$2 NL HE 6-max: Villain bet on river, call?

[miklcct]

Game

Hold'em

Game Format

No Limit

Stakes

$.01/$.02

Table Format

6-max (6 seats)

Currency

$

pokerstars, Hold'em No Limit - $0.01/$0.02 - 6 players
Replay this hand on CardsChat

UTG: $1.09 (55 bb)
MP: $2.54 (127 bb)
CO: $2.00 (100 bb)
BU: $8.27 (414 bb)
SB: $2.74 (137 bb)
BB (Hero): $2.50 (125 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.03) Hero is BB with 9♦ 9♣
UTG raises to $0.07, 4 players fold, Hero calls $0.05

Flop: ($0.15) T♦ 5♣ T♥ (2 players)
Hero bets $0.07, UTG calls $0.07

Turn: ($0.29) 4♣ (2 players)
Hero bets $0.14, UTG calls $0.14

River: ($0.57) 4♦ (2 players)
Hero checks, UTG bets $0.27

Should I call? Is UTG likely to have a 4?

 

[puzzlefish]

Personally I would be more worried that they were slow playing a Tx or just a higher pocket pair than yours. But you checked on the river, which can induce your opponents to bluff. The question is, what would your opponent be coming along with from the flop that he would now be bluffing with?

I think you are probably up against JJ, QQ who has allowed you to bet for them from the flop. Rarely AQ, AK might try this line on the river. I think this is probably a fold situation.

 

[monkeytilter]

You have done nothing to define Villain's range so this is just a guessing game now, villain can have some A4, Tx, pairs 66..AA the majority of which beats you (not to mention some of the random 2NL misplays which are winning too). there may be some Ax hands that have floated and now bluff as you have checked (but this will be very rare!).

I think fold is best option and don't put bets in like this on flop and turn in future when you don't know if you are betting for value or bluffing (similar pattern to a previous post?) THINK: what hands are calling that am I beating (value), what hands that are better than mine (bluff), until you start doing this you are just clicking buttons.

On the flop here the default action would have been to check, because: we are out of position and the caller, there are few hands calling that we get value from and we are unlikely to make any better hands fold.

We then call a bet on the flop as villain should be c-betting 100% here, then calling bets on turn and river depending on sizing and any villain reads, though we are not compelled to call down.

 

[chmkbg]

It has many aspects. If it were me, I would call.

 

[miklcct]

We then call a bet on the flop as villain should be c-betting 100% here, then calling bets on turn and river depending on sizing and any villain reads, though we are not compelled to call down.

It was me making the aggressive action pre-flop, why should villain c-bet if I checked? Isn't a c-bet supposed to be done by the aggressor?

 

[monkeytilter]

It was me making the aggressive action pre-flop, why should villain c-bet if I checked? Isn't a c-bet supposed to be done by the aggressor?

Villain (UTG) was the preflop aggressor (they raised), they would normally continue (hence c-bet)this aggression on the flop, especially on a flop like this.

 

[miklcct]

Villain (UTG) was the preflop aggressor (they raised), they would normally continue (hence c-bet)this aggression on the flop, especially on a flop like this.

That means I shouldn't bet aggressively, and wait to see if UTG make a c-bet first, is that right?

 

[monkeytilter]

That means I shouldn't bet aggressively, and wait to see if UTG make a c-bet first, is that right?

That's right.
There are exceptions to everything in poker but generally you check to the preflop aggressor when seeing a flop.