Weak-hand statement combined with a double-check of cards before raise
A hand history from a $2-3 NLHE game
The following is a hand history sent to me by a poker player named Trent. It includes:
A weak-hand statement from a bettor on the river
A double check of cards before a raise
Thoughts about small bet sizings
I’ll include a couple comments in there in [square brackets]
From Trent:
Playing 2-3 at [redacted].
8 handed. It folds around to HJ who limps 65% of the time, opens for $10 15% of the time, and opens for $20 15% of the time. If someone opens in front of him he does occasionally fold if the open was for more than $10. $10 or less and he calls. I never figured out the 5% of hands he folded preflop LOL.
HJ limps.
I'm CO and open for $20 with Kd Jd. It folds around to HJ who calls. Because he limped then flatted I don't put him on any sort of suited ace or ace at all really. I think he probably opens any ace rag rather than limps. I also don't put him on any pocket pair for the same reason.
Flop is 3d 2d 2h. He checks. I bet $40 into a pot of $48. Well, as I said this guy chases everything so he called.
Turn is 6d. He checks. I bet $40 again. Now I'm trying to set up for value. The 3rd diamond might scare him so I just bet the same. I'm not too worried about another diamond as I think he opens preflop with any ace so I don't put him on Ad. I probably could have bet more here.
River is 4d. Not really the card I wanted to see unless it gives him the straight. Afraid the 4th diamond will freeze the action. He checks. I bet only $60 into $208 because while he chases everything we've seen the river card. He's not stupid, he's just a chaser. He's also not a calling station on the river.
He check raises to $160.
[From Zach: I do like the small bets in spots like this where you think your opponent is likely to be quite weak and may call. The tough thing about that is that it can put you in tough spots like this where you have to consider if they’re bluff-raising you based on perceiving your small bet as representing weakness. Not saying that makes the small bet bad, just an observation.]
As I said, I can't put him on a nut flush nor a full house. But what the hell is he check raising with? Maybe I was wrong? Maybe he has a queen or jack of diamonds.
I think for a while. Time to use my Elwood "Verbal Poker Tells" skills. I say, “Do you really have the 5 of diamonds. I sure hope you do. That would be cool.” Referring to the high hand jackpot.
He considers for a second then responds, "I'm not sure I like your speech." He seems comfortable.
What would Zach say about this response? I deduced it as "Oh no, you're giving a speech, you must be strong, I don't like that at all. Please don't call me." In other words an indirect weak-hand tell, which means he’s strong. Can I really fold the second-nut flush to HIM?
It's only $100 more for a pot (if I call) of $588. I can't possibly lay this down.
What if he has the Qd? I just don't think he raises the 3rd flush on a paired board.
I decide I have to go with my tell. Pot odds be damned.
I fold showing the Kd. He turns over 5d 3h for the straight flush and the high hand jackpot. The table can't believe I laid the king down for $100. I was also surprised, considering I thought the Ad was so unlikely. But it just seemed so textbook (where the textbook in this case is Verbal Poker Tells!).
[From Zach: I talked about this in a previous post (and in my video series): I think it’s optimal to ask about a medium-strength hand; in this case, I’d probably ask about the Jack of diamonds. Reason being: players are much more likely to remove a weaker hand from their range, whereas the stronger the hand you ask about, the more it will cause them to consider it. In this case Trent asked about the strongest hand possible. It worked out, but I think it usually won’t. But the fact that it still did is testament to the fact that often players with the nuts often just enjoy talking. Another interesting thing: verbal tells like this are so unknown in mainstream that there’s a good chance he and other players witnessing wouldn’t even know what Trent based his fold on. The relative obscurity of verbal tells is the same reason they’re so valuable.]
Anyway, that's my success story. You saved me $100! And half the table thinks I'm a genius (and the other half thinks I'm an idiot given the pot odds).
Epilogue: After the hand he says "I was going to fold. I knew I had the straight but I can't call with those 4 diamonds. But I checked my cards and saw that the 5 was a diamond."
Then I remembered because I was paying attention, as your Reading Poker Tells book commands. After I bet the river he thought for about 3 seconds. He then picked up his cards (picked up, didn't peel the corner). He was obviously mucking or calling (but not raising). He looked at the cards. Then he put them back down. Thought for about 10 seconds then announced "160".
How did I miss that physical tell? Maybe my subconscious caught it. Clearly something registered as after he told me that I remembered it all happening. Disappointed I didn't consciously consider that tell! I think the raise short circuited my processing of him not folding or calling and instead setting the cards back down so I analyzed the raise rather than the action that preceded it. Another lesson learned.
[From Zach: this is referencing the general pattern that players who look at their hole cards and then make a significant bet or raise are quite unlikely to be bluffing. Reason being that bluffers have an incentive to not want to check their cards as they don’t want to accidentally communicate uncertainty/weakness. Main caveat here is that some players often look at their cards and are balanced; but most people are imbalanced in this way.]
Anyway, thank you for the money saved on this hand and countless others!
[Thanks Trent! Great write-up!]