help clarifying a seemingly simple topic/theme

[amir is cool]

I feel like a damn fool for asking what will probably be a very simple question with a simple answer but I am almost completely lost here the more I think about it.

I've often seen in videos and or posts that post flop people say to refrain from value betting because worse hands fold and better hands call or variations of that statement.

What does this mean exactly? Could some one give me a somewhat in depth explanation or example of this theme, because I just don't understand it.

I remember some post i read on here a while ago that somebody said something along the lines of "when i finally realized the fact that only worse hands fold and better hands call it was like an epiphany and did wonders for my game" so i could come to the conclusion that this is a hole in my game i need help plugging.


Thanks for your help.

[Vinland]

I can take a shot and give an example. This one is pretty situational. Hopefully others chime in b/c there is a lot to this and I have trouble noticing different situations where this applies.

For example, say a player you know to be quite tight opens for a raise in MP and you decide to call in the BB w/ TT.

The flop comes AKX. You've missed, the two high cards make a good pile of the opponents range. If you bet, the only hands he folds are hands worse than your TT, and possibly QQ, JJ which arent a lot of holdings. Getting him to fold JJ/QQ is great but the chances that he holds those exact cards are small. If he calls, he likely has a good K or A given his tight tendancies and his preflop raise. Leading out with a bet will only fold worse hands that you have crushed and better hands thst now have you dominated are calling.

here's another example:
the board is four flush and you have bottom set
your opponent will not call a bet of any size on the river without a one card flush or possibly a better set
you're OOP on the river, there's NO reason to bet
either c/c if you think he'll bluff a high % of the time or c/f if you think he won't

[bjsaust]

From a session just now:

No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (6 handed) - Hold'em Manager Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

UTG ($100)
MP ($98)
CO ($140.42)
Button ($87.50)
SB ($101)
Hero (BB) ($96.50)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 4, 8
2 folds, CO calls $1, 2 folds, Hero checks

Flop: ($2.50) 5, J, 7 (2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks

Turn: ($2.50) 8 (2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks

River: ($2.50) 4 (2 players)
Hero checks, CO bets $2.50, Hero calls $2.50

Total pot: $7.50

Results:
Hero had 4, 8 (two pair, eights and fours).
CO had Q, 10 (high card, Queen).
Outcome: Hero won $7.15

Lots of people go "Whee 2P and he might not have a flush so I bet!" but seriously, wtf hands would really call me here that dont beat me? His air folds, and unless I minbet no one pair hands call, and theres not many 1P hands that got here like this. I have a bluff catcher, but not a value betting hand.

Warning!!: This call is only good because this particular opponent likes to bluff rivers a lot, and even then its pretty marginal.

[Vinland]

^^^Yes^^^
iopq gave you another good example. I ran into this a number of times lately.....

You have to think....given how your opponent plays, is he calling with worse or only calling with stronger hands? If he is tight and straightforward, leading out will, in most cases be -EV when his range well covered by the board.

You'll find that these spots are even more difficult to judge when you are OOP.

[Luco]

Thank you for making this thread. It's a concept that everyone in the BC should study (me too). Nice to see Vinland getting his head around it too.

This is marginal hand play, something that I myself have only recently started to apply, but yes this will turbo boost your winrate once you start to use it.

I find this comes in most useful on the river, but it applies to every single street, including preflop.

If you have a moderate hand with some showdown value, you want that hand to go to showdown in a lot of cases. Look at Renton's ABCD theorem - we want to come out betting with our strong hands (because worse hands will call) and our bluffs (because we want them to fold), but not with the middle hands. We lose value whenever someone plays correctly and folds the worst hand to our bet, and we lose value when they call and we know we're beat. By betting with medium strength hands, we essentially turn them into a bluff hand (we don't want a call). So the better move is to try to keep our villain's worse hands in, and try to get some more value from them.

This thread is a good example. We see that Micro2macro has played to the river with tptk ip without raising, and then on the river he sees that he can't raise his tptk for value. Why? because the only hands that would call a river raise would be hands that beat TPTK, so he could never gain any additional money by raising here, it's just spewing chips. He has to just call.

But yes, being OOP on the river is a classic example. Say you have QQ, an overpair to the board, you're pretty sure you're ahead. But then an A comes on the river. You can't bet this ace, because your villain will only call if he's got the ace himself. You have to check/call (if you think they will bluff) or check/fold if they're honest. Only a hand that beats your queens would call that river bet, and worse hands will fold, making the river bet here very -ev.

Buy Theory of Poker and read up on river play, it will blow your mind.

[settecba]

Exactly what i was about to suggest Luco. OP: If you havent yet, read TOP. The topic you are talking about has to do with the Reasons we BET. Incorporating this concept to your game will do A LOT.

[oskar]

blah, I don't particularly like the examples, becaouse 4-flush and 5-flush boards are such easy bluff opportunities that I even like to bet some hands with showdown value that cannot beat any flush just because they might actually call with worse some of the time, and if they never call with worse than say a set or 2-pair, then it's still right to bet, so...

It's really very rare that there is a situation where they will ONLY call when they have you beat... I think it's more beneficial to ask yourself how many hands are in his range that have you beat that will call, and how many are in his range that you beat that will call.
There are a million examples. Just post some hands. It really applies to every decision you have to make in some way.

The only situation that is really black and white like that is, say you raise PF with 55, flop comes 6TT, and you shove for 5x the pot because the last time you had 55 the guy hit his 6-outer on the river - you're only getting called when you're beat... but you have effectively protected your hand :P

[bigspenda73]

here's another example:
the board is four flush and you have bottom set
your opponent will not call a bet of any size on the river without a one card flush or possibly a better set
you're OOP on the river, there's NO reason to bet
either c/c if you think he'll bluff a high % of the time or c/f if you think he won't

are you c/c'ing 2nd pair as well?

here's another example:
the board is four flush and you have bottom set
your opponent will not call a bet of any size on the river without a one card flush or possibly a better set
you're OOP on the river, there's NO reason to bet
either c/c if you think he'll bluff a high % of the time or c/f if you think he won't

are you c/c'ing 2nd pair as well?

I don't give my opponents the same credit
so sometimes they bet two pair on that kind of river and I

but yes, sometimes it's OK to c/c 2nd pair
but only when the action and the opponent lead you to believe it's good
I can't make herocalls with second pair against fish, only against people who know what WA/WB situations are