From my limited experience, when people do these donk block bets to set a price, which does happen a lot in smaller stakes, and the obvious draws come in and they "bomb" it (or at least bet much more then blocked bet for) then they usually got there. It's just (especially in this hand), they wanted to chase their draw for cheap, not really run a bluff - hence all the passive play (check/call flop bet/raise, lead smallish on turn, just call raise). What other hands besides draws play like this except maybe sets who wanna boat up, and most people don't bluff with sets (especially when we could be going crazy with a flush draw ourselves). I think this hand was played perfectly until the river when we didn't really follow the logical conclusion of our opponent's range.
While watching this.... the villain could've had K10 of spades.... and because of that, I think it was possible to fold the river a percentage of the time...
I think I would hate my life and fold on that river. Having 70k left (140bb) is a LOT better than 30k (60bb), and villain sizing on the river screams strength. Villain calling the turn check-raise sure looks like a set, 2-pair, or combo draw. If the river bet was another blocking-sized bet, I could see it being 2-pair or a set, but betting POT when the spade hits sure looks like a flush. Bart mentioned KQ turning into a bluff, but I just don't see that hand calling the turn. As briefly mentioned, KTs & T8s make a lot of sense (maybe some ATs, too). I wouldn't expect A5s too often, but I do know players that play nut flush draws to the river no matter what. The 9s is a great blocker on the turn, but not as much on the river. I could see calling if this was a cash game vs certain opponents, but not this tournament situation for me.
Daniel Thomas Williams Dang it, you’re right I got the pot size wrong. Makes the river bet less polarizing, but still pretty strong considering the stack sizes.
Ya definitely should fold, I doubt I would though. I'd probably convince myself he's bluffing or it's a chop. Haven't finished video yet but definitely the hero tone sounds like he looses.
I think we are undervaluing the spades here. KTss, T8ss, and maybe even ATss could all be in his range. I would still call here but I don’t think it’s a slam dunk at all.
I enjoy your analysis Bart, but I feel you butchered this one. I feel you were way too hung up on the 9 of spades and gave too little consideration to the fact that this is a rec heavy field that can have several AsXs and a bunch of KsXs combinations. Considering the villain called a large raise and still lead out on the river, I’m not sure how this guy can’t have the best hand. You’re giving these recreational players way too much credit for being capable of things they’re not and not weighing population tendencies from this skill level (tourney players). I think your judgment is sometimes clouded and negatively influenced by your exposure to the LATB cash games. I love your content, but I honestly consider these things when listening to your analysis
i was just going to see if anyone posted this. I think his turn sizing put him in a really awkward spot on the river. I think you either call the turn if you want to play for pot control, and if you are going to raise turn I think just jamming it in is the best play honestly with the 9 of spades in your hand (the gin card here)
now if the turn came like an off suit deuce or something like that and he still held the nuts, i would not advocate jamming the turn, but the turn coming what it did, at this point if you are raising your hand isn't really disguised at all anymore, the opponent pretty much knows what you have. which is why you should just jam and don't give him correct odds to draw to a potential flush when your hand is faceup to the world
Jam flop next time, you have the nuts, when better to jam? It went raise call, obviously someone is drawing to the nut straight / flush. The board is connected, and draw heavy, jamming is the only way to get max value and chase off draws. They will also hesitate to chase draws versus you next time, cos it will always be for their stacks.
In terms of pure math based odds villain calling turn is 100% justifiable. Even If villain didnt blocker bet on turn and checked, and lets say hero bet 36k the pot would be 97.6k , Villains call woukd actually be +EV without even requiring the need to take implied odds into consideration. This is of course just the math, villain would need to be layed at least 2.67: 1 and was given 2.71: 1 on his money. This is a pure cash game perspective. Tournament translation and stack preservation plays pivotal Roles but if you ask me Id still play tournaments betting 2/3 to 3/4 pot charging draws because its all about laying your opp incorrect odds to call thats where your edges are. With respect to variance, well variance is variance doesnt matter if you manage to squeeze 100 hands of play by playing small ball bull versus betting strong on one hand. Unless you have an incredible edge on reading players and are disciplined enough to fold river if he leads out, then no point in playing small ball.
H Josh with 12 outs, V only has 24% OTT. He needs 36/(34.6+36+36)=33.7% to call assuming he checked and Hero had bet 36k like you said. Not sure where you got your numbers from.
Rich Piana you’d be surprised how many players that are weak or scared money that flat ak off oop... jamming turn really doesn’t make any sense as far as your range goes
