River bluff opportunity - Thoughts?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (6 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from Play Online Poker, Site Reviews & Poker Forum | FlopTurnRiver.com

BB ($10)
UTG ($12.90)
MP ($9.41)
Hero (CO) ($10.15)
Button ($6.63)
SB ($18.68)

Preflop: Hero is CO with J, K
2 folds, Hero bets $0.30, 2 folds, BB calls $0.20

Flop: ($0.65) 9, 4, 9 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.40, BB calls $0.40

Turn: ($1.45) 5 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks

River: ($1.45) 9 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.60, 1 fold

Total pot: $1.45 | Rake: $0.07


Evaluate this spot, is this a good bluff spot? Is the 9 a good card to bluff at? Are the K highs within my range good hands to turn into bluffs? Are there better hands than my Khighs?

Does villain have a strong or weak range?

Is this spot +EV?

Stats and reads on villain? I'm assuming fishy.

No HUD. Seemed fairly tight and passive.

Post reads or that you don't know your opponents.

The flop and turn seem okay. On the river, I think it's close between betting and checking. It's hard for him to have better than he folds with here.

You probably get folds from A high, KQ and maybe 22, 33, A4 and A5. imo your line reps a 66-88 PP trying to get value from lower pairs.

So I'd say it largely depends on whether you think your opp would call the flop with his A high hands, or A high + backdoor flush draw. And whether he is the kind who calls preflop with A4 or A5. And it also largely depends on whether villain is capable of folding a low pair to your small river bet.

As a general rule: don't bluff at unknowns.

I've changed my mind and decided that I think KJ is definitely a check on the river. I'd like to see OP's river range to verify.

I think Hero's river bet size is another good topic of conversation.

Originally Posted by daviddem

As a general rule: don't bluff at unknowns.

This is misguided. Ideally, we would bluff some nominal amount against unknowns. For example, in a river all-in spot, our ratio of bluffs to value bets could be A:1 where A = bet/(bet+pot) without a problem (ie: unexploitable).

I'd argue that "unknown" at the micros is a player who calls too much. Don't you want to be exploiting this by bluffing less and value betting more, rather than play unexploitably?

i don't like this river bet because many players (you'd be surprised) cannot fold any pair on a 3-of-a-kind board. also, i'm pretty sure you would bet any 9x for value 100% of the time on the turn, yeah? i'd probably look you up here with hands as weak as 4x

If we give villain a river range:
- overcards: AQ+ (28 combos). I purposedly limited the range to AQ+ to reflect the fact that he does not always call the flop with his naked A high hands.
- pairs: A4, 66-88, 22-33 (42 combos)
- busted FD: let's say we add 22 combos of flush draws (KhQh, AhJh, KhJh, QhJh, AhTh, KhTh, QhTh, JhTh, Ah8h, Kh8h, Qh8h, Th8h, Ah7h, 8h7h, Ah6h, 8h6h, 7h6h, Ah5h, 7h5h, 6h5h, Ah3h, Ah2h). Note that a good deal of these beat Hero if Hero checks back the river.

If Hero checks back the river, the above range wins 88.6% of the time.

We assume he always folds his A high hands and busted flush draws and always calls with his pairs. So he calls (and wins) 45.7% of the time.

EV of bluffing = 0.543*$1.45-0.457*0$.60=$0.51
EV of checking = 0.114*$1.45 = $0.17

So it looks to me that in the end, bluffing is much better than checking.

Originally Posted by daviddem

If we give villain a river range:
- overcards: AQ+ (28 combos). I purposedly limited the range to AQ+ to reflect the fact that he does not always call the flop with overcards.

This skews the analysis because {AQ+} will always appear to be ahead of us if we check river back, but villain's range will really include all kinds of overcards, including lots of combinations we beat on the river. Especially since villain 3bets AK and even AQ pre sometimes.

Originally Posted by Fielmann

This skews the analysis because {AQ+} will always appear to be ahead of us if we check river back, but villain's range will really include all kinds of overcards, including lots of combinations we beat on the river. Especially since villain 3bets AK and even AQ pre sometimes.

imo villain is also more likely to call the flop bet with AJ, AT than KJ, KQ or QJ, precisely because these A high hands have more chance to win at showdown vs air. I just took AK and AQ as examples, but it could just as well have been AJ and AT, the result is the same.

Lots of villains don't like to let go of their A high facing a cbet as easily as other hands, especially when the flop texture missed most of the range of Hero.

You can try and play with the ranges. Of course if you assume he calls the flop with ALL his overcards it becomes closer but even then I think bluffing remains better.

Actually, here goes:
- overcards: AQs-ATs, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, AQo-ATo, KTo+, QTo+, JTo (I removed AK assuming AK 3 bets preflop): 117 combos
- pairs: 66-88, 22-33, 7h5h, 6h5h (removed A4 assuming he does not call preflop with A4o): 32 combos
- busted FD: Ah8h, Kh8h, Qh8h, Th8h, Ah7h, 8h7h, Ah6h, 8h6h, 7h6h: removed 3 Ahxh combos to reflect that he does not always call with these preflop. 9 combos.

Against this range, our equity is a much better 39.6%

He only calls the river bet with his pairs. That is 32 combos out of 158, or 20.2% of the time. So:

EV of bluffing: 0.798*$1.45-0.202*$0.60=$1.04
EV of checking: 0.396*$1.45=$0.57

So it's closer but bluffing remains better by far.

If he is tighter and NEVER calls the flop with naked overcards, and also folds 22 and 33 to the river bet:
- busted FD: AhQh, KhQh, AhJh, KhJh, QhJh, AhTh, KhTh, QhTh, JhTh, Ah8h, Kh8h, Qh8h, Th8h, Ah7h, 8h7h, Ah6h, 8h6h, 7h6h: 18 combos
- pairs that call 66-88, 7h5h, 6h5h 20 combos
- pairs that fold 22-33 12 combos

Equity vs this range: 21%

He folds 30 combos out of 50 to a river bet or 60% of the time:
EV of bluffing: 0.6*$1.45 - 0.4*$0.6= $0.63
EV of checking: 0.21*$1.45=$0.30

So bluffing is still better.

I think I did my homework. Now find me a range where checking is better.

Standard check spot for me. We're not getting any pp to fold and even AT+ is probably looking us up given op's inconsistent, bluffy line.

OK I'll do it again (same as post #12, but he also calls the river with AT+) :
- overcards: AQs-ATs, AQo-ATo (I removed AK assuming AK 3 bets preflop): he calls a river bet with these. 44 combos
- pairs: 66-88, 22-33. 30 combos
- busted FD: let's give him only 6 combos of flush draws that he folds to a river bet: KhQh,KhJh,QhJh,KhTh,QhTh,JhTh

Our equity against this range is 5.6%

He folds only 6 out of 80 combos to the river bet. That is 7.5%.

EV of bluffing: 0.075*$1.45-0.925*0.6 = -$0.45
EV of checking: 0.056*$1.45 = $0.08

So yes, IF he calls with all his PP and he calls with all his A high hands AND he has very few flush draws then checking is better.

Not sure if people start making heroic calls like these at 10nl though.

I personally think OP's line is consistent with a medium PP like 88 or 77 trying to extract some value from lower PP's or even trying to induce an AK or AQ to call.

A big problem on this river is that Hero does not have many hands that he can value bet with profitably. However, he does have a few suited connectors and suited one-gappers that did not hit pairs that would be much better suited for bluffing than KJ.

Originally Posted by daviddem

I'd argue that "unknown" at the micros is a player who calls too much. Don't you want to be exploiting this by bluffing less and value betting more, rather than play unexploitably?

If he calls "too much," then he's not unknown.

I will post my range up here and see if i can find the best bluffing hands, these range analysis take me FOREVER to do one so it'll be a sometime tonight or tomorrow.

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

I will post my range up here and see if i can find the best bluffing hands, these range analysis take me FOREVER to do one so it'll be a sometime tonight or tomorrow.

This one should actually take like three minutes and be about 3-4 lines. You just have to figure out what the top of your range is to see if you can value bet, etc. It's pretty simple since your alternative action is to check to end the hand.

Like you might go ho hum I have 8 combinations that I think I can bet for value with such-and-such bet size and they are {list of hands}. Then I would need A percent* of 8 hands to bluff with to be balanced. I think Villain probably calls (more/less) than A percent here, so my bluffs (will/will not) be +EV in a vacuum. That means I should probably bluff (more/less) than the balanced bluffing strategy.

A = bet/(bet+pot)

Holy crap, so will i use my range like adjusted from previous streets so like i would never check JJ-AA on the turn so they aren't in my river range, i think i should adjust in this manner just want to double check although this seems like a dumb question?

Struggling to see how a bet/chk/bet line on this board is anything other than a bluff from a thinking villain's perspective. Ace high checks river behind for showdown value (apart from thin value ak maybe) and all pps bet turn except 22-44 (with betting river pretty thin too with 22-44).

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

Holy crap, so will i use my range like adjusted from previous streets so like i would never check JJ-AA on the turn so they aren't in my river range, i think i should adjust in this manner just want to double check although this seems like a dumb question?

If you would never check a hand on the turn, then it can't be in your river range here.

Along similar lines, if you would never bet a hand on the flop, then it can't be in your river range.

To beat a dead horse, if you would never raise a hand pre-flop, then it can't be in your river range.

So my range is pretty weak on this river I may be able to bet these hands for thin value {22-33 66 AK} this is a total of 34 combos of thin value bets.

So 0.60/(0.60+1.45)= 0.29 I’ll need 29% of 34 combos to balance my range. 34*0.29=9.86 I’ll go with 10 combos of bluffs to balance my v-bets.
I need villain to fold 29% of the time here for a bluff to be +EV in vaccum.

Villains range is fairly weak too I’d imagine probably a few missed FD’s, some pocket pairs and Ahighs.

Lets say {AThh 22-33 77-88 AJ-AQ} =57 combos

He calls AQ 77-88 and folds everything else. So he calls 28 combos and folds 29 which means he’s folding 50.8% of the time. So our bluff is +EV in a vacuum. So he’s folding more than we need to have a profitable bluff with this bet size in a vacuum so we should bluff more frequently than the balanced strategy.

So if I vbet AK 66 22 33 = 34 combos

I can bluff JTcc QTcc QJcc KTcc KJcc KQcc ATcc AJ for a total of 23 combos.

This is more than twice the balanced bluffing strategy, there is obviously some cut off point where we will end up bluffing too much which would be a mistake, I think it has something to do with his calling frequency.

So with this betting range in this spot when I bet I will be bluffing 40% of the time and vbetting the remaining 60%.

It's important to figure out your range first so that you pick the worst hands in your range to bluff with and the best hands in your range to value bet with. Your range should look like this (not to scale):

Worst Hands <---bluff---|---check---|---value bet---> Best Hands

For example, you would rather bluff with 7-high than Q-high. If you decided that you wanted to bluff with about x combinations, then that should be the worst x combinations in your range.

Edit: I added an underlined portion for emphasis. Other than picking your bluffing hands in a sub-optimal manner, your analysis was fine.

a 60c bet with KJ high on river is the nut worst move you could do.

You won't even bluff him off Ace-high with that sizing, and your hand is decent enough to win at least sometimes. So either bet 4/5th pot and hope he folds Ace high --> bluff, or check it down. I'd check it down.

60c would be a good sizing to value bet with like 22-33.