seem to go from too passive preflop to too aggressive postflop. I understand where you're coming from with regards to the AT-AJ part of the villain's range, but I'm not convinced they would actually be folding this. Certainly not 100% of the time anyway.

      Is it not more valuable for us to charge the draws here than to push out hands that we could potentially get a bit of value from if we slow played? Could we also not argue that they may check part of their AT-AJ range anyway?


      • RealJPB
        RealJPB commented
        Editing a comment
        Don’t get me wrong there is certainly logic to raising AK on the flop (particularly when we don’t 4b it pre) but I think it needs to be for value more so than just protection.

    • #6
      Question about pre-flop bet/call 3-bet ranges in general: In a situation like this, should we be calling 3-bets with SCs and Suited Aces? We're not getting the 20:1 implied odds JL often quotes as being a rule of thumb. We're getting 2:1 and I'm inclined to believe we have near 33% equity against most B 3-betting ranges. But we're also out of position so we may under-realize that equity.

      Depending on how we proceed pre with those holdings, we could have a lot of draws on this board, or we could have way less than it seems. If we're continuing with all SCs and Suited Aces we have plenty draws and then raising TPTK if probably fine. But if we only have AQhh, AJhh, AThh, KQhh, KJhh, KThh, QJhh, QThh, JThh, and T9s we probably only want to be raising our sets and two pairs. Especially against villains who's ranges are likely shifted towards value.

      Breaking his pre-flop 3-betting range into value and bluffing, keeping in mind the bluffs are probably fewer than they should be, what value hands does he 3-bet pre-flop, bet flop, call raise, call turn bet? AA (maybe), AK, maybe AQ, maybe AJhh, maybe KQhh. Bluffs that continue in this way, hearts, A7, and A8. Based on that, he basically has you crushed, I think this might be a check fold unless we can consider villain balanced and come up with a range that includes 25% bluffs that shove the river. Only value I can see in shoving the river is if you think two pair might fold, which I don't think is likely.


      • Dilly
        Dilly commented
        Editing a comment
        reeeeeeper I think that make sense, that adds 6 draws assuming we have all the AXhh, total of 19, and we have 10 combos of sets and 2 pair (A7s, A8s, 88, 77) this seems to be a better balance so I think raising TPTK here might not be optimal. When we continue with this range of sets, 2-pairs, and FDs, we almost always bet that turn, and I think we bet our full range on the river except A7 which might be a frustrating check fold to a bet? Everything else is boats and nut flushes that probably get called by worse.

      • CrazyEddie
        CrazyEddie commented
        Editing a comment
        maybe certain language is only used by certain types of player ... realizing equity. You realize equity by going to show down, right ? as long as you are prepared to realize losses as well...

      • Dilly
        Dilly commented
        Editing a comment
        You realize your equity by actually winning at showdown, yes. You under-realize your equity when the circumstances allow villain to bluff you off your hand before it gets to showdown. Not sure if the concept and term are entirely universal, but it's definitely something Jonathan talks about frequently