Jump to content

Shove Over Top On River Or Just Call?


Recommended Posts

This is an area where I definitely think I need to improve my game. When I have a very strong hand (but not the nuts) on the river, and I get check-raised, sometimes I play it safe by calling and find out I could have gotten more value; other times I go for it and find out I should have played it safe after all. Here's a great example of just such a dilemma:PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $5.00+$0.50 Tournament, 10/20 Blinds (8 handed) - Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.comMP2 (t1740)MP3 (t1460)Hero (CO) (t1400)SB (t1480)BB (t1500)UTG (t1480)UTG+1 (t1500)MP1 (t1480)Hero's M: 46.67Preflop: Hero is CO with 9heart.gif, 9club.gif2 folds, MP1 calls t20, 1 fold, MP3 calls t20, Hero calls t20, 2 folds, BB checksFlop: (t90) Kheart.gif, 8diamond.gif, Jspade.gif(4 players)BB checks, MP1 checks, MP3 checks, Hero checksTurn: (t90) 9spade.gif(4 players)BB checks, MP1 bets t40, 1 fold, Hero raises to t160, 1 fold, MP1 calls t120River: (t410) Jclub.gif(2 players)MP1 checks, Hero bets t200, MP1 raises to t600, Hero...?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hmm. Does anybody else feel this hand was played really strangely by villain? He flat calls the raise on the turn and then check raises the river. Surely if he had KJ or a straight he would have to bet the river? There's no way he could be sure that you wouldn't check behind him if he had KJ and with a straight he'd either want to know where he is with a bet or he'd simply check/call. Not sure what to do but I'd probably end up shoving. Did you call?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm. Does anybody else feel this hand was played really strangely by villain? He flat calls the raise on the turn and then check raises the river. Surely if he had KJ or a straight he would have to bet the river? There's no way he could be sure that you wouldn't check behind him if he had KJ and with a straight he'd either want to know where he is with a bet or he'd simply check/call. Not sure what to do but I'd probably end up shoving. Did you call?
For some reason I was thinking with no reads the first instinct given ther action that villan shows up here with KJ or Jx more often than not ..... but again I say this with no given reads no previous hands played vs villan (ie is he always showing up with the nuts ...... ) my initial thought was KJ or Jx.... Any thoughts? this is given the screwy play at these stakes (I have seen plenty of screwy plays at this level)
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I bother shoving the river but that's because in SnGs I tend to come down on the side of preserving chips rather than extracting max value. I'm happy to take the 1200 chips if I have him beat rather than risk busting out. The gain in equity from extracting another 500 chips does not offset the loss in equity from busting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ShoveThe fact he check raised suggests he's quite trappy (or just bluffing) but being trappy here could mean AJ/QJ/QT/JT/88, all of which pay off a shove. KJ/J9/J8 also make some sense. I'd lean away from J8/J9 though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think I bother shoving the river but that's because in SnGs I tend to come down on the side of preserving chips rather than extracting max value. I'm happy to take the 1200 chips if I have him beat rather than risk busting out. The gain in equity from extracting another 500 chips does not offset the loss in equity from busting.
That's an interesting point. So if I take the conservative approach and call (I'm not going to tell what I did in this hand just yet), and I've got villain crushed as it turns out, I shouldn't necessarily be really upset that I lost value, because maybe over the long run I'm better off never busting there.And btw, last night I had a true "chip and a chair" sequence where I came back from 20 in chips to over 1000, so I definitely hear you there. (I didn't actually cash, which would have made it a better story...but still!)
Link to post
Share on other sites

In $5 tournies people always overvalue their holding. Villain could have like a straight or just trips. I might shove here since he probably can't really put you on a full house the way you played your hand. If he has you, he has you. In a tourney I look to accumulate as much as I can and I don't mind shipping it here.A call is fine though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's definitely a difference in what to think if this is a SnG or an MTT. MTT this is closer to shipping because you want to accumulate chips. In a Sit n Go the call seems perfectly reasonable, as you will have a strong stack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's an interesting point. So if I take the conservative approach and call (I'm not going to tell what I did in this hand just yet), and I've got villain crushed as it turns out, I shouldn't necessarily be really upset that I lost value, because maybe over the long run I'm better off never busting there.
You shouldn't be upset at all. In my opinion, the mentality of "shove and if he has you beat that's bad luck" is cash-game or MTT thinking, not SnG strategy. If you look at the arguments from an equity perspective, they're pretty convincing that taking early risks to double up in a SnG is bad for your tournament equity. It makes sense in cash games where you can just reload and where every decision is a pure ev calculation, and in MTTs where you have to take risks to accumulate chips, but not in SnGs.
Link to post
Share on other sites
There's definitely a difference in what to think if this is a SnG or an MTT. MTT this is closer to shipping because you want to accumulate chips. In a Sit n Go the call seems perfectly reasonable, as you will have a strong stack.
It's a 3-table SnG, which plays more like a STT than a MTT.
Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a 3-table SnG, which plays more like a STT than a MTT.
I usually play these very tight, wait for good spots to steal/shove/reshove. But I still might shove the hand on the river.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I usually play these very tight, wait for good spots to steal/shove/reshove. But I still might shove the hand on the river.
I agree. I'm as tight as they come, even in 6max stt's early on. I still say I shove this spot, only because you'll see QT or Jx a lot. Your hand is very disguised here.
Link to post
Share on other sites

hello all! :club: my first post on these forumsi think this is a clear shove because there are a ton of hands you beat that could still be raising that river, and I would chalk it up as a cooler if he shows up with a higher boat. my guess is you lost the hand and he flipped KJ or something similar, and I really think thats results oriented thinking to be questioning getting it in on this board. on a side, i think you should always be raising this hand pre, as the limping ranges in these low limit sngs are pretty horrendous and in the long run it is going to be +EV to try and iso raise when you'll probably be in position for the hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree. I'm as tight as they come, even in 6max stt's early on. I still say I shove this spot, only because you'll see QT or Jx a lot. Your hand is very disguised here.
And you could also see KJ. The point is that if you shove and lose, you're out of the tourney. If you shove and win, you pull in an extra 500 chips (over calling). That extra 500 chips is insignificant in the grand scheme of the tourney, and the benefit in terms of overall tournament equity is virtually nil. It's just not worth the risk. I think calling is by far the better play here.
Link to post
Share on other sites
on a side, i think you should always be raising this hand pre, as the limping ranges in these low limit sngs are pretty horrendous and in the long run it is going to be +EV to try and iso raise when you'll probably be in position for the hand.
The limp is perfectly fine in the early levels. Raising here in a multiway pot is a spew seeing as there's a ton of flops that you do not want to see with 99 and you will be handcuffed almost every flop you don't hit a set. Better to take the cheap route because you'll often get paid off if it's a community pot and you hit the set.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of those multiway flops you need to lead in position. We have plenty of chips relative to the pot, and can afford to thin the herd a bit. This also gives a healthy turn lead more strength. I don't think KJ or QT's going anywhere :/ I think this line's more consistent with trip jacks, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The limp is perfectly fine in the early levels. Raising here in a multiway pot is a spew seeing as there's a ton of flops that you do not want to see with 99 and you will be handcuffed almost every flop you don't hit a set. Better to take the cheap route because you'll often get paid off if it's a community pot and you hit the set.
I definitely agree. Vis-a-vis this, and MovingIn's advice to lead the flop even with the two overs, I tend to like the smallball approach (just read DN's new treatise on this, where he argues that there's nothing wrong with playing passively and being a "calling station", that aggression is overrated).Results: I shoved, he had KJ, gg me. I could be accused of results oriented thinking, but I do like the idea that the extra 500 in chips isn't worth as much on the positive side as the end of my tournament life is on the negative.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I will add that if we bet the flop, KJ or some other better hand probably raises us and we find out sooner that we're beat (and for fewer chips).
This is true. On the other hand, what if the turn had come with a 9 but a blank hit the river? Then I make a decent pot with my set, as villain probably would like his top two pair. So you could look at it both ways depending on the action: if I bet the flop and get raised, I miss my chance to catch my set.ETA: In other situations, where a hand like 99 is as someone said "handcuffed" due to the presence of overcards, I've found that following the DN smallball approach and either checking behind everyone as in this case, or check-calling small bets (dumping the hand if the bets get too big) is often a good way to pick up small pots where the middle pair does hold up, without committing a lot of chips and bloating the pot. (Although in this particular case, with this many people in the hand and two overs, I probably wouldn't call much of anything if my hand doesn't improve.)
Link to post
Share on other sites
This is true. On the other hand, what if the turn had come with a 9 but a blank hit the river? Then I make a decent pot with my set, as villain probably would like his top two pair. So you could look at it both ways depending on the action: if I bet the flop and get raised, I miss my chance to catch my set.ETA: In other situations, where a hand like 99 is as someone said "handcuffed" due to the presence of overcards, I've found that following the DN smallball approach and either checking behind everyone as in this case, or check-calling small bets (dumping the hand if the bets get too big) is often a good way to pick up small pots where the middle pair does hold up, without committing a lot of chips and bloating the pot. (Although in this particular case, with this many people in the hand and two overs, I probably wouldn't call much of anything if my hand doesn't improve.)
I understand what you are saying and understand the concept, but it's really not optimal for this structure. Small ball in a 1500 chip sng with 5 or 10 minute levels will just cause you to spew chips because if you were to c/c a flop with overs, assuming the pot is fair sized, you'd be calling off a good percentage of your stack with possibly the worst hand. I've seen a ton of players play that the exact same way. Check/call the under pair, check/check turn, lead out the river only to get flatted by top pair weak kicker on the river. At this point you'd be down 25-30% of your stack.I'd prefer to take the limp for set value, dump it if I miss. Or, any time I get good hands, value bet, value bet, value bet rather than take the "safer" route. You really aren't deep enough for the safer route in sngs.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand what you are saying and understand the concept, but it's really not optimal for this structure. Small ball in a 1500 chip sng with 5 or 10 minute levels will just cause you to spew chips because if you were to c/c a flop with overs, assuming the pot is fair sized, you'd be calling off a good percentage of your stack with possibly the worst hand. I've seen a ton of players play that the exact same way. Check/call the under pair, check/check turn, lead out the river only to get flatted by top pair weak kicker on the river. At this point you'd be down 25-30% of your stack.I'd prefer to take the limp for set value, dump it if I miss. Or, any time I get good hands, value bet, value bet, value bet rather than take the "safer" route. You really aren't deep enough for the safer route in sngs.
I think you make some valid points. But I think we have to factor reads in here. Also, I almost never play anything with 5 minute levels, which turn into shovefest crapshoots very quickly IME.ETA: I'm having trouble, also, understanding why the scenario you present would lead to losing 25-30% of my stack. Let's say we go to the flop with a pot of 90 as here, but with only one opponent and only one overcard, said overcard not being an ace (those are kind of the three criteria for my playing a middle pair this way). Villain bets 50, I call. Check-check turn, lead out for 100 on the river and get flatted--that's only 150 or 10% of my stack, not 25-30%. Also, against some villains I'd check the river as well; I'd only make a blocking bet if I felt pretty strongly that was the cheapest way to get to showdown. And why in your scenario did we necessarily find ourselves OOP anyway? As DN said in the book, the ideal scenario for smallball is to be heads up against the BB (meaning heads up in the pot, not overall in the tournament--thus we are in position after the flop).ETA2: If you were thinking of a situation where the blinds were bigger (say 25/50), but with a stack still around 1500, then I'd argue that you shouldn't be limping for set value at that point anyway because you don't have the implied odds. That's a tricky and awkward stack size to find onesself with 99--I would probably just dump it UTG or in MP if someone had limped, maybe limp behind on the button if there were a couple limpers...though if the limpers were bonafide suckers or some maniac had raised preflop for the fifth consecutive hand I'd think about shovelling. Tricky spot, but in any event not a smallball scenario by any means.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...