Against the flow

	The key to an unorthodox river bet is to make an opponent think he can only call with something very strong or very weak

Poker rewards the industrious and punishes the complacent. If you think you have mastered poker theor y and can just play off your accumulated expertise without keeping your eyes and ears open, you’re going to get punished. River betting is a good example. Solid poker players understand that when you bet the river you must either be betting for value or bluffing – you can’t possibly do both. Unless one or the other is clearly called for you should just check. But nothing in poker is true 100% of the time. Sometimes you should put in an unorthodox bet on the river without knowing whether you’re bluffing or value-betting.

A CRASH COURSE IN RIVER-BET THEORY

To see why, we need to go back and look at the theoretical basis for the rule we’re about to break. Remember that the decision to bet the river or not rests on your return on the bet, not on the existing pot. There are four possible outcomes resulting from a river bet (ignoring raises). If your opponent calls with a worse hand you win the price of your bet, but not the pot (that was yours if you just checked). If your foe calls with a better hand, you lose the price of your bet but not the pot (you couldn’t have won it). If your opponent folds a better hand you win the price of the pot (as you wouldn’t have won it if you’d checked). If your opponent folds a worse hand your bet wins nothing (you get the pot but that was yours anyway).

With this in mind let’s look at a specific scenario. The board reads a raggedy 2-6-8-10-K rainbow and you have Queens and suspect you are ahead. Should you value- bet? Before you do so, consider your opponent’s calling range. This is absolutely critical because it is only worthwhile value-betting if your opponent is reasonably likely to call. Thinking about your opponent’s style and your own table image, you reckon he’ll call with A-8 or better here. If so you should check your Queens. For your value-bet to make money, you need your opponent to call with a worse hand more often than he calls with a better hand. When you bet here and your opponent calls, you’ll find you’re beaten more often than not so you’ll lose money in the long term. In fact a bit of fiddling about with odds software PokerStove reveals that you need K-7 or better to value-bet here.

Suppose instead you hold 2-3. In hold’em, bottom pair will usually be behind on the river so you may be tempted to bluff. But in poker some hands are too good to bluff. Being too good to bluff sounds absurd – if the bluff works, it doesn’t matter what you have in the hole, right? But remember, you’re trying to decide between bluffing and checking here. If your hole cards are good enough to take down the pot even a small amount of the time, that may give you a better return than a bluff. Betting the pot with bottom pair here gives you a poorer return than a check. For a pot-sized bluff to be better than a check you would need A-5 or worse.

One consequence of all this is that there is always a check zone sandwiched between the range of hands that should be value-betting and those that should be bluffing. At the top end of this zone your hand is probably a winner but not good enough to bet for value. At the bottom end your hand is probably a loser but not bad enough to bluff. This is good solid river theory.

BREAKING THE LAW

However, standard poker theory has a habit of failing, as if you follow it you are predictable and exploitable. If, on the other hand, you selectively ignore correct theory you will trip your opponent up. Say your opponent thinks you’re following standard theory when you bet the river. Now he has to decide between two quite different calling ranges. If you are bluffing he can call with almost anything, since in order to bluff you must have a really bad hand. But if you are betting for value you must be quite strong. Provided he believes you are a solid player with a good understanding of poker strategy, you can exploit this assumption by suspending your use of river theory.

Consider a board that reads 8-8-9-9-2 rainbow and you hold 2-2. You and your opponent are both in the blinds and the pot was checked to the river. On the face of it, betting is the fool’s choice since a single 8 or 9 has you crushed and nothing else will call anyway. But remember that your opponent thinks you are playing the river by the book. As such, a big pot bet means you are either very strong or very weak. So, by betting you either have the 9 or are representing it. If you are betting for value, he knows he needs a 9 to call, for a near certain split pot, but otherwise should fold. If you are bluffing, however, you are going to have some serious trash. With that board he figures an Ace is way too strong for you to bluff and probably a King too. Holding a Queen he is definitely a winner… if you are bluffing. All he has to do is to work out which.

By now there is no way out for your opponent. Let’s look at why. Holding twos full of nines on this board you are in the top 17% of hands. If an opponent decides you want a call here and folds anything apart from a 9, he will be calling 2% of the time (that’s how often he holds a 9) and folding a further 15% of the time when he holds a winner. That’s a lot of money made for you. What if he decides it’s a bluff? With a Queen he is in the top 53% of hands. He’s a small dog to a random hand, but he thinks if you’re bluffing you must be especially weak. If he calls with a Queen or

better, then against your twos he will show a winner 17% of the time and a loser 36% of the time. That’s also a load of money made for you. In practice he will call sometimes and fold sometimes depending on whether he thinks you are bluffing. But looking for a tell is a hopeless endeavour since you genuinely don’t know whether you are bluffing or value-betting! In the long run your play must make you money.

How can this be? It’s because your opponent has assumed you are following river theory and polarised his ideas of what you have, when in fact you are not following that theory at all. The key to an unorthodox river bet is to make an opponent polarise his views on what he needs to call with – to make him think he either has to be very strong or tempt him to hero-call with something very weak. A pot-sized bet on a scary board is the best way to induce this kind of thinking.

AIM CAREFULLY

You also need to pick your opponent wisely. First you have to be sure he understands conventional river play and believes you do too. Second you want a certain amount of vanity. You want an opponent who will feel chuffed to win with a bad hand because he understood the situation, and one who would be embarrassed to show a losing strong hand if it implied he didn’t.

Your manner of betting helps too. Let’s look at another common situation that confuses some people and inspires others to get fancy – and is therefore perfect for a bit of unorthodox betting. The board brings a four-flush on the river, and a four-straight to boot: K?-3?-9?-10?-J?. Having the deuce flush, you instantly lead out for a pot bet. This is on the face of it the most moronic move known to poker. However, your insta-bet strongly suggests a bluff simply piggybacking the strength of the board. Or it could be a cunning attempt to pass off the nuts as a bluff. It certainly doesn’t look like a bad flush. So once again you’ll polarise your foe’s behaviour. Say he decides he needs a 7? or better to call with if you’re value-betting, but any pair if you’re bluffing. I’ll spare you the maths this time but you actually break even when he holds a flush (he calls as many winners as he folds), but you win on the occasions he calls with various pairs looking for a bluff. Long live the unorthodox river bet!