Calling on the River

[Faustus Fotherby]

I've been watching a RIDICULOUS amount of 'The Big Game' online lately, mostly because 6-max cash game is my absolute favourite NLHE format and I'm hoping to learn a thing or two. I know that a lot of the play on there is quite loose and wouldn't be recommended for the stakes I play at and often their play is based on their knowledge of each other etc. but it's really interesting to see what they do in certain situations that I know I've faced, e.g. it's been really useful for pointing out one scenario in particular that often elude me, that being where I think I'm betting for value but the reality is I will only ever be called by a hand that beats me.

Anyway one big thing they have a habit of doing, (and I know that often only hands that reach showdown will make the final program edit), is calling on the river when they're genuinely unsure as to whether they're winning or not. Their hand is good and they might be beat but might not so they pay off thin river value bets because they're getting a good price and don't have to be right in that situation often to still be EV+.

I'm wondering if this is something I should do more often if I'm getting a good value on the river. I remember reading some basic poker tips that say you shouldn't pay people off to see the winning hand "just to keep them honest" etc. But can I justify doing this here, even at micro stakes, when there's a chance I could have the best hand? Sometimes it's blindingly obvious when you've been smacked on the river but I mean in situations where the river might not have changed much but they're still betting and you can't necessarily see how you're behind.

Writing this out now has helped me illustrate the point to myself and has made me feel like calling on the river in the situation illustrated above is a fine play, but I'd like to hear what everyone else has to say too

[RyckyRych]

I know I have been becoming more aware of my hand's showdown value, but I'm playing SNG/MTT types. I'll often try to control the pot by checking the turn, which sometimes opens up the chance to simply call a river bet, which is often a bluff.

Not sure how well that fares in 6-max NL. I'll let a cash-game player come in.

[Tim]

Originally Posted by Faustus Fotherby

...it's been really useful for pointing out one scenario in particular that often elude me, that being where I think I'm betting for value but the reality is I will only ever be called by a hand that beats me.

Do you have any examples? Because if you're talking about micro-stakes then you should definitely be going for value.... maximum value... taking them to value town.

Originally Posted by Faustus Fotherby

I'm wondering if this is something I should do more often if I'm getting a good value on the river. I remember reading some basic poker tips that say you shouldn't pay people off to see the winning hand "just to keep them honest" etc. But can I justify doing this here, even at micro stakes, when there's a chance I could have the best hand? Sometimes it's blindingly obvious when you've been smacked on the river but I mean in situations where the river might not have changed much but they're still betting and you can't necessarily see how you're behind.

There's a big difference between paying for information or "to keep them honest" and calling when you think you have a reasonable chance of winning. I think you answered your own question on this one.

[Faustus Fotherby]

Yeh, it's really weird that I should post this question here yesterday because I actually just got to the chapter on this in the book I'm reading yesterday - ALL IS GOOD!