NL200: River 3bet bluff

[chinz]

Villain is capable of turning made hands into a bluff, do you like?

My idea was that I can represent TJ very very very good here, but it isn't really in villain's range (he has close to 80% cbet so I don't really see him checking JT on Q63). I wouldn't do it if I thought he's valueraising too often, but 88 and maybe 99 are like the only valueraising hands he could have here, and that is if he doesn't cbet the flop with those.

I'm not too sure if my initial riverbet is shoving a profit, so I understand if some of you don't like it, but I thought this is kind of sexy spot to 3bet bluff after he raises. What do you think?

€1/€2 No Limit Holdem
6 Players
Hand Conversion Powered by weaktight | fold when you know you're beat

Stacks:
UTG €250.50
UTG+1 €138.89
CO €236.60
BTN €200
SB €219.70
Hero €250.65

Pre-Flop: (€3, 6 players) Hero is BB Ad Td
2 folds, CO raises to €5.75, 2 folds, Hero calls €3.75

Flop: 6d 3h Qd (€12.50, 2 players)
Hero checks, CO checks

Turn: 9c (€12.50, 2 players)
Hero bets €8, CO calls €8

River: 8s (€28.50, 2 players)
Hero bets €22, CO raises to €78, Hero goes all-in €236.90

[podbelski]

That's soooo sick mate
I would have pissed into my pants seeing that river raise... I'm putting him on weak sooted Q or rivered 2pair maybe... or A-high float?

[urbansprawler]

He has a set of queens and won't fold.

Possibly 88.

Results?

[chinz]

Originally Posted by urbansprawler

He has a set of queens and won't fold.

I'd be really surprised to see a good NL200 regular ever check the flop with top set, even less when he cbets close to 80%.

But you are right about 88, that is the reason why I'm asking is this good. He could very well play 88 like that and he probably wouldn't fold to a river 3bet... Even if he knows that A9 and 88 are the same hand here, it's not like I'm valueshoving top2 or something.

I just think he has weak hands turned into a bluff very often here, I would have called if I had something like QJ myself.

Results?

He folded.

[urbansprawler]

Originally Posted by chinz

I'd be really surprised to see a good NL200 regular ever check the flop with top set, even less when he cbets close to 80%.

There is no other strong flopped hand that checks and raises river for value, assuming he does raise for value.

He folded.

Villain's bluff is garbage in this spot imo. He reps nothing but QQ/88 and your bluff reps even less. There's just so little reason to raise as a bluff on that river I would assume a good 200NL regular understands that raising Ax is terrible as anything that Ax is behind and is betting on the river doesn't fold to a bet.

It's actually possible he had 88 and leveled himself into folding (which is pretty lol). If you believe villain can level himself into folding 88 enough, then your shove is super +EV. Kind of doubt that, though...

Reason I wouldn't 3b here is I don't understand why a good 200NL reg would turn any part of his range (all bluffcatchers really) into a bluff here.

[chinz]

Originally Posted by urbansprawler

Villain's bluff is garbage in this spot imo.

In a way it is... He's not really repping too many hands, but even at NL200 a lot of regulars will like never call turn/river raises with one pair hands. A lot of people would snapfold TP here in my place.

Against some weak regs it could probably be +ev, but against a callingstation like me, you're right.

He reps nothing but QQ/88 and your bluff reps even less.

Yeah, but when I 3bet the river it's not like "he reps a narrow range" is a good reason to call. :P

So, if he was raising for thin value with hand like 2 pair (which I doubt he was), he should be snapfolding to that river 3bet....

At NL2k or something it could be a raise-call because they can be 100% sure that I know that his (CO) range is capped but mine could literally be any hand (well, not really QQ) here... And at those stakes people are probably more capable of making 3bet bluff, while in NL200 I believe a lot of regs have never in their life 3bet bluffed any other postflop street than flop... :P

It's actually possible he had 88 and leveled himself into folding (which is pretty lol). If you believe villain can level himself into folding 88 enough, then your shove is super +EV. Kind of doubt that, though...

I don't really think he folded 88, I'm not that optimistic...

but tbh, when a player with around 25/20/4 stats would 3bet that river against me, I would probably fold 88 as him... Or tbh more likely, I would think "I should fold, he has TJ every time" and spitecall anyway and lose 80% of the time... That's my biggest leak :P

[Qgel]

Please convert, that damn euro symbol is burning a hole in my eyes arghhh.

Honestly your river shove looks like pretty big spew. I think you are misapplying the whole "turns made hand into a bluff" concept. Main reason being that on that river the villain cannot represent much of anything therefore him making that river "bluff raise" with a hand like A6 makes no sense to do. Your hand looks a lot like a strong Q going for value which he shouldn't expect you to fold therefore villain most likely rivered 2pair or a set and is value raising.

If you expect him to fold 2pair like 86s on that river to a shove then your play is good but if you're trying to get him off a mid pair that he turned into a bluff then your play is very spewy because he should almost never show up with that hand and you will just run into 2pair+ most of the time.

[chinz]

Originally Posted by Qgel

Main reason being that on that river the villain cannot represent much of anything therefore him making that river "bluff raise" with a hand like A6 makes no sense to do.

I still see people do it a lot...

If you expect him to fold 2pair like 86s on that river to a shove then your play is good but if you're trying to get him off a mid pair that he turned into a bluff then your play is very spewy because he should almost never show up with that hand and you will just run into 2pair+ most of the time.

If he is valueraising two pair like 86 on the river, I think it makes my 3bet wayyyyyyyy better... I don't really see anyone ever calling river 3bet on that spot with mid 2 pair.

Something like 88 will probably call, because sets are mentally harder to fold (yes, I think this makes a big difference here) and he could think "he might be valueshoving 33 or 66"... I wouldn't valueshove bottom set here tho, since he's range which he raise-calls for value should be polarized to 88+ or so.

You both are probably right that my rivershove is (slightly) losing play, in the long run... but not for the reasons you stated. If he's always/often thin valueraising the river with weak 2p like 86, my shove probably comes +ev. There is absolutely no way that anyone half decent would call rivershove with that, because there's not even the slightest chance of me shoving worse for value and nobody 3bet bluffs the river with more than 40% frequency. NOBODY. With 88 it's a bit different, since a lot of people would shove 33 or 66 as me for value here, which I think is too thin. (sounds stupid saying that valueshoving set barely over 100bb is deep, but in this case it is)

[urbansprawler]

Originally Posted by chinz

but tbh, when a player with around 25/20/4 stats would 3bet that river against me, I would probably fold 88 as him... Or tbh more likely, I would think "I should fold, he has TJ every time" and spitecall anyway and lose 80% of the time... That's my biggest leak :P

Haha I can so relate.

[chinz]

Originally Posted by urbansprawler

Haha I can so relate.

It's actually probably one of the biggest leaks in most NL100-NL400 players' games from what I've seen. I know tons of good players who can hand read quite well and think at the game at pretty high level... but still when playing, they often bet-call rivers which are most obvious bet-folds and do other stupid shit like that.

So, as I said earlier, 88 probably should fold here to my shove, but I am not expecting people to really fold that and I'm quite sure that I couldn't do it myself either.