Don't embarrass the fish.

[Willem]

Villain here is my new best buddy. He is very loose (80/0) and very passive on the flop and turn (both around 0.2 AF). On the river however, he bluffs at every given opportunity, his Aggression factor there is 6. In this situation, I know with 95% certainty that if I check, he will bet-fold if he has nothing, and bet-call if he has a pair. If I bet myself, he will fold if he has nothing and call with any pair.

From a technical point of view, check-raising is better than betting. The problem I have with this line is that by doing so, I make a fool out of him. This may cause him to tighten up, play better or maybe even leave. If this were a live game, I think just betting (or check-calling) would be the most EV+ move. Not the EV for this specific hand but my EV over the whole remaining session. Online, this psychological issue is less important but I still think my check-raise here was wrong.

Anyone care to comment?

Poker Stars
Limit Holdem Ring game
Limit: $1/$2
6 players
Converter

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is SB with
3 folds, Button calls, Hero raises, BB calls, Button calls.

Flop: (6SB, 3 players)
Hero bets, BB folds, Button calls.

Turn: (4BB, 2 players)
Hero bets, Button calls.

River: (6BB, 2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets, Hero raises, Button calls.

Results:
Final pot: 10BB
Hero showed Ah Ks
Button mucked 6c 6d

[Misunderstud]

I think you're trying to be too fancy (psychologically). He's not playing against only you, and no one else at the table is going to let him off light. He'll learn eventually anyway (if he doesn't go broke first). Just keep taking his money while you can. He probably won't even notice.

In this particular instance you've improved on the river anyway, so he's more likely to think your c/r is what he would have done if he were you, not that you're some sort of poker genius who's got his number.

Most LAGs think they're great players and can't see beyond their own game - have you noticed how many of them call you a fish when your (correctly played) draws come in but still pay you off for the rest of the session? I'd save the 1-on-1 psychology for a HU table.

IMO, a far better psychological strategy is to compliment him on his play: give him an 'unlucky' next time he calls you down with 2nd pr or his transparent bluff fails.

[chillrob]

I understand what you are saying, and wouldn't want to "pull a sexy" like this too often on the same guy in a live setting, but if you really have a good read I wouldn't worry about it at all online. People come and go so quickly anyway on live tables that you don't really need to worry about it.

Hope you appreciate my advice; in return all I ask for is villian's screen name, by PM if you could, thanks.

Rob

[Piemaster]

Misunderstood nailed it really. It's true that it sometimes pays not to embarass a bad player if doing so might make him play better or leave. The problem is that if you don't do it, then somebody else will at some point or other. Or worse somebody will just come out and tell him how awful he is playing and how to get better (because people are dumb like that). I agree that in a live setting this would be different, but you have to take the money while you can get it online.

[Willem]

After this hand, I did notice a small change in his behavior (tightening up) but that only lasted 5 hands or so. In fact, this villain probably had a short term memory of a few hands.

I always check-called the river OOP heads-up against him and he bluffed every time, probably got over 10BB worth of bluffs this way. In position, he was even easier. He donk-bets if he has nothing and checks when he does have something. I also saved several bets by checking behind mediocre hands on the river.

I didn't say anything to him. I can compliment him on occasion but most people see right through that. It was also remarkable that nobody else made any adjustments when they were in a hand with him.

[toronexti]

Uh, it wouldn't matter live since he'd call, you show your hand and he mucks - no one would know what he had.