Making The Call On The River When You're Beat?

[jmkiser 0]

My frustrations have been with people value raising me on the river who catch on me when they shouldn't have been calling my bets on the flop and turn in the first place. Situation takes place in No Limit Hold'em cash game with normal sized raises and both above average chip stacks. No all-ins were made or necessary in my mind. No straight scares, two pair scares, full house scares... just the average 4 flush draw.We'll take the typical example of the Hero flopping top pair with the opponent (in position) drawing with a four flush. The read by the Hero is there after the opponent calls the Hero's flop bet (which is large enough to kill drawing odds). The read is made even more certain by the call on the turn (of which the bet is again large enough to kill drawing to the river). The flush card then hits on the river...So here's the situation. We're out of position with TPTK (just for example) and we're pretty certain the opponent just hit his money card.If you're read is spot on that he was drawing to that exact card, do you continue to bet into the opponent on the river to keep up the show of strength?By now, the pot is a pretty decent size.Does it make sense after putting so much money into the pot to just check/fold?To me it feels like the options are check/fold or bet. Is there any way we can just check call in this situation?I feel as if I'm giving the flop and turn calls the right implied odds because of how I keep paying off these river value bets when my read is certain that I'm beat. If I'm certain that I'm beat by the flush, can I fold to a raise that is mediocre at best compared to the entire size of the pot? I would almost feel like I got played if it wasn't for the fact that these opponents are mediocre poker players.The reason I just asked this is because I just got ran down by 9-3s and 10-3s by two different opponents who played it exactly the same. Call on the flop, call on the turn, hit on the river, then I bet again, and get re-raised on the river.

[MightyLouse 0]

If you are killing their drawing odds, why are you unhappy that they are calling?Once you know you are beaten, why are you calling? It becomes dangerous to check fold scary rivers if your opponents are smart and start representing all scare cards. If you have a solid read that an opponent is on the flush draw, don't fire at the river. Keep the pot small, and check and call or check and fold if your read is that good. You know what you have to do you are just complaining about it. Either make the right decison and fold or move in on the turn so you don't have to make these decisions.

[jmkiser 0]

If you are killing their drawing odds, why are you unhappy that they are calling?Once you know you are beaten, why are you calling? It becomes dangerous to check fold scary rivers if your opponents are smart and start representing all scare cards. If you have a solid read that an opponent is on the flush draw, don't fire at the river. Keep the pot small, and check and call or check and fold if your read is that good. You know what you have to do you are just complaining about it. Either make the right decison and fold or move in on the turn so you don't have to make these decisions.

I'm not upset that the flop bets and the turn bets are called... I'm actually happy about that. Moving in on the turn is unnecessary.In limit, it's not that big of a deal to check call when the four flush you knew your opponent had hits (at least.. I would imagine it isn't).In no limit, his four flush hits on the river, but are you just handing the pot away by checking the river? And if he bets small enough to call... should we still not be calling?I ask this because I've read plenty an article about keeping your opponent honest on the river if the price is right.

[MightyLouse 0]

I feel as if I'm giving the flop and turn calls the right implied odds because of how I keep paying off these river value bets when my read is certain that I'm beat. If I'm certain that I'm beat by the flush, can I fold to a raise that is mediocre at best compared to the entire size of the pot? I would almost feel like I got played if it wasn't for the fact that these opponents are mediocre poker players.

Then I don't know what you want. You've said you're certain you were beat. Why call, then? Are you not certain? Checking and calling is cheaper than betting and calling, and therefore a better line. Checking and folding is the cheapest, and therefore the best line. If you are certain your opponent got there. They're mediocre players, and unlikely to be putting a move on you. You have all the information you need here, so why not just do what you advocate?Either you're certain you're beat and you check fold. Or you think you're beat, but getting such a great price that calling will be profitable in the long run, so you call. Or you think your opponent will call if you beat him, but raise when he beats you, and you think it's close. So you bet and fold to a raise.What are you advocating as an alternative? Betting and calling so you can be disgusted and moan when he turns over nine-deuce? You know what the right play is. You just don't seem comfortable making it.By the way, if you're certain your opponent would only raise if you're beat, it's still a terrible mistake to call in limit hold'em. There's never any reason to call when you're losing unless you've decided your opponent is the type that will bluff raise rivers all night if you give up once early in a session.

[Sea Wasp 0]

Your opponents may be happy to draw to their hands because they know you will pay them off when the hit. If you are certain you are beat then calling river value raises is terrible and makes you the value in the game.Calling river raises with one pair type hands is an express route to being bust. If you must bet the river with a 1 pair type hand then you can fold to any small raise safe in the knowledge that your hand is no good. Even if the pot is laying you 5-1 if villian is only bluffing 1 in 10 times then you are making a big mistake by calling. This is all pretty standard and i agree with MightyLouse's comments.

[jmkiser 0]

Then I don't know what you want. You've said you're certain you were beat. Why call, then? Are you not certain? Checking and calling is cheaper than betting and calling, and therefore a better line. Checking and folding is the cheapest, and therefore the best line. If you are certain your opponent got there. They're mediocre players, and unlikely to be putting a move on you. You have all the information you need here, so why not just do what you advocate?Either you're certain you're beat and you check fold. Or you think you're beat, but getting such a great price that calling will be profitable in the long run, so you call. Or you think your opponent will call if you beat him, but raise when he beats you, and you think it's close. So you bet and fold to a raise.What are you advocating as an alternative? Betting and calling so you can be disgusted and moan when he turns over nine-deuce? You know what the right play is. You just don't seem comfortable making it.By the way, if you're certain your opponent would only raise if you're beat, it's still a terrible mistake to call in limit hold'em. There's never any reason to call when you're losing unless you've decided your opponent is the type that will bluff raise rivers all night if you give up once early in a session.

That is very true. When it's all spelled out in words in front of me, it seems to make a lot more sense. It could just be the discomfort of a positive situation turning into a negative one so fast that makes it hard to let go. I'm betting the correct amount to the river and then the worst card pops up. My aggression factor kicks in and I feel obligated to follow through with a bet because I just hate to throw up the white flag with a check. I guess when he just comes over the top of me for such a small amount, I almost feel obligated to call. You're right, though, I just needed a smack in the face on the forums to help fix this leak in my game. Back to solid play and thanks for the help :-)

[David_Nicoson 1]

My frustrations have been with people value raising me on the river who catch on me when they shouldn't have been calling my bets on the flop and turn in the first place.

After you consider the amount you pay off on the river, are they still making a mistake on the flop and turn? If we take a check/fold line, then the tricky players are going to start calling these boards with draws other than the obvious flush draw (particularly heads up). Against these players, we're going to want to take a check/call line.Bet/fold doesn't work against a lot of opponents (in my experience), because they'll still be willing to bluff in this situation. We're attempting a blocking bet, in that case.

[MightyLouse 0]

That is very true. When it's all spelled out in words in front of me, it seems to make a lot more sense. It could just be the discomfort of a positive situation turning into a negative one so fast that makes it hard to let go. I'm betting the correct amount to the river and then the worst card pops up. My aggression factor kicks in and I feel obligated to follow through with a bet because I just hate to throw up the white flag with a check. I guess when he just comes over the top of me for such a small amount, I almost feel obligated to call. You're right, though, I just needed a smack in the face on the forums to help fix this leak in my game. Back to solid play and thanks for the help :-)

I suck at poker, so don't listen to me. I'd consider trying to feel less paranoid, though. Paranoia leads to bad calls leads to losing. Getting bluffed once or twice isn't nearly as bad as always paying off