VS Cbet, Check line OOP River range

Okay so a situation that happens always in HU, very often these days in 6MAX esp late position especially if you don't widely use a donking strategy on flop or turn oop

You flat pre OOP, Check call flop, turn gets checked and you are faced with a river decision against a regular
I was thinking about it today and would like your thoughts on how we should play that spot:

example:
+ Show Spoiler +

But many more, basically I'd take the same strategy on any standard non-paired board just adjust frequencies for possible ranges

I think the thing about this spot at small stakes, pretty much 100% at 50 and below, people cap their range on turn and always bet hands they can go for 3 streets, and good draws. So I asked around and people usually say "do whatever, lead everything check fold hands that have sdv but can't call, sometimes check raise"


Was thinking about this since its such a common spot and I'm not one of the retards that 3b 15%, I like my flatting oop.

And basically would take this strategy against unknown regulars or regulars without a glaring imbalance in their river play

LEAD
1) Hands we can value bet
2) Hands without showdown value like - usually most of them as we don't rly float oop THAT wide without sd value I assume. If we do we can just decide based on our value combos
CHECK RAISE
1) nuts like sets+ etc.
2) hands WITH showdown value that can't profitably call a bet
- the amount of combinations of bluffs depends on
A) our value combos
B) How exploitable is villain - if he really caps his OTT range and top of his range is TPNK etc. and he's incapable of calling we can bluff all hands we checked (one extreme) or if hes a russian nonbeliever spazztard that snaps cause you rep narrow range and will fold only total air we can just make sure he's max breakeven by calling too much. Or we can simply treat more hands like weaker 2P, TPGK like the nuts and raise if thats the case and well get paid
CALL
-hands that can't value bet but can call. If villain bets and/or folds to raise too much we can turn them into a bluff too if we think it will be higher ev than calling - but that goes into the glaring imbalance category

HS example:
http://weaktight.com/6424591

1) Is this a sound approach?
2) How do you usually play these spots?
3) If I play this way, how would you exploit this strategy if you know I play it? (Assuming I decide to choose correct Value:Bluff ratio when I bet and check raise and call in-exploitable %of my range if you decide to raise my lead).

--- Nuked ---

In exploitative terms I think this is maybe the most profitable spot in nlh. Once you have a feel for your average opponents ludicrously exploitable strategy on this board it's really easy to bank ev on the river.

Without a read I'd lead the river for half pot but a read for this kind of spot should be pretty much the first one you look for and then everything else becomes an option.

Just do what you think produces the most EV. It's simply a case of whether he's more likely to call with worse or to bet with worse. Consider what he calls with if you bet, consider what he value bets when checked to and consider what he bluffs with. You can sit there all day pondering theory, making rationalisations about how much you should be valuebetting based on how many bluffs you have in a certain spot. I spent way too long thinking about "GTO" play last year and it was to my detriment. Far too often I checked rivers with a strong hand because I thought my range had 0 bluffs so betting "made no sense", way too often they ended up checking back with a hand they almost certainly would've called, even if I literally had 0 bluffs in that spot. You're playing vs humans. They make mistakes and none of them have a clue what GTO play looks like anyway. I almost feel like there's a level of arrogance to the way people rationalise their plays as being "GTO". No computer can come close to what GTO strategy looks like in 100bb NLHE, what chance does any human have? Don't bother. Just do what you think is gonna show the most profit. I mean especially at fucking 16NL, don't hamstring yourself checking here because you believe you have no bluffs if you think it's more likely for him to herocall K6 or J2 or whatever as opposed to bluffing.

On January 24 2014 14:18 ToT)MidiaN( wrote: Just do what you think produces the most EV. It's simply a case of whether he's more likely to call with worse or to bet with worse. Consider what he calls with if you bet, consider what he value bets when checked to and consider what he bluffs with. You can sit there all day pondering theory, making rationalisations about how much you should be valuebetting based on how many bluffs you have in a certain spot. I spent way too long thinking about "GTO" play last year and it was to my detriment. Far too often I checked rivers with a strong hand because I thought my range had 0 bluffs so betting "made no sense", way too often they ended up checking back with a hand they almost certainly would've called, even if I literally had 0 bluffs in that spot. You're playing vs humans. They make mistakes and none of them have a clue what GTO play looks like anyway. I almost feel like there's a level of arrogance to the way people rationalise their plays as being "GTO". No computer can come close to what GTO strategy looks like in 100bb NLHE, what chance does any human have? Don't bother. Just do what you think is gonna show the most profit. I mean especially at fucking 16NL, don't hamstring yourself checking here because you believe you have no bluffs if you think it's more likely for him to herocall K6 or J2 or whatever as opposed to bluffing.

this is so unreal spot on for most players.

Although it doesn't hurt to study up on GTO and that kinda stuff but getting carried away and just straying away from just standard good solid play will handcuff any player.

On January 24 2014 14:10 Oly wrote: In exploitative terms I think this is maybe the most profitable spot in nlh. Once you have a feel for your average opponents ludicrously exploitable strategy on this board it's really easy to bank ev on the river. Without a read I'd lead the river for half pot but a read for this kind of spot should be pretty much the first one you look for and then everything else becomes an option.

you lead half pot rivers with air sets, weak 2 pairs, 1 pair that get value? seems really weird no?

On January 24 2014 14:18 ToT)MidiaN( wrote: Just do what you think produces the most EV. It's simply a case of whether he's more likely to call with worse or to bet with worse. Consider what he calls with if you bet, consider what he value bets when checked to and consider what he bluffs with. You can sit there all day pondering theory, making rationalisations about how much you should be valuebetting based on how many bluffs you have in a certain spot. I spent way too long thinking about "GTO" play last year and it was to my detriment. Far too often I checked rivers with a strong hand because I thought my range had 0 bluffs so betting "made no sense", way too often they ended up checking back with a hand they almost certainly would've called, even if I literally had 0 bluffs in that spot. You're playing vs humans. They make mistakes and none of them have a clue what GTO play looks like anyway. I almost feel like there's a level of arrogance to the way people rationalise their plays as being "GTO". No computer can come close to what GTO strategy looks like in 100bb NLHE, what chance does any human have? Don't bother. Just do what you think is gonna show the most profit. I mean especially at fucking 16NL, don't hamstring yourself checking here because you believe you have no bluffs if you think it's more likely for him to herocall K6 or J2 or whatever as opposed to bluffing.

GTO lalala i dont care what you call it? Altho perfectly inexploitable ranges can be easily calculated in isolation on the river it's still BS on the river because we never get there with optimal range in 99% of spots in the first place - it's basically considering how you play your range not just 2 cards, where
- default vs unknowns at the limit (so called "population reads"
- with every read and dynamic and image change, you skew your ranges one way or the other using Bayesian theorem
- against the people that own you/in long HU matches v good players with no leaks you can identify yet you try to play as close to that term I don't like to use.


Good time to look at your range and frequencies is when you simply cannot know what produces the most EV with 2cards, which with this line is the case without a good read most of the time imo.
=> Why I'm hesitant to check raise only made hands that can't value bet nor call a bet cause in that case if the guy calls too much he's playing correctly*


*when I check raise river theres 2 concepts going against each other
1) his range is capped, so he doesn't have much to call with, his range is weak. We don't know how much he will use the bet check bet line as bluff either.
2) you guys said yourself that you lead value hands in these spots - people expect that too, so we rep very little ourselves and often villains are aware of 1)

if you want to get default ranges for this spot when you truly have zero reads i think you at least need to break it down by board texture, and use your "population reads" or w/e you call it to get more accurate ranges (certain board textures get barrelled much more often than others)

great posts by Oly and Midian

yeah i've looked at 3 board examples and our strategy can basically be the same just with just different frequencies - I guess our line can change on boards where people X behind more made hands OTT or where they are likely to bluff rvr (e.g. an Ace or Kang falls that he can rep)
Zaza said you need 50+examples to grasp a concept so will need to focus on this spot cause in autopilot I still do stuff like randomly overbet and click buttons in this spot cause its fun