As I’m sure you are well aware, a hero call is a call, generally made on the river, in which a player has a very marginal hand but one that’s narrowly better than the player making the bet. The ‘hero’ phrase is used to describe the guts (or stupidity) of a call made where generally all the caller can beat is a bluff. The term has been popularised in recent years after players such as Kenny ‘Sick-call Kenny’ Tran have shown what is possible when you have the courage to trust your reads implicitly.
However, while successful hero calls do make you feel like Superman, in general they are a symptom of Fancy Play Syndrome and require an accuracy of decision that is incredibly tough to deliver with any consistency. In the long run, you will most likely lose a LOT of money if you make hero calls a regular part of your game.
The problem is that hero calls are, like true acts of heroism, exceptionally tough to pull off. Without having a really good grounding in some of the finer technical aspects on no-limit hold’ em, attempts at heroism will generally only hurt you and your hourly rate. Nevertheless, there are some spots in which a hero call might be the most +EV line. But there are a wide variety of factors to be considered and weighed up before you proceed.
Hero call or zero call?
Obviously, before even contemplating such a high variance call, you need a tonne of information about your opponent. You need to have a good grasp of their hand ranges and know they are capable of bluffing in this spot – and, perhaps more importantly, that they think you are capable of folding.
You also need to be confident that other, less risky lines will not yield a better result. This is the main reason hero calls are such a dirty example of fancy play syndrome – there is almost always a much more +EV line to exploit. Usually, when you have little to no hand, but fancy your opponent to be weak, there are all sorts of lines you could take to win the pot. The hallmark of a true hero call is to check-call out of position, but this is perhaps the weakest and most passive of your options.
Any line that involves a lot of calling or check-calling should generally be seen as a mistake.
Of course, no angle should ever be dismissed entirely. In certain situations and against certain opponents allowing someone to bluff into your marginal holding is the best way to get paid. But in most circumstances, so-called ‘hero calls’ are just an excuse for bad play.
'Sick call' Kenny Tran in action
Considering a hero call
Okay, let’s get straight to the crux of the matter: making successful hero calls is not easy. You must examine a whole range of factors and how they interact before making your decision. Let’s look at one example. You are 250 big blinds deep at the start of the hand and you have 7s-7d. The button (who has you covered) opens and you call. The flop comes 8h-6h-2h. You check, he bets, you call. The turn is the 5s. You check, he bets, you call. The river is the Kh. You check, your opponent bets and the decision whether or not to make the call is on you. So what factors should be incorporated into your thinking?
1. Why did you play the hand so passively?
Reasons to play a hand this passively include the fact that your opponent is a maniac bluffer or exceptionally aggressive and will routinely semi-bluff raise and pure bluff raise on any street. When you are playing deep-stacked against this sort of opponent you are forced to play a hand more passively, as the risks involved in playing a big pot are far higher.
2. Hand reading
In most cases this is the most important factor to consider. What does your hand look like in the villain’s eyes? What level is the villain thinking at? Will he understand that the bulk of your range is a weak one-pair type hand? What is the villain trying to tell you? Does it add up?
3. History
Does the villain have some crazy history with you? Did you just make a huge call on him in the last hour? Are you seen as crazy/solid/weak? These are important considerations.
4. Image
Does your opponent see himself as having a clean image? Is he good enough to attempt to abuse this? Is he just another idiot without a care in the world?
These are the basic considerations to make in general play. When making a big hero call you should also factor in madness, timing and bet sizing. Is the guy a nut job? This should have a significant bearing on whether or not you make that hero call. Did he bet super-fast without thinking on the biggest river scare card in the history of poker? Did he pause on the flop for a long time, probably thinking about how to extract the most money (with air we know we have to bluff, with monsters we need to pause and think)? Does his bet look like it wants a call? Does his betting make sense? Was he betting to price out a draw? Is he trying to make his river bet look like he’s milking you? Balance all the information you have at your disposal and call or fold accordingly.
Relative strength
When you are contemplating a big river call with a very marginal holding you have to understand that on some boards relative hand strength is incredibly important. Say you and I play a pot. We clash for one moment in time in a six-max cash game on PKR. In a raised pot the two of us see a flop. Just one single pot. The flop comes 3s-5s-7s. I check and you bet. I call. The turn comes the 9h and we both check. The river is the Ks, putting four to a flush on the board. I bet huge and you raise all-in. Given that we have no history and no image – in short, the hand is in a vacuum – this hand is quite interesting. If you are effectively representing the nuts or air and have no history of value-betting thin, the relative strength of hands becomes very important. If I am holding the 8s, it becomes effectively as strong as the Qs, given that you will never value-shove over this river with worse than the nuts. This concept is fundamental to making some of the more deceptive cash-game plays against very good players.
The mark of a hero
My good buddy Patrik Antonius let me sit behind him during a small informal game in Vegas recently and I witnessed a hand that illustrates relative hand strength nicely. (Okay, it was actually on ‘High Stakes Poker’ but I digress.) The action starts at 5:22.
This hand, in which Antonius calls an $80,000 river bet from Phil Laak with nothing but a pair of Fours, is probably one of the most discussed hands of 2009. If you dissect the action, it is an incredibly good call from Antonius. This hand is actually the epitome of a good hero call. The money is deep and Phil Laak appears to be playing very aggressively. At no point in the hand can Antonius realistically raise without risking getting himself blown off the pot (with a pair of Fours on the flop and, better still, a flush draw on the turn). The money is very deep and check-calling out of position is pretty much the only good option available.
The river is a fantastic example of good hand reading. Would Phil Laak make such a big value bet on this river with A-K or A-A? Doubtful, if you have watched him on this series in recent years. He ends up selling a story that makes little sense, given that he probably checks back Q-Q on the turn and very rarely raises small pairs and suited connectors preflop. He represents K-K and only K-K. All his other likely holdings are bluffs, which is why Antonius snaps him off.
Antonius drew on all the information at his disposal – hand ranges, timing, bet sizing and player history (they had played each other pretty hard beforehand) – to make a great decision and scoop a $287k pot. Must be nice.