Top pair out of position on the river, no limit tournament

Checking seems like the reflex play, but it shows so much weakness that it’s going to put us in an awkward position of opp shoves. Yes, there are several ways we could be beat, but once we check twice the chance of his river shove being made with a weaker hand than ours increases dramatically.

Shoving seems like overkill, as we’re likely to get called only by hands that beat us.

Betting an amount that allows us to extract value but dissuades weaker hands from shoving seems like the play here. Betting 300k might get a weaker ace to call and if opp shoves, we can be pretty confident we’re beat and save the extra 250k or so.

What actually happened: Mizzi bet 250k and his opponent called and mucked when Mizzi showed AQ.

This is a tricky board. Flushdraw, fullhouse are all possible. Preflop raise was enough to remove the odds of low sets. So the 8 and 5 wasnt going to help him. Besides the 5 came on the turn. A Jack is unlikely because there are two on the board.

Because the board paired, we no longer have the bother of an opponent with two pairs. We have two pair and a good kicker. So their arent many hands likely to beat us.

The flush is unlikely. Because we have the Qh. So the only likely flushdraw to call here, is a AKh/ATh. AKh would probably have reraised preflop. ATh i dont know for sure, it could be. But he checked it down, against an aggresive player on the turn.

He never showed strength, so i dont think he has a strong ace. He has called because of position and never showed strenght, while he knows we are aggresive. His flatcalls arent building the pot.

I would bet half the pot. Valuetown, a lower bet shows weakness.

Perfect analysis by Smerdis!

There are two ways to play here IMO, check-fold to a shove or betting half the pot and calling. I can’t see how I am letting go a 1M pot just to save me from spending an extra .25M in this spot; so I agree with the staff, except I’d rather risk the extra bet then letting one go.

If the stack sizes were even I would throw a parade for the staff analysis.

However, the opponent’s stack is less than the pot size - and it poses no real threat to our tournament status either.

Given the action, I am going to check here in an attempt to induce a bluff. I WANT the opponent to shove. I’m going to eliminate him a nice percentage of the time here.

What actually happened was an atrocious tournament sin in my eyes. We let the villian stay in the tournament with a short stack when they certainly would have called the rest of their chips. NEVER do this. Eliminating players is the ONLY important thing in tourneys. He is still there and should be gone, and I’ve seen plenty of tiny stacks come back and eliminate players who should have taken them out earlier.

If you are going to bet, bet enough to cover him. Stack sizes are EVERYTHING in tourney play.

Check-fold is just way too weak. You’d be getting better than 2 to 1, and there are too many hands you beat here.

I don’t like check-call either. This seems too much like the case of the “negative freeroll”, where too often the villain will check behind with a marginal hand and bet with a winner. There’s something to the idea of checking to induce a bluff, but I don’t see this as a really good bluffing opportunity (as noted, the villain can’t deny you good odds).

I think betting here maximizes EV, with little difference between the two options. Raising all-in might be a bit better, as you’ll probably get called with largely the same hands… but I don’t have too strong a feeling either way.

I think we made a mistake by letting the villain see a free river card. If he made his flush, the chips are going in anyway, so rather than bet 300k and being virtually committed if he shoves - I’m putting him to a decision when the turn card hits purely because of his stack size.

fold immediately

online poker has a good point about the object being to eliminate players, but here, I dont think he would have called off his stack, the half pot bet enticed him; he probably would have folded to the shove.