Have I missed value here versus a donk lead?

[LondonImp]

I hate donk leads. I never know what to do and they seem to vary so much from person to person.

https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/324tv3reU

I suspect against this villain's exact holdings I probably couldn't have got much more out of him - but should we be targeting more value from his entire range facing a donk lead?

Villain: 55/25/14 AF:10

Just 20 hands on this guy so take the above with a pinch of salt.

Thanks for any assistance.

[1Peter510]

I generally assume a donk lead is a marginal hand. Especially at smaller stakes.

For me the only reason to raise would be for protection, but you really only hat a T or A hitting.

I think calling and raising the river is fine. Allows him to keep value betting your hand for you.

On the river a pot a pot size raise would be $6.15 so anything between a min raise and jam are in play. Boils down to how more often you expect him to call $2.66 vs $8.15. $8.15 can be called 1/3rd the time and still get the same value.

[LondonImp]

Nice to see you back in the forum 1Peter510 - I was worried we'd lost you over the holiday festivities!

Is it really that simple? Yes a pot size raise may be called 1/3 of the frequency, but this is going to shift towards hands that beat me.

In play I was confident that I would easily beat over 50% of the hands that would call (maybe that in itself is an argument to go slightly bigger) but was planning on folding to a raise. By going to $8.15 I could be getting into a very difficult situation.

[1Peter510]

My posts will be hit or miss for a bit (being an accountant and all).... but glad to be missed at any rate.

Wasn't saying it was simple. Ranging someone that donks is tough. But, I typically assume a marginal pair at smaller stakes until I see otherwise.

Donking with a gut shot is a stronger play, that most small stakes players won't do. Most small stakes players know to check raise 2 pair or better or slow play, so unlikely he has a set, KQ or K2. I would be shocked if he had a better hand. Combine that with how folks don't fold pairs at these stakes and I think you could have jammed. I mean, you were right on the cusp of raising to 1/3rd your stack anyway.

By no means is it a fist pump jam, but I do think it would be reasonable. Maybe he gets away, but then you make a note that you can bluff jam him when he donks.

[kkep]

You got more than I would have. Some like to donk the flop with draws too and the obvious draw got there. So I would have just called him down.
Had he made a min bet on the flop then I would have raised and took back control of the action.

[LondonImp]

I don't think I'd class a gutshot as an 'obvious' draw but I get your point.

[thereitis]

If I were to raise, I would have raised the turn, not the river. But I typically call down in this spot. You have no idea what villain is betting 3 streets with. But he's in BB and could easily have had K2s and was barreling off for value. I expect villain's range to be more polarized than it was. I'd typically expect villain to check the river with his exact hand.

[Guido]

On this board this is most often a find out where i stand donk bet

i Think you played the hand very well on all streets

On Flop you Have a mmh that dont need a lot of protection , so call

On turn you should not overplay your 2 pair when straight comes in

On river you raised him and if you had raised higher he might have folded

[LondonImp]

If I were to raise, I would have raised the turn, not the river.

Why do you say that? It seems to me that even at the micros the general player pool is slowly coming to terms with the fact that if you bet and get raised on the turn, you are almost certainly behind.

Regarding your second point, you are correct in that villain could've had K2 although from my experience they would probably be more likely to c/r a hand this strong.

When the board pairs, especially when its 22-44, a lot of villain's suddenly over-value their holdings thinking 'I've got two pair!' when really it's the relative strength they should be concerned about. Here I was targeting his over-valued range.

[LondonImp]

On turn you should not overplay your 2 pair when straight comes in

Oops, that's not why I called... Haha. I didn't want to force him out the hand (truth be told I didn't consider the straight!).

Thanks that is certainly something to keep in mind though.

[kkep]

Here is another type of donk bet I run into often. I was going to mention it before but I thought it would be to hard to find an example in my HUD.
This just happened and I really do see this a lot at the smaller stakes.

https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/124tBBqIk

[thereitis]

Why do you say that? It seems to me that even at the micros the general player pool is slowly coming to terms with the fact that if you bet and get raised on the turn, you are almost certainly behind.

I said I would raise the turn more than the flop because I expected villains to have K2s and Q2s that they could be donking the flop with in addition to some Kx hands. Even though the turn card does make some straights, I think KJ is going to be ahead of lots of BB donk bets so that's why I'd consider raising the turn more than the flop.

I'm not sure what you mean about the player pool coming to terms with the fact that if you bet and get raised on the turn, you are almost certainly behind. -- Maybe that's true but we still need to raise when we think we are ahead for value. I thought in this spot KJ is most likely ahead of the donk bet range and worth raising.

[LondonImp]

Do you mean raise the turn more than the river?

You are right that I would be missing out on potential value from villain's weaker two pair hands. But this way I am also keeping him in with all his bluffs too and can potentially extract another street of value from his whole range if he fires again on the river.

What I meant by my player pool comment was pretty much exactly that. He would certainly fold all his bluffs to a raise, and potentially a lot of the marginal hands I was ahead of that may call a river bet knowing there's no more action to face.

I suppose what I need to consider is does keeping him in with his bluffs make more profit than tagetting extra value from a smaller portion of his range.

[thereitis]

In my first reply I said my default play would have been to call all the way down. I don't love raising the flop or the turn. And I agree with a lot of your thought process.

On the flop I don't like raising because it's 3 way and I don't have much information. I'm getting donked into from a player who could easily have garbage or 2pr+. And I have no idea. So I think the safest play is to call. The second factor is the SB has yet to act and I'd rather see what he does before building the pot. The final factor is I expect to get called a reasonably high % of the time if I raise because it's multiway and villains should have lots of broadway hands that would continue because they can improve.

On the turn my default play would be to just call. I like to keep villain betting with his bluffs. I don't expect villain to be ahead of me too much. I'm going to discount either villain having JJ,QQ,KK and KQ because they didn't 3bet preflop.

On the river I am never raising KJ. I would raise full houses on this board. I'm worried that villain somehow has 2x. Maybe a straight. My raising range is going to be very polarized to full houses and some random bluffs. But I'm having a hard time thinking about which hands I would bluff with in this spot.

[LondonImp]

I'm having a hard time thinking about which hands I would bluff with in this spot.

Really good point - I didn't even consider this in game.

I can't think of a single decent bluff. I suppose it would have to be a couple of under-pairs like TT or 99 that at least have some blockers to the straight.