Riverplay part 2 - In position

» COLUMN

River play part 2 - In Position

from MiiWiin

In the first part of the article series we dealt
with the basics of playing on the river and noted the options and goals we
should have. We also figured out that wrong decisions on the river can
turn out to be very expensive. Furthermore you should definitely not
stick to preset rules and ways of thinking. Today we want to deal with
this a little further and look at some examples where hero can act in
position. We will deal with playing out of position on the river next
time.

Regardless the situation, it is always a huge advantage to be in position in no-limit hold'em.
Obviously this applies to playing on the river as well. We receive much
more information about the hand strength of villain, enabling us to
think our decisions through in more detail.

There are two scenarios: Villain either checks the
river or villain bets. Either way, we have three possibilities, which
we should evaluate using the criteria mentioned last time.

Generally we concluded that we have to
determine where we are at with our hand on the river: If we think that
we are way behind we could either bluff or give up the hand. If we
think that we are in a wa/wb-situation, with a medium strength hand, we
would want to see the showdown cheaply. If we think that we are way
ahead we should try to get as much value as possible.

Our options are very clear if villain checks to
us. Checking behind with a hand with show down value should be
standard. We would assume to be ahead a couple of times but don't
assume that villain would call another bet with a weaker hand.

If we think that we are ahead, we obviously have to bet. The same applies if we want to bluff.

However, if villain bets, we have to think the hand
through. As mentioned, we have the advantage of being in position and
received some additional information through the river bet.

Calling would be an option if we would like
to see a showdown. Though the question is whether we would be able to
see the show down "cheaply". Without looking at the bet size, the river
card, as well as the previous action a standard call can't be made.

The same applies to a bluff. The only possibility
would be to raise, which might represent a shove in a raised pot. It
should be clear that this move has to be successful enough of the time
because villains actions have suggested that he has a very strong hand.
Clear reads are very helpful to determine whether he would actually
fold his hand enough of the time. You should generally abstain from
making moves that put your whole stack
at risk against unknown opponents.

Raising with a very strong hand is still an
option. It wouldn't be a bad idea to question your hand strength again
at this point though. Is our hand really that strong, or respectively very
close to the "nuts"? Does villains range involve enough weaker hands
which he would bet/call with on the river? You can raise in good
faith if this is the case. However, if you have some doubt, a call,
based on the additional information about villains hand, is an option
too.

Obviously the game on the river is important for
everyone else as well as us. Basically they will encounter the same
amount of problems as us.

To get better at playing in position, it is especially important to categorise our opponents:

1.) Standard-type
A standard player is decreasingly
aggressive from one street to the next and rarely stays as aggressive
on the river as he was on the flop. This is often caused by lots of
bets on previous streets. Players then get stuck in c/c mode on the river.
Most of the time, these are players like TAGs or LAGs with hands that
they want to see the showdown with. You have to evaluate whether a bluff
makes any sense and whether you have enough fold equity, very carefully.
You should make a value bets with very strong hands.

2.) The weak-tight type

When the weak tight player is faced with a large pot on the river he usually gets scared. Even if he is a little
aggressive on the flop and the turn he usually stops on the river. Most
of the time these players play c/c on the river. Sometimes these
players play c/c on other streets as well which classifies them as a
calling station or a rock. It is very important to determine whether
you have enough fold equity. The relative hand strength increases. Even
with very strong hands these players often check. A bet should be
considered to be very serious though and you should ask yourself whether you want to buy a showdown with marginal hands.

3.) The aggressive type
The most
problemantic opponent is the aggressive type. Not only because we are
faced with more expensive decisions, but also because it is hard to
evaluate the aggression. One characteristic of a very aggressive player
is that his river-AF is higher than his turn-AF.

This aggression could have two origins: We are
either dealing with a player who wants to make use of our hinted
weakness on the turn to bluff us out of the hand on the river.

Or we are dealing with a player who likes to
induce a bluff on the turn but then has to bet for value on the river
if we checked behind. We are therefore dealing with a "slow player".

The problem should be clear now. In the first case
we are up against a bluff which we beat with many hands. In the second scenario we are dealing with a monster hand that
only started betting on the river. Distinguishing these two scenarios is
relatively difficult and has to be combined with any other information
we have about the opponent.

Especially maniacs with a high VPIP as well as PFR
have to try to bluff us out of the hand quite frequently because his
relative hand strength will be way lower in comparison to our
hand. The river is a good spot for these players to make
crazy bluffs becausethe overall aggression of most players drops
significantly on the river. Another thing you could watch out for is a very low "went
to show down" value.

Maniacs who have a high VPIP but rarely raise
preflop tend to be calling stations. A high "went to
showdown" value completes the picture so that we should assume to be up
against a monster that slow played if there is excessive action on the
river.

Let's look at some examples:

PartyPoker $25 NL Hold'em (6 handed)

Stacks & Stats
MP ($25)
CO ($25)
UTG ($25) (weak-tighter Typ (Nr.2))
BB ($25)
SB ($25)
Hero ($25)

Preflop: Hero is Button with A , K
UTG calls $0.25, 2 folds, Hero raises to $1.25, 2 folds, UTG calls $1.25

Flop: ($2.85) J, 3, 2 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $2.25, UTG calls $2.25

Turn: ($7.35) K (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $5.00, UTG calls $5.00

River: ($17.35) 6 (2 players)
UTG bets $11.00, Hero ???

This is a standard play until the river. Hero
raises preflop, makes a continuation bet on the flop and barrels on the
turn as well because he doesn't want to give away any free cards.

Villain donks on the river. We classified the
opponent as a weak tight player. He tends to be more of a calling station and
didn' t stand out with any previous river aggression.

The river card is not very good because a straight is now possible, but the flush draw would still be unimproved.

Which options do we have?

If we decide to call, we have to be ahead 3,5 of
the time. We wouldn't create any furhter fold equity if we decide to
raise (shove in this case). Villain could hardly fold any hands except
a pure bluff (from which we wouldn't get any value anyway). The option
that is left is folding.

We have a medium strength hand. We don't have to
put our whole stack at risk against a rather passive player. The only
thing that would be possible is a busted draw. The flop and turn play would
definitely suggest that he is on a  flush draw. However villain would play
c/c with hands like KQ on the river. Furthermore there are many hands
that beat us. For example a set. Calling stations will
rarely try to protect their set. However on the river they will be
scared of us checking behind so that they would normally bet. Generally
there aren't many hands against which we are ahead. Folding would
definitely be reasonable in this situation.

PartyPoker $25 NL Hold'em (6 handed)

Stacks & Stats
MP ($25)
CO ($25)
UTG ($25)
BB ($25) (aggressiver Typ, Richtung “Bluffer” (Nr.3))
SB ($25)
Hero ($25)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 9 , 9
3 folds, Hero raises to $1.00, 1 fold, BB calls $1.00

Flop: ($2.35) 4, 4, 7 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $1.60, UTG calls $1.60

Turn: ($5.55) K (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero checks

River: ($5.55) J (2 players)
UTG bets $5.00, Hero ???

Hero decides to check behind on the turn. We
classified villain as an aggressive bluff type who rather bluffs the
river than call a turn bet. We don't have to protect our hand due to
the texture of the board.

Villain makes a bet which is close to pot size on the river. We roughly have to be ahead one out of three times.

We can assume that this is the case here. By
checking behind we will often induce a bluff. Villain could have many
hands that are worse than ours which he would try to force us out
of the pot with. A fold would be too weak here. A raise makes just as little
sense because villain would only call with stronger hands and fold any
weaker hands. We should try to see a show down with our hand.

What would have happened if we were up against a "standard type" or a "slow player"?

A "standard-type" has, as mentioned, a relatively
normal river aggression but could try to bluff as well. A call
in this situation would probably be +EV as well, although contemplating
to fold with two over cards on the board wouldn't be wrong either.

It is much closer against a slow player. It would
probably be a standard move for him to check/call the flop with hands
like 4x/77/TT+(which are always possible for players like this one). He
would probably check hands like Kx with the intention to c/r on the
turn as well. The bet on the turn is rather ugly for us. Most of
the time this will be a value bet like in the previous examples. I
think a fold is reasonable in this situation.

We had a made hand in both situations and were
faced with a river-bet. In dependence of the odds as well as the type
of opponent and our relative hand strength we had to reach close
decisions.

Let's look at an example in which we could contemplate raising.

PartyPoker $25 NL Hold'em (6 handed)

Stacks & Stats
MP ($25)
CO ($25)
UTG ($25) (???)
BB ($25)
SB ($25)
Hero ($25)

Preflop: Hero is Button with 7 , 8
UTG calls $0.252 folds, Hero raises to $1.25, 2 folds, UTG calls $1.25

Flop: ($2.85) 5, 3, J (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $2.25, UTG calls $2.25

Turn: ($7.35) 2 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero checks

River: ($7.35) 5 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero...???

We decide to raise the suited connector from the
button. We make a continuation bet on the flop and take the free card on
the turn. We miss our draw though. Villain checks to us.

Generally a bluff would be reasonable in a situation like this. We
will basically never be ahead with 8-high and we would be giving up the
hand by checking behind.

Which type of opponent makes a bluff reasonable?

Against a "standard type" a bluff is generally reasonable because the
line shows a lot of weakness. A stronger draw as well as a medium
strength hand is possible. Villain would have taken the initiative with a
stronger hand in order to protect it. A river bluff bet is definitely
profitable but not a necessity.

Against a weak tight type it would be a lot closer because a player who
is rather passive on the river would automatically see more showdowns. A small pocket
pair could definitely be in the c/c mode. Furthermore you could think
about folding. We could probably make a better draw fold (we will be
behind against nearly all draws). Our river bet will probably be called
by this type of opponent and is therefore not very profitable in the
long run.

I think that you would have to bet against very
aggressive players. Anyone who usually bets the river but checks this
time has usually given up the hand. I should mention again that we
basically
don't have any show down value and can't win the pot without bluffing
at it. We should definitely bet the river if we are playing against a
bluffer or a
slow player.