Small Stakes Holdem Hand Analysis

Hork42

3/6 Party

No read on any of the other players.  (I'd like to say New Table, but really, I'm not paying all that much attention to the game...)

Hero (that's me) in MP with :jc :10c

Folded to me, I call.
Button calls.
SB calls.
BB calls.

4 to the flop (Pot=4 SB)

Flop:    :as :ks :qd

SB Checks.
BB Checks.
Hero Bets.
Button Calls.
SB Calls.
BB Folds.

3 to the turn (3.5 BB)

Turn:  :9h

SB Checks.
Hero Bets.
Button Calls.
SB Folds.

2 to the river (5.5 BB)

River:  :qs

Hero:  Check or Bet?

Big E

With all that limping.....BET!

pkrfce9

With one opponent, I'm tempted to bet. 2 or 3, meh.

What would you do if he raised?

ScoobyD

Tough spot with no reads. Against a loose player I'm likely betting there for value. There's too many hands that will pay you off if you bet, but check behind if you check. Of course the board pairing and the 3rd spade hitting really sucks and getting raised blows. I'm likely check-calling vs. a tight player and betting it vs. a loose player.

ScottyZ

I would check.

There are three reasonable betting lines for the river.

1. Check with the intention of calling.
2. Check with the intention of folding.
3. Bet with the intention of calling.

Note that, with a hand of medium-good strength as you have here (combined with the initial bet having little to no value nature), betting with the intention of folding is complete insanity. A much better use of a big bet is option #1 above.

In fact, the parenthetical above pretty much rules out option #3 as well. In low-limit poker, 90%+ of your agressive actions are made for one reason: for value. It's hard to imagine the two requirements for value betting both holding here on the river. The river card is so likely to kill your hand that the "best hand / called by worse hand" parlay is a real longshot.

So, it feels like checking the river is pretty clear. If the opponent checks behind, I'd be pretty happy with this result.

What if your opponent bets? This where player read would go a long way. Against an auto-bluffer, you might have to attempt a pick off.

Against an unknown/average low-limit player, you're in a bit of a tough spot. The trouble (but not meaning that it was a bad thing to do) with your checking the river was that your opponent may now not put you on a hand that is all that strong. He may have spiked three queens and believe that it is now good. Some low-limit players may feel that your checking the river is the green light to go ahead bet their Ace-rag hands in this spot. Others will be relieved to check it down with a medium hand after the river scare card falls.

In the end, I'd like to think I would fold here. Realistically, I probably make the (check and) call on the end.

Will you show up with the winning hand about 1 in 7 of the times that your opponent bets the river here? While, a natural (and often correct in general) reaction is that you will, this one, I think, might be closer than it looks at first glance.

ScottyZ

BBC Z

Your opponent did nothing more than call you down. Don't see MUBS (Monsters under the bed). Bet/Call..

Two pair will call your bet but may not bet themselves..

SirWatts

I'm going to have to diagree with Scooty for once. I really don't think check/folding is an option here or that it's close. I usually like to bet/fold against loose/passives since you can get called by some random hands but I'd be afraid of him thinking 3 queens are good or something and raising me off my hand so Ithink I'd have to call if raised. I'm going to think about this a bit more I've been bet/.calling here usually but that might be a little too aggressive. Hmm unless someone can show me some math to prove otherwise I'm gonna have to bet/call here.

PokerKai

PREFLOP:  Open limping anywhere outside of UTG and UTG+1 is generally a bad idea.  RAISE.  Steal the blind, take the initiative.  Even if you fail in stealing the blinds, your likely going to get in a heads up situation with one of the blinds and at low limits, your generally going to take the pot down with a flop bet when your opponent misses.

FLOP: plays itself

TURN: plays itself

RIVER: plays itself...how is this not an obvious value bet.  we are playing against loose, unthinking players here.  A dry ace will call, a queen will call (and possibly give action).  

In the end, I'd like to think I would fold here.

Check/folding would be an AWWWWWWFUL line.

PokerKai

The only hand we are worried about being behind is spades here. Any two pair would have shown some sort of agression on the flop or on the turn. (and given the high nature of the board, very likely preflop as well)

If we are to believe that our opponent is bad enough to limp in with two small spades behind us on the button, and play it passively on every street...can we not also assume that he is bad enough to be calling with a raggedy ace the whole way as well.

moose

1. First in MP - raise PF
2. Bet river
If you check, he will check unless he has the flush because he will fear the straight and the flush. If you bet and he has a flush, it is unlikely he will raise unless his flush is very high because he will fear the higher flush.

You know the strength of your hand. You know he doesn't have quads or FH.

So how can you not make a $6 bet on a made hand with:
a) he folds to your bet
b) he calls and loses
c) he calls and chops
d) he calls and wins

Which is greater - your fear of betting and losing or finding out you didn't bet the best hand?
If you have a greater fear of betting and losing with a made hand you should find a different game.

ScoobyD

Which is greater - your fear of betting and losing or finding out you didn't bet the best hand?

I don't think it's 100% clear cut that your opponent wouldn't raise with a small flush here. I think the big issue with this hand is that how often does your hand have to be good here to take the bet/call line (since it will win you one bet when you're ahead, but cost you 2 when you're behind, possibly with the exception of someone raising trip queens). Like Kai says, unless the opponent is ultra-passive, 2 pair or a set should have made some sort of aggressive move on the flop. The flush seems to be the only real concern. Against a loose-passive I'd expect to get calls from any ace, any Q, and probably crying calls from hands like KJ, KT etc (one pair plus gutshot type hands). You even get the ultra-morons that will call you down with small pocket pairs here. With no reads, I would tend to think the chances of getting called down by a weak hand are much greater than my opponent having a better hand, hence I'll make those marginal river value bets until I'm proven wrong...

moose

He doesn't have a high flush and/or he will not raise it on the river because if he flopped a high flush draw he would also have a straight draw and an aggressive player would have shown aggression on the preflop/flop. No aggression so far - it is not likely he would raise the river. If he has a low flush then he is a bad player playing weak cards and still not likely to raise. He may also fear that our hero has gotten a boat (and certainly would have if our hero had raised preflop).

SirWatts

If he has a flush he's raising. There are very few players so passive they won't raise a flush here, even a baby one, even on a paired board. I still don't think this makes betting wrong.

Hork42

Good replies. I'm glad we have arguments for both actions (betting/checking) because I think the EV of both plays are very close.

I'm not posting results a) because they don't matter & b) because I made the hand up. Here are my thoughts.

I would not bet or check with the intention of folding to a raise. The pot is too big and my hand is too good.

Which hands can beat me? Full house/quads hands are unlikely. Most (but not all) players will raise PF with AK or QQ or AQ or AA, KK, 99. Q9 is *possible* too, but a little bit of a stretch given the call on the flop. Still, I've seen stranger hands stick around... KQ is a more likely holding.

Flush hands are very possible. Many low limit players will play any two suited and will not raise draws, simply calling until they make the flush. (Yes, they will raise a made baby flush, even the really passive players)

This being said, I think I favour checking, for the following reasons:

- A Bet won't necessarily be called.
- A Check may induce a weaker hand to bet, either a bluff, or a naked ace whose kicker doesn't matter now that the board is paired. I think this is the most likely hand to be with you until the river here in a low limit game.
- Betting will invite a raise that you don't want to call, but almost have to.

If the board was not 3-suiited OR not paired, I think it's an autobet. Because it's both, I favour a check. The fact that the cards involved make full house/quads unlikely makes it close...

Am I way off here?

hork.