[Closed] NL5 - river donk bet

Hello StaringAtGoats,

The problem is that actually if we take a look at his play preflop, we mostly can put him on some weak hand because of the limp/call. And such a limp/call has a lot PP type of hands which is going for the set. And not many of like K5/K6 type of holdings unless he is really loose and plays some K5s/K6s/K2s.

Therefore I'd consider more often him having here some kind of set rather a 2pair type of hand. And he can't bluff either that much here, only few missed draws. Therefore I'd make the crying fold on river according to his line. Don't really see many hands what we beat.

Best regards.

Therefore I'd consider more often him having here some kind of set rather a 2pair type of hand.

If he's got a set or 2P, wouldn't it make more sense for him to either raise the turn or check / raise the river?
And if he really has got such a strong hand (set +) why would he bet the river? By going on what he knows about me, he must assume that I'm going to bet the river. So he's going to get more value with a strong hand by check raising here.

Sorry to deviate from the river topic but isn't the bet on flop way too small? Vs. two villains do you want to bet that small w/ top pair? The board is not awfully wet but it is somewhat connected and I'd think you want/need to protect there...

Since you got two pair (so no fear of something like KQ) and there is a FD as well on turn, I'd bet bigger as well. For value and to punish the draws on his range. Since he called the flop he's probably calling again.

As for the river I have doubts too. With top pair I'd fold, w/ 2 pair I don't know. Fish love to play bottom 2 pair as it were the nuts. And sets in his range, I do agree he would have raised previous streets.

What happens is, if you bet bigger flop and turn, you'd have (I think, that's my reasoning) an easier decision on river. The pot being bigger it's too expensive to bluff, and if stacks are too small compared to pot villain wouldn't have the power to bluff you off.

I mean: if you bet 0,60 on flop, the turn would have 1,90. If you bet 1,50 on turn, that's tougher on him for most holdings. If he calls, you'd have a $4,90 pot and 2,70 behind.

Then I have 2 questions: is my reasoning correct? And if so, it top two good enough to commit this way?

The other line is check turn, which I don't like. But if with the limp/call and then a call to a big bet (if not pot size) on the flop you put him on a set, then check back turn compromising protection for pot control. Then you can call river easily and take note on his play. But if you think he's just a fish playing any2 (which appears to be the case, since he didn't protect set vs. runner FD w/ at least ch/r) then I'd commit and go broke.

Originally posted by StaringAtGoats

Therefore I'd consider more often him having here some kind of set rather a 2pair type of hand.

If he's got a set or 2P, wouldn't it make more sense for him to either raise the turn or check / raise the river?
And if he really has got such a strong hand (set +) why would he bet the river? By going on what he knows about me, he must assume that I'm going to bet the river. So he's going to get more value with a strong hand by check raising here.

Because he knows that you are going to Call with pairs/2pairs anyways against his line. And he doesn't want to miss the spot that you Checking behind. And often times that's the case with them.

Sorry to deviate from the river topic but isn't the bet on flop way too small? Vs. two villains do you want to bet that small w/ top pair? The board is not awfully wet but it is somewhat connected and I'd think you want/need to protect there...

Guess it's not that big mistake. If they have some kind of set and they gonna Check/Raise it then we can easily fold it. And if they don't have a hand then they are anyways going to fold it. Although against a bit smaller bet they might even find a Call with some smaller PPs.

Since you got two pair (so no fear of something like KQ) and there is a FD as well on turn, I'd bet bigger as well. For value and to punish the draws on his range. Since he called the flop he's probably calling again.

Yep, reasonable thinking. Likely could bet a bit bigger.

As for the river I have doubts too. With top pair I'd fold, w/ 2 pair I don't know. Fish love to play bottom 2 pair as it were the nuts. And sets in his range, I do agree he would have raised previous streets.

Depends a lot on the player, there are even fishes who are passive and very passive, even with 2pairs. And as well there are a lot of situations when they just slowplay till the river and then realize why I didn't Raise on early streets? But right now the problem is that there are only few 2pair type of combos and which is just 65 and that's all. And you need like 35% equity to make it profitable Call, and against what kind of range do you get it?

For example:

Board: 5♦6♠K♥ J♦ 2♥
       Equity     Win     Tie
UTG    70.97%  70.97%   0.00% { 66-55, 65s, 43s, 65o, 43o }
UTG+1  29.03%  29.03%   0.00% { KsJh }

We ain't getting it.

Then I have 2 questions: is my reasoning correct? And if so, it top two good enough to commit this way?

Yes, then we would likely just get a lot better odds and can't fold that easily and would be more often inclined to Call and not make a mistake by Calling.

The other line is check turn, which I don't like. But if with the limp/call and then a call to a big bet (if not pot size) on the flop you put him on a set, then check back turn compromising protection for pot control. Then you can call river easily and take note on his play. But if you think he's just a fish playing any2 (which appears to be the case, since he didn't protect set vs. runner FD w/ at least ch/r) then I'd commit and go broke.

Nah, I don't like Checking behind. There are just so many hands which may pay you. Kx/draws/even worse pairs sometimes/worse 2pairs.