MHO, One of the most profitable plays in limit hold'em... (long)
J10Suited
position player raised pre-flop, and has been leading the flow and the
put the turn. Here comes the river.... well thats interesting, not a
death card but not a complete brick. Lets see the action.. check,
check, check, and then the last position player also checks! Thats
the play in all its glory.
Why is this play so profitable? Because it forces everyone in turn to
expose their hands at the showdown. End the speculation, lets see the
hands! If your head has been in the game, this is a golden
oppurtunity to validate your reads with hard information. I call this
a 'forced showdown', since the rules state that when no one bets the
river, the players are to show their hands in order, starting with the
earliest position player. You get to see a lot of hands, and can
reconstruct the play of the hands to get a good read.
This play is the one that exposes weak players the fastest when you
play in a new environment. Its great when you waiting to post behind
the button, watching, and a forced showdown happens. This is a burst
of free information. Conversely, I curse inside when the late
position player, instead of checking, does what i call an 'early
show', one of the least profitable plays in poker. More on that
below.
Sometimes when this 'forced showdown' happens, and the first player
shows something like a small paired card, the players behind him will
muck if they can't beat it. This still helpful, you can figure the
mucker for a draw or 2 overcards, and still refine your profile.
More often,the last position player bets the river, the others fold,
or call and then fold when the late position shows. You don't know
for sure if the folder played a 10-4 all the way, or was drawing
legitimately and caught a pair on the end, or whatever, because he
mucks (though anyone can ask to see the mucked hands, everyone knows
that is bad form, i stance i fully agree with unless you suspect
collusion). But if the last position player also checks it at the
end, players are forced to show their hands down in order. This is a
fantastic datapoint for sharpening your reads on the players in the
hand. If you are on top of things, you should be able to see your
opponents turn over hands you thought they would have.
A lot of times, I see the river go check, check, check, and the last
position player thinks, and then instead of also checking, he turns
over his hand, and hopes it held up. If its good, the others will
just fold out, and in this case i think the 'bad form' for seeing
losers' hands applies. This is an 'early show' in my opinion, and I
also think its a mistake. He should check and not show immediately,
and gather the information if not the bets on the river.
Also, for some reason I've noticed that in these forced showdowns,
people seem more likey to show what they were playing even if they
cant beat the first hand, either because they fear they are
overlooking a winner, or for 'posterity', i.e., look at my monster
draw that i missed. This hand will then get a 'post-mortem' from the
players in and out of the hand, since everyone showed and no one has
to speculate. Lots of justification, and whining stuff like 'I knew
your kicker was bigger, thats why i just called' ' (defensively) I
was afraid he had aces!' 'if you 3-bet before the flop, he's out with
just AJ! That was a mistake!, on and on and on. But listen to what
people are saying, it too is a strong datapoint on their
personalities, and how they view other players' play.
Again, the greatest thing about this play is that you don't even need
to be in the hand, just your head in the game.
If you are this last position player and decide not to bet the river,
just check politely along and wait. No need to expose first, you can
take advantage of the rules of the game.
Is it worth it to purposefully check the river if you are the last
postion player and feel your hand is best, just to get the info?
Well, no, not even close IMHO since its a big betting round. But when
you have that questionable kicker, or suspect the river gave someone
that second pair, and you are not going to bet, then check it and dont
do an 'early show'. The information you get from the forced showdown
might soothe your having missed the value bet you should have made on
the river :-)
If you've made it down this far, thanks for reading. If I could have
somehow edited this post with some ultra-quick, MTV style camera
cutting to appeal to those with a more limited attention span, I would
have, but I normally just lurk, not write.
J10Suited
Terrence Chan
wrote:
>..and you dont even need to be in the hand. Multiplayer pot. The last
>position player raised pre-flop, and has been leading the flow and the
>put the turn. Here comes the river.... well thats interesting, not a
>death card but not a complete brick. Lets see the action.. check,
>check, check, and then the last position player also checks! Thats
>the play in all its glory.
>
>Why is this play so profitable? Because it forces everyone in turn to
>expose their hands at the showdown.
Not necessarily; some rooms have a "last aggressor shows first" rule.
This rule is a massive pain in the ass though, so I prefer the
positional showing way.
End the speculation, lets see the
>hands! If your head has been in the game, this is a golden
>oppurtunity to validate your reads with hard information. I call this
>a 'forced showdown', since the rules state that when no one bets the
>river, the players are to show their hands in order, starting with the
>earliest position player. You get to see a lot of hands, and can
>reconstruct the play of the hands to get a good read.
>
>This play is the one that exposes weak players the fastest when you
>play in a new environment. Its great when you waiting to post behind
>the button, watching, and a forced showdown happens. This is a burst
>of free information.
Expose the weak players? Why on earth would you want to do that? If
I bet on the turn for value against a calling station with something
like second pair/good kicker, then check on the river, I'm showing it.
Immediately. I'm not going to embarrass the fish by indignantly
refusing to show my hand and making him show the bottom pair/no
kicker/no draw he called me all the way with.
If I'm against a tough player, OTOH, I want to see how he'll play, so
I'm much more likely to take advantage of this particular rule.
Conversely, I curse inside when the late
>position player, instead of checking, does what i call an 'early
>show', one of the least profitable plays in poker. More on that
>below.
>
>Sometimes when this 'forced showdown' happens, and the first player
>shows something like a small paired card, the players behind him will
>muck if they can't beat it. This still helpful, you can figure the
>mucker for a draw or 2 overcards, and still refine your profile.
>
>
>More often,the last position player bets the river, the others fold,
>or call and then fold when the late position shows. You don't know
>for sure if the folder played a 10-4 all the way, or was drawing
>legitimately and caught a pair on the end, or whatever, because he
>mucks (though anyone can ask to see the mucked hands, everyone knows
>that is bad form, i stance i fully agree with unless you suspect
>collusion).
You should be able to figure out if someone plays a T4 without needing
to see the damn hand. Sheesh. A player who plays T4 is liable to
play anything, and if it takes you more than 10 minutes to figure this
out, you're not paying much attention.
But if the last position player also checks it at the
>end, players are forced to show their hands down in order. This is a
>fantastic datapoint for sharpening your reads on the players in the
>hand. If you are on top of things, you should be able to see your
>opponents turn over hands you thought they would have.
>
>
>A lot of times, I see the river go check, check, check, and the last
>position player thinks, and then instead of also checking, he turns
>over his hand, and hopes it held up. If its good, the others will
>just fold out, and in this case i think the 'bad form' for seeing
>losers' hands applies. This is an 'early show' in my opinion, and I
>also think its a mistake. He should check and not show immediately,
>and gather the information if not the bets on the river.
Presumably, if the last player is thinking after three players have
checked, he has something of value. If I have something of value and
there has been a bet on the previous street, I will (usually) show my
hand for reasons stated above.
>
>Also, for some reason I've noticed that in these forced showdowns,
>people seem more likey to show what they were playing even if they
>cant beat the first hand, either because they fear they are
>overlooking a winner, or for 'posterity', i.e., look at my monster
>draw that i missed. This hand will then get a 'post-mortem' from the
>players in and out of the hand, since everyone showed and no one has
>to speculate. Lots of justification, and whining stuff like 'I knew
>your kicker was bigger, thats why i just called' ' (defensively) I
>was afraid he had aces!' 'if you 3-bet before the flop, he's out with
>just AJ! That was a mistake!, on and on and on. But listen to what
>people are saying, it too is a strong datapoint on their
>personalities, and how they view other players' play.
Sure.
>
>Again, the greatest thing about this play is that you don't even need
>to be in the hand, just your head in the game.
>
>If you are this last position player and decide not to bet the river,
>just check politely along and wait. No need to expose first, you can
>take advantage of the rules of the game.
You can. The question is whether or not you ought to. I think
letting a fish keep his dignity is worth more than the slight
advantage gained by the way he plays. I know how the fish plays.
Badly.
Against a tightish or tougher opponent, I will gladly take advantage
of the rule. Heck, he might muck a king-high rather than show and let
my jack-high win. I've seen that.
>
>Is it worth it to purposefully check the river if you are the last
>postion player and feel your hand is best, just to get the info?
>Well, no, not even close IMHO since its a big betting round. But when
>you have that questionable kicker, or suspect the river gave someone
>that second pair, and you are not going to bet, then check it and dont
>do an 'early show'. The information you get from the forced showdown
>might soothe your having missed the value bet you should have made on
>the river :-)
One more problem: If you routinely bet thin on the turn and check
down on the river (not a bad play), and force your opponent to show
first, you'll get paid off a lot less on the turn. I guess this means
you can semibluff more in last position on the turn, but...
>If you've made it down this far, thanks for reading. If I could have
>somehow edited this post with some ultra-quick, MTV style camera
>cutting to appeal to those with a more limited attention span, I would
>have, but I normally just lurk, not write.
Good post. I disagree with you on this matter, but it's something
that's not discussed very often, and you made your point well.
--
"You are incorrect. You meant what I wrote, not what you wrote."
-David Sklansky on rec.gambling.poker, 29-June-01
Terrence Chan
<terren...@telus.net> wrote:
>Expose the weak players? Why on earth would you want to do that? If
>I bet on the turn for value against a calling station with something
>like second pair/good kicker, then check on the river, I'm showing it.
>Immediately. I'm not going to embarrass the fish by indignantly
>refusing to show my hand and making him show the bottom pair/no
>kicker/no draw he called me all the way with.
>
>If I'm against a tough player, OTOH, I want to see how he'll play, so
>I'm much more likely to take advantage of this particular rule.
For the sake of completeness, here's an example. I open-raise late
with A8. All fold to the big blind, who is an absolute fish; chases
like a puppy in rush hour traffic. The flop is J-8-6. He checks and
calls. I know my hand is currently best. The turn is a 7. He checks
and calls. I'm still good. Well fuck me, the river is a 9. I'm
probably not betting this hand for value even against the worst of
calling stations. So, I have two options:
1. Sit there and make him show his 63s first. Everyone snickers,
some old fart whispers in another old fart's ears, the dealer
stammers, "uhh, one pair of sixes". I show my hand and take the
money.
2. Show the eights. There's a fairly good chance they're still good
here. If they are, I allow the fish to fold with dignity. He can
pretend he was on a flush draw, or whatever.
Which do you think is more +EV in the long run?
kma
In my local cardroom (only 400km away!) if everyone checks the river then
whoever wants to makes the first showdown and if someone can beat that they
showdown etc. Thats in a 4-8 game, I'm not sure if they still do that at
the higher limits.
j10s...@hotmail.com (J10Suited) wrote:
>...and you dont even need to be in the hand. Multiplayer pot. The last
>position player raised pre-flop, and has been leading the flow and the
>put the turn. Here comes the river.... well thats interesting, not a
[snip]
J10Suited
Terrence, I don't think we disagree. I could swear I wrote an
'Exceptions' part in my original post, right before the end, and its
main point was going to be don't embarass very weak players, as
countless people have written about(correctly). But I don't see it so
you are correct for bringing this up, and in fact my viewpoint would
be deadly without this addendum. I agree with you completely on this
matter.
In fact one of the downsides of the 'forced showdown' vs fish is that
sometimes you are not that last position player, its someone with a
big ego, and he likes to embarass people to show off. They want
revenge vs the fish because of the lucky draw out earlier. I too
cringe when a fish is forced to show his gills...
Also, forced showdowns really shine in multiplayer pots, as my
original description had in there, but probably under emphasized. in
fact i think the play is meant for only multiplayer. Heads up,
especially if it gets heads up by the turn, I will ususally turn it
over early so as to not start a vendetta. It just seems respectful to
my opponent to show when heads up if it has a good chance its good.
Call me old school. Multiplayer, i don't think its unreasonable to
force a showdown, though, since we've all had someone spike 2 pair and
was lurking to check raise on the river.
About 'ought to already know he's a fish that plays 10-4 off', players
that have such a reliable profile (i.e. incurable maniac), its true,
you probably don't need more additional data points to verify their
behavior. You've seen enough lunacy from them to never have to change
your opinion, even if they happen to show something good this time.
Its the loose-aggressive - tricky type that this helps me with.
In most cases if i know that 10-4 off is in my opponent's possible
holdings, i will value bet middle pair / ace kicker regardless. Even
in your example, i think if the fish hits a straight, he will bet into
you, its what he's been waiting for. Some fish even know that with
that kind of board, you will check it behind them if you fear the
straight, so they bet their miracle. If he checks to me, ill strongly
consider betting for value, and if not i WILL early show, you are
right, this falls under heads-up courtesy. But multiplayer, it is
completely reasonable to check it down on that board. in fact expect
to be mucking way before the showdown, that board is a school of
fishs' wet dream.
Also, when im the new guy and have no profiles on any of the players,
its very valuable, even to see the fish exposed, since you dont know
them at all. I wanted to emphasize that this play is one of the most
informtion rich avaiable, and that applies best obviously to those you
don't have a solid read on. Recently, I moved to a new area and find
I have to start again from scratch on the profiles. Its in this
mental state that when i saw this play happen a few times, and each
time it was like a burst of information, nice and juicy.
Additionally, you don't see a lot of forced showdowns vs fish, because
people tend to bet the river for value vs them, and they either fold
outright, or call, wait to see the winner, and fold, no showdown.
Asking to 'see that hand' of the fish in this spot is grounds for an
immediate shooting in the parking lot for the requestor.
I've played in a lot of places out west, and I believe either the
house rule was that the players must show in order in a forced
showdown, or the players themselves just naturally did it this way.
Here are the places i've played that I think have this rule, or at
least seen it done this way: Hollywood Park, Commerce Casino, The
Bike, Hawaiian Gardens, Mirage, Lucky Chances, Cainso San Pablo, Oaks,
Bay 101 (not sure), Barona, San Manuel. Actually Im not sure about
the NoCal ones yet for sure, this is the new environment im in. but i
have seen forced showdowns in each of these clubs whether it is the
house rule or not. Mirage I'm sure someone knows the rule verbatim
for this matter, and i will defer to his input.
I'm surprised and interested to read about the 'previous aggressor
shows first' rule, what places have this rule?
J10Suited
> In my local cardroom (only 400km away!) if everyone checks the river then
> whoever wants to makes the first showdown and if someone can beat that they
> showdown etc. Thats in a 4-8 game, I'm not sure if they still do that at
> the higher limits.
>
I can't help but imagine that absolute chaos breaks out the majority
of the time there is no bet on the river in your cardroom. What
happens when no one wants to be first? Some determining rule MUST be
in place, ask your floorperson.
KevinU...@earthlink.net
Terrnece, you are getting far too good at this game.
You are not coming to BARGE, are you?
-Kevin Un
Lenny
can play with any regularity, so I assume you already know that they
do the showdown this way, in fact, if the river is checked out it's
not possible to 'early show' and since the amount of info you're
likely to have on your opponents is limited (you've probably only
played with them a couple times and you have no visual clues) the info
you get from them showing in early position is very valuable. I also
like it because when I want to 'advertise' a bluff I can do so without
looking suspicious.
Terrence Chan
><snip everything>
>
>Terrnece, you are getting far too good at this game.
I think I have to try to be more results-oriented though. I don't see
how else I'm going to be able to beat those tough LA games.
>
>You are not coming to BARGE, are you?
Afraid not. Probably not next year, either. Exams are always the
first and second week of August at my school. But I plan to be all
over BARGE '03. :)