160bb deep pot, w/ river shove... call?

Multitabling too much for solid reads, but villain had won a big pot earlier with a set... he bought in 60bbish, doubled up

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (6 handed) Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

MP ($90.20)
CO ($18.50)
Button ($49.95)
SB ($170.40)
Hero ($192.40)
UTG ($166.65)

Preflop: Hero is BB with A, A.
UTG raises to $4, 4 folds, Hero raises to $15, UTG calls $11.

Flop: ($30.50) 4, 9, K (2 players)
Hero bets $15, UTG calls $15.

Turn: ($60.50) 3 (2 players)
Hero bets $27, UTG calls $27.

River: ($114.50) T (2 players)
Hero checks, UTG bets $109.65 (All-In), Hero???

ok, we're deep, but why are you betting half pots with overpair and NFD? we're only behind KK realistically and they probably would 4bet. 99 is possible but AK is even more. as are QQ or JJ. I very much doubt he calls you pf raise with QJ

cuz i have a spade redraw and I could trap a lot of weaker hands. I can see QQs calling down, maybe even jacks. If he has like 99 or even kk he has to raise the flop or turn, which is ok by me with the redraw.

I think you need to bet river in order to avoid this and hope to fuck he doesn't push.

I think the problem in this hand is commitment - if you felt you were committed you should've bet bigger so the river is a formality, if you didn't feel committed you should've checked the turn for pot control - as played you're in a sick spot and have no idea where you're at.


Whether or not you should commit though is a completely different matter.

so what range do you put him on?

your bet sizes get you in a difficult position...

better bet sizing does make the river a trivial decision. I like 2/3, 2/3, push alot more here. This looks like AK that doesnt want to see another spade hit but with the line you took its harder to put him on a hand. idk, i probly puke and call but i dont like it.

Why doesn't anyone like the way this is played? Can anyone put him on anything that we're behind? why is everyone responding so paranoid?

anyone snap call river?

Originally Posted by mixchange

Why doesn't anyone like the way this is played? Can anyone put him on anything that we're behind? why is everyone responding so paranoid?

anyone snap call river?

I snap call this river. Though I don't know if you should read into that too much, cause i snap call a lot of things!

The only hand I am worried about here is QJspades realistically. I think any other hand strong hand needs to raise this flop to protect. He may have rivered his set of T's, but I don't even know if a set would push on this river so deep.

You showed moderate weakness with your bet sizing throughout the hand AND now you induced a river bluff by checking, so I think based on how this hand is played out, its certainly weighted more heavily towards call.

Originally Posted by mixchange

Why doesn't anyone like the way this is played?

Originally Posted by BigPapi

why are you betting half pots with overpair and NFD?

Originally Posted by Ash256

you should've bet bigger so the river is a formality.

Originally Posted by BigPapi

your bet sizes get you in a difficult position...

Originally Posted by bode

better bet sizing does make the river a trivial decision.

just guessing, but it might have something to do with bet sizing

its pretty horrible because you played it so weakly and you have no reads. He cant have the A so it doesn't look like a missed draw. I think he probably raises a made flush at least by the turn since he cant have the nut flush. That makes it look like either

a) A strong made hand that was scared of the flush but has decided it is ahead. Something like a set.

b) A weak made hand turning itself into a bluff. Maybe something like Kx Q or KxJ. I would think b would want to check behind here alot though.

There is also the chance of Q Jx

I think we are going to see something like a) or Q J alot more often than b) But Its really hard to say if its twice as often.

In short I dont know... But bet bigger on the flop/ turn.

i dont understand the recommendation of checking behind turn for pot control?

we have the nut redraw and, in a 3bet pot, an overpair. i'm pretty much committing myself on the turn here. i want to get max value from chasing hands and build the pot for when i suck out on what has me beat. i have no problems betting 2/3 or even 3/4 on both streets. if he flopped the flush, so be it. if he has a set, so be it. i have a 9 out redraw to beat both.

for some reason i have the feeling villain is chasing something here. QJ w/ a spade. JJ/QQ w/ a spade. AK.

i think his river push is extremely polarized, though. air or QJ. and, i have a hard time envisioning QJs opening UTG, much less in a 3bet pot oop.

oh crap i didnt see it was a 3bet pot. I snap call. I think we see AK alot here waiting to see if another spade comes.

24 on the flop, 64 on the turn, shove river.

As played b/f river, lol at c/c. I think we have to fold at this point.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

24 on the flop, 64 on the turn, shove river.

As played b/f river, lol at c/c. I think we have to fold at this point.

This makes no sense.

So we take a stronger line, and bet stronger on every street (allowing opponent to play more passively against our range) and we are willing to shove and stack off on river?

BUT we take a weaker line, betting weak on every street, and checking river and suddenly we want to fold, when everything we've told villain so far is that our hand is weak?

If we're willing to stack off in the situation where we show the most strength, I can't see how suddenly we're not willing to stack off in a situation where we showed the least strength.

Given no read and the way you played this hand, I can't see how there is any alternative except to fold the river.

I go along with the consensus and would have bet between 3/4 and the pot on the turn.

----

Having no read is the problem. I'm finding it hard to find a hand he could call-call and then shove. You have ace spades, what does he not raise with? My guess is villain has JT spades, although I wouldn't have played it his way. The other problems are that he called your preflop reraise, with what? Finally and crucially I think that he's less likely to bluff a busted flush draw with this board than if the 3rd club had arrived later (no-one ever believes anyone ever flops anything).

Almost no hand makes sense, how can he chase, chase shove? How can he not check, or value bet? You need to multi-table less and follow the game more . Would he, bizzarely, play 999 like this, or maybe KKK.

Given that your posting and possibly gonna show us the outcome it was probally KQ vs AA; but I would fold.

Originally Posted by griffey24

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

24 on the flop, 64 on the turn, shove river.

As played b/f river, lol at c/c. I think we have to fold at this point.

This makes no sense.

So we take a stronger line, and bet stronger on every street (allowing opponent to play more passively against our range) and we are willing to shove and stack off on river?

BUT we take a weaker line, betting weak on every street, and checking river and suddenly we want to fold, when everything we've told villain so far is that our hand is weak?

If we're willing to stack off in the situation where we show the most strength, I can't see how suddenly we're not willing to stack off in a situation where we showed the least strength.

When you bet bigger you're both committed so you shove. Now neither of you are committed and he shoves the river for pot, somehow it looks to me like it's for value.. his most realistic hands that we beat (like AK) would check behind.

I bet >20 on flop, >50 on turn, shove river as well...

as played its really close, flip a coin..I probably snap call though

Originally Posted by jackvance

When you bet bigger you're both committed so you shove. Now neither of you are committed and he shoves the river for pot, somehow it looks to me like it's for value.. his most realistic hands that we beat (like AK) would check behind.

I guess what I'm saying is, that I don't think this is a commitment issue. This is an issue of planning the hand and being a) willing to stack off here b) not willing to stack off here.

If we decide we're willing to stack off here we can either: a) play this hand strong, barrelling into him and charging him to draw to whatever he may have, thinking we are ahead often enough b) play this hand weaker, how OP played, and potentially induce some bluffs from hands that might not stick around otherwise.

We should probably know how we feel about this hand before we get to the river. I just don't see why we would be willing to stack off due to pot commitment when we play the hand stronger (villains range is narrower), than with worse commitment if we play the hand weaker (villains range is wider).

The commitment in this hand is not pot commitment, but rather commitment on the flop when in our heads we tell ourselves "I am willing to fire 3-barrels on this board and call a push".. whether we choose to take that line, however, is a different story. But it shouldn't change our willingness to stack off, I don't think.

(edit: fwiw: I also fire flop, turn and river with strong bets)

but this shouldn't be a tough decision, u should probably get to river where u have a 2/3 pot size bet left, and just shove.

I dont really understand why you bet so gay on flop and turn, then want to c/f this river tbh

Here is a different hand which kind of shows the concept I'm talking about. I guess I'm differentiating between pot commitment and the willingness to commit to a hand in our head, I suppose I can call this term 'mental commitment'.

In this hand we get to the flop and we decide that we are either mentally commit to this hand or not. The pot is $92 and villain has about $135ish left. If we decide to mentally commit, we can either bet $70-75 on flop and as a result we are pot commited to a push as well. Or we can also bet $40ish and potentially induce a shove from more worse hands.

In either case we are calling because we were mentally commited.

I'm not at all advocating betting like a wuss, but in a spot like this I don't think any hand is going to flat call. Its either raise or fold to our bet, and we might as well bet such that worse hands will raise. This depends a lot on the villain. Some villains perceive small bets as "call me bets", while others might be more willing to call weaker hands if you open shoved as this is a "please fold bet". Reads on this obviously help.

Cryptologic
No Limit Holdem Ring game
Blinds: $2/$5
6 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $100.65
UTG+1: $128.01
CO: $174.85
Button: $442.65
SB: $519.90
Hero: $489.50

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is BB with
2 folds, CO raises to $10, Button calls, SB folds, Hero raises to $40, CO calls, Button folds.

Flop: ($92, 2 players)
Hero bets $XX, CO raises all-in $134.85, Hero calls.

i agree with others that OP shoulda bet more on the flop. as played, i'm pretty sure villain has at least a set, so fold.

I also could justify a weak flop bet here. If I bet 1/2 the pot on the flop I'm looking to re-reraise, as was possibly mix's plan.

Once the flop bet is just called I would certainly bet bigger on the turn.

The suited board is unusual and does change things. I would possibly overbet the flop (look! I have a king, but don't want you to hit any spade).

griff,

i understand what you are trying to point out, but i dont think OP was 100% committed from the get-go; hence, the post, and the betting.

i dont think OP was trying to induce a bluff like you are suggesting with "move B." move A being betting to get committed.

by betting smaller here, we ARE inducing bluffs, but we arent strong enough to call them in relation to what we think may be out against us. the pot is too small and the push is too big. we need a hand that beats more of the board to call here, imo.

however, had we played this hand strongly right out of the gate, who cares by the river? if he's bluffing, so what? we are committed anyway. this drastically reduces what he will bluff us with, but he is committed with all his speculative shit, too, because we sized our betting appropriately, and has to call us with a variety of weak one spade crap.

to me, the same quality of hands are still around, but they cant try and blow us off a pot if we play it hard because they wont have enough behind after they miss what they are chasing.

This makes no sense. If we're willing to bet/bet/shove and would have shoved the river anyyways if we bet sized right, why would we ever want to fold this river? The only mistake here is to check river, but once we make it, why fold? Think of it as if you misclicked "check" instead of "all in", why do you now decide your're beat and fold, just cuz he shoved?

Originally Posted by Warpe

Originally Posted by mixchange

Why doesn't anyone like the way this is played?

Originally Posted by BigPapi

why are you betting half pots with overpair and NFD?

Originally Posted by Ash256

you should've bet bigger so the river is a formality.

Originally Posted by BigPapi

your bet sizes get you in a difficult position...

Originally Posted by bode

better bet sizing does make the river a trivial decision.

just guessing, but it might have something to do with bet sizing

LOL

they're right though mix your betsizing needs to be bigger.

Alexnos: Given absolutley no read on the opponent, i think the massive overbet allin is more likely to have us beat, than not. That's why I would fold.

Although sometimes I wouldn't.

I don't 'multi-table too much for solid reads.'

Originally Posted by Kamawoop

Alexnos: Given absolutley no read on the opponent, i think the massive overbet allin is more likely to have us beat, than not. That's why I would fold.

Although sometimes I wouldn't.

I don't 'multi-table too much for solid reads.'

lol do you multi-table too much to read the potsize?

delete

The potsize makes a bluff more likely. Still I don't think it's likely enough.

It's a wierd hand, if I didn't know that Mix had A spades it would most likely be a call. However, Mix has ace spades; the hand is odd - I'm fairly sure that if I had either players cards I wouldn't have played them as they did.

The bluffs I guess are QJ or JT offsuit with 1 spade (possibly continuing on to any offsuit connectors that don't pair). If it's known the villian is a nutter you could add in total air; without a read I think a set or flopped flush are more likely.

QJ is not a bluff here. its the rivered broadway str8. and exactly the kind of hand that may not believe a flopped flush, carry his had too far with small bets, wait for the 4th spade to drop (because he has one) and bomb the river when he suddenly beats every hand that didnt flop the flush...all the while convinced there isnt a flush out there because hero is betting so small/scared.

ure not beat by much...only JsQs/TsTx imo, maybe some wierd KT stuff if hes fishy but I still snap call.

I hadn't checked what the actual hand was for too long.

Chopper is right. I'll bet you 52 cents villian had QJ.

I've been struggluing for a while to find a hand that makes sense here. Villain has QJ - if not villain is a lunatic.

Originally Posted by mixchange

Why doesn't anyone like the way this is played? Can anyone put him on anything that we're behind? why is everyone responding so paranoid?

anyone snap call river?

Because it was played poorly.

As played, you have to call the river (and remind yourself why you should not bet small with megadraws on flop ever). You checked it to him so he could bluff with pobably a missed KxQ.

Griffey,
Considering people at these stakes don't thin vbet, considering when people bluff they normally don't shove full pot or more in, considering he took a really weak line, considering this isn't a spot where people bluff, and considering I can't think of one hand in his range besides the As that he bluffs I think a much better move is to fold the river.

I think when we check the river i expect that we're ahead a lot, but when he shoves all in i dont. I think that's the point you're missing.

NL $100 6 handed

Chooper : 'I have a hard time envisiging QJs opening utg".

I agree villian has air, or QJ (I think QJ, now you've pointed it out). But you should envisage players opening utg with QJs.

Along with many others here, I'm sure, I make my living by playing poker on the internet - six handed I would recommend raising QJs utg in many situations (it's especially good if the table is either tight, passive or loose).

Tight you steal the blinds.
Passive you take the pot post-flop.
Loose you're ahead of the callers range.

Added to that your out of position. You can't get back in respect what you lose in position; but you can get a bit of it back. It was a UTG raise, must be a hand.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Griffey,
Considering people at these stakes don't thin vbet, considering when people bluff they normally don't shove full pot or more in, considering he took a really weak line, considering this isn't a spot where people bluff, and considering I can't think of one hand in his range besides the As that he bluffs I think a much better move is to fold the river.

I think when we check the river i expect that we're ahead a lot, but when he shoves all in i dont. I think that's the point you're missing.

ISF, so you're basically saying that cheking this river is ALWAYS good...since if he bets full pot we know he has us beat, and when he bets a lower amount its a bluff? as played i mean ofc

The river decision is not straight-forward. If he bets smaller it's still not straight-forward, but probally have to call.

The point that everyone has been making is that this hand went wrong earlier. It shouldn't have got to a tough river decision.

Personally if had I played the hand this way, (which I wouldn't) then I would most certainly have played it differently and bet $27 again on the river.

I think there's a good chance I'm ahead of his calling hands and could fold to reraise without regrets.

Originally Posted by Kamawoop

NL $100 6 handed

Chooper : 'I have a hard time envisiging QJs opening utg".

I agree villian has air, or QJ (I think QJ, now you've pointed it out). But you should envisage players opening utg with QJs.

i cant see it w/o a read of "loose" at the very least...or stats like 25+/X/X. i dont play 100NL anymore, and opening QJs UTG is a loser unless you are a LAGgy player, imo. 100NL is a bit tougher than when i played it, too, making it even more -EV, imo. let alone calling a 3bet w/ it. if so, villain immediately goes from unknown to donkey, in my book.

ISF? i'm sure YOU open QJs UTG. would you at 100NL? better yet, would YOU expect a relative unknown to have it in his range w/o a read?

Originally Posted by Kamawoop

Along with many others here, I'm sure, I make my living by playing poker on the internet - six handed I would recommend raising QJs utg in many situations (it's especially good if the table is either tight, passive or loose).

Tight you steal the blinds.
Passive you take the pot post-flop.
Loose you're ahead of the callers range.

agreed, or at least i understand where you are coming from. however, stealing the blinds from UTG is really bad, imo. and, we have NO READ that on this table to assume we can raise QJ up...and we would be giving villain a lot of credit for ASSuming he thinks that deeply, at this level.

Originally Posted by Kamawoop

Added to that your out of position. You can't get back in respect what you lose in position; but you can get a bit of it back. It was a UTG raise, must be a hand.

isnt that what makes it unprofitable in the first place? are you recommending we make this unprofitable move? i can see it if you say, "we do it for image once in awhile," but to do it as default is spew, imo. especially since you say we can only get back SOME of it long-term.

btw, QJs is NOT a hand...especially in 6max. 6max is a strange dichotomy to me. on one hand TPTK wins more than full ring. on the other everyone loves to steal blinds with marginal stuff and play it on the flop like the nuts. in 6max, from what i know, TP power goes up in value and suitedness and connectedness go down simply because you are rarely getting the odds to chase a draw. however, QJs can become a hand, but it just doesnt start off as one, except to LAGs.

as stated earlier, seems we are starting to think this was QJ. i never said that. i said AIR or QJ. i lean towards air, but my AA isnt strong enough to overcome the possibility villain is a complete bonehead and holds QJ. i cant call a bluff with something as suspect as AA on this river...the way it was played. which is why we all have said it should have been played stronger...so we dont have this nasty river decision.

btw, i miss getting flamed for my thought processes. are you guys just holding back? lol.

Originally Posted by Alexos

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Griffey,
Considering people at these stakes don't thin vbet, considering when people bluff they normally don't shove full pot or more in, considering he took a really weak line, considering this isn't a spot where people bluff, and considering I can't think of one hand in his range besides the As that he bluffs I think a much better move is to fold the river.

I think when we check the river i expect that we're ahead a lot, but when he shoves all in i dont. I think that's the point you're missing.

ISF, so you're basically saying that cheking this river is ALWAYS good...since if he bets full pot we know he has us beat, and when he bets a lower amount its a bluff? as played i mean ofc

Well no. I mean your point is fine and very well a point for checking, but betting this river is way better. I'm just saying that a full pot bet on this river considering his range and most peoples tendencies means we're beat.

He should have value bet the river. Chopper has the hand correct, but should raise QJs UTG.

If the alternative is to fold QJs utg, that's fine. However I'm of the opinion that limping preflop is even worse in short-handed no-limit, than limit (I don't play limit).

Poker is a situational game. There are occasions when I don't follow my own adivice.

I find QJs a very easy raise to believe; it would be my standard play.

OK, first I want to say thanks for all the responses, and second I will try to keep an open mind on this hand, and I hope you do too. I am willing to change my view on this hand, but I haven't heard any good reasoning so far why. 90% of the time I post a hand I do get great advice here that I learn from, but I am not understanding the advice this go around. I think I'm right in this hand playing it this way.

The gist of my position: With smaller bets, we are keeping in the hands that we beat. The hands that beat us stay in anyway. Usually this is a bad line to take with any overpair, but in this situation a straight would have to be runnner-runner and we have the nut flush draw. We're basically trying to keep in many hands that may only have 1-3 outs against us. We may be able to get 3 streets of value vs. AK (no spades) or 2 streets against Queens or Kq. Many hands may fold flop to a strong bet, but call a "weakish" bet, not realizing they are drawing to 1-4 outs.

Bode, Warpe, Mass, ash, papi -- why do you want to bet big here? Value wise, what is calling your large bets?

Villain doesn't have a set, because flop or turn would need to be raised with the FD out. The only hand we're a little scared of is a flopped flush, as some people like to slowplay them, but by the turn they need a strong raise considering he has to put the As in our range. So by river, I have decided I'm ahead and I want to give villain the opportunity to bluff. He bets it all which makes me even more sure I have the best hand. If he had me, I think he'd bet something more like $50 considering I bet so weakly. If he's willing to just call small bets on flop and turn, why does he suddenly go for it all on river? Not consistent. He doesn't have a flush.

Why this line is good against hands we're ahead:
Hands that come along for the ride without a re-raise here and we get outstanding value from are:
AK (no spades obviously), QQs, KxQs KxJs. I doubt he plays K10 utg, KJ is just on the edge of possibilities. Maybe he has QsJx but that would be very silly to count the flush outs with basically a gutter, plus the PF call is unlikely.


Why this line is good against hands we're behind: We are losing to a badly played set, but we have a cheap redraw to the Nuts/topset, 35% by the river. With a small bet, villain might just call flop and pump turn, but pot will be small enough we have equity to call and we still have a chance to stack them.

Jackvance: What hands is he shoving for value that didn't raise for value earlier? And with a possible 4 flush coming? Are you basically putting him only on a slow played and badly played flush?

Warpe:I know what the recommended bet sizes here. But I simply think in this particular hand, the status quo is wrong. Remember villain did buy in short, so I view him/her as weak player. They often call too light PF and overplay 1 pair hands, especially when deeper than they are used to.

and if he does have a flush or a straight, why would he open shove? how in the world are we behind here? I've bet weak, then check river, and I'm calling a river shove? No, hands that want a call bet like half the pot. I weight villains' range very close to a bluff.

what hands does villain play this way?

Griffey wrote:

So we take a stronger line, and bet stronger on every street (allowing opponent to play more passively against our range) and we are willing to shove and stack off on river?

BUT we take a weaker line, betting weak on every street, and checking river and suddenly we want to fold, when everything we've told villain so far is that our hand is weak?

If we're willing to stack off in the situation where we show the most strength, I can't see how suddenly we're not willing to stack off in a situation where we showed the least strength.

I agree griffy, I don't get the logic either... with this line we often induce bluffs.

Originally Posted by Kamawoop

Given no read and the way you played this hand, I can't see how there is any alternative except to fold the river.

Given how I played the hand fold?? Because I played it weakly I have to fold? We fear villain's shoves when we have acted strong, but with our weak betting villain's shove looks like a bluff more than a value bet. If anything, because we underepped our hand we have to call!

Originally Posted by Kamawoop

I'm finding it hard to find a hand he could call-call and then shove. You have ace spades, what does he not raise with?
<snip>
Almost no hand makes sense, how can he chase, chase shove? How can he not check, or value bet?

Exactly...

Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer

Originally Posted by mixchange

Why doesn't anyone like the way this is played? Can anyone put him on anything that we're behind? why is everyone responding so paranoid?

anyone snap call river?

Because it was played poorly.

As played, you have to call the river (and remind yourself why you should not bet small with megadraws on flop ever). You checked it to him so he could bluff with pobably a missed KxQ.

You provide no evidence as to why its a "badly played" hand. You just say it was played badly, as in "everyone knows its bad".

I wonder if I posted the hand from Villain's point of view with say a hand that AA beat on the river. I bet a lot of you here would be telling me/villain to shove river because he "has to fold based on how weak he played the hand". Since fold equity *seems* large to villain, AI bluff seems like a good move from villain's perspective.

i actually like the op's thought and reasoning behind this play. a lot.

i also like the way hes sticking up for his thought process and not being sheepish by following the flock

heres's a reason why its played badly: he raised UTG and seeing as you have no reads (or just simply stats?), i would make a guess that he isn't a raising machine (as you said he bought in short -likely hes weak/tight). Let's look at his range:
AK - drawing only to a K and you get most if not all of his stack.
KK, 99 - maybe 2% chance of this, plus he probably 4 bets KK.
QsQx, JsJx, TsTx - he probably calls 1 street with these, maybe 2.
KxQs - definitely 3 streets of value here.
QsJs - probably not seeing as you 3 bet him from the BB and we are guessing he is weak/tight, but who knows. Also, you still have like a 25% chance of sucking out on him (just a guess).

i think if you posted the hand from villain's pov, you would get told that the AA was a retard...no offense. we wouldnt think we were offending you, and would be much more brutal.

i like your reasoning. i just wouldnt play it that way for reasons mentioned. i dont pretend to know the most about poker...ever.

I don't really mind the bet sizing. Like you say, villain is drawing thin and you have the nut flush/set redraw. However, I'm curious why you check the river if you put him on ak/kq/kj/qq. I can't see your average 100NL player turning these hands into a bluff here very often. Also, he can't really be bluffing a missed draw, since you had the only reasonable draw yourself. I'd still call as played though, since villain's play doesn't make much sense, and you kind of set him up, and omg you have aces in a HU re-raised pot.

He's turning a made hand (one pair) into a bluff on the river you think? I'd say he either has a monster or air here, but what air hands could he have given it's a 3bet pot? 56s?

preflop is just AWFUL this deep vs an utg raiser and u prob know y

u have to bet 3/4+ on flop/turn/river till ur all in here against anyone and depending on ur read u can c/r the turn but usually bet/bet/bet

river is semi gross but id def shove myself given how u got there

since u didnt shove i call i guess

any postflop line here besides bet/bet/bet is just plain bad against almost anyone

Originally Posted by mixchange

Why doesn't anyone like the way this is played? Can anyone put him on anything that we're behind? why is everyone responding so paranoid?

anyone snap call river?

the fact that u said this implies a fundamental lack of understanding of certain extremely important postflop concepts which u will have to learn in order to move up to mid stakes. im saying this because ur posts do display sound thinking very often and def think u can succeed at higher levels.

Originally Posted by mixchange

Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer

Originally Posted by mixchange

Why doesn't anyone like the way this is played? Can anyone put him on anything that we're behind? why is everyone responding so paranoid?

anyone snap call river?

Because it was played poorly.

As played, you have to call the river (and remind yourself why you should not bet small with megadraws on flop ever). You checked it to him so he could bluff with pobably a missed KxQ.

You provide no evidence as to why its a "badly played" hand. You just say it was played badly, as in "everyone knows its bad".

I wonder if I posted the hand from Villain's point of view with say a hand that AA beat on the river. I bet a lot of you here would be telling me/villain to shove river because he "has to fold based on how weak he played the hand". Since fold equity *seems* large to villain, AI bluff seems like a good move from villain's perspective.

Sorry about that, I thought I did.

Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer

Because it was played poorly.

As played, you have to call the river(and remind yourself why you should not bet small with megadraws on flop ever). You checked it to him so he could bluff with pobably a missed KxQ.

good point sauce, when I was betting the hand I remembered him as a short stack, I hadn't noticed he had more than doubled up. so yeah thats an awful raise (set mining) but against this guy I'm conflicted. The problem is that with someone like a normal shorty he probably folds to a $22 raise just about anything except Kings. But I can gamble a bit with him and in the long run (imo) gain EV. I also will fold AA/KK if I think villain has a set. I don't always call down.

anyway I will just have to disagree with everyone. With the nutflush+set draw (35%) I like gambling a bit on the chance he outdraws me.

results: villain had KJ and I induced the bluff. One of those hands that by gambling a little and not playing it 'textbook' I picked up more $... but yeah, a gamble.

I play the hand just like everyone else does without the NF draw. Just seems like a waste to blow villain's range out of the water here.

Maybe I've just had a couple lucky ones, I don't know. I'm open to that. But I've had these three hands in the past couple days.

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (6 handed) Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Hero ($100.40)
SB ($96.50)
BB ($16.40)
UTG ($151.05)
MP ($376)
CO ($59.40)

Preflop: Hero is Button with K, K.
UTG raises to $3, 2 folds, Hero raises to $12, 2 folds, UTG calls $9.

Flop: ($25.50) 5, Q, Q (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero bets $14, UTG calls $14.

Turn: ($53.50) 6 (2 players)
UTG checks, Hero checks.

River: ($53.50) K (2 players)
UTG bets $125.05 (All-In), Hero calls $74.40 (All-In).

Final Pot: $202.30

Villain had AJo

There's just a lot of loose PF calls at 100NL and some people will try a big bluff if you show a hint of weakness.


PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (6 handed) Poker-Stars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Hero ($99)
BB ($85.55)
UTG ($22.50)
MP ($107.95)
CO ($66.20)
Button ($92.35)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A, A.
1 fold, MP raises to $4, 2 folds, Hero raises to $16, 1 fold, MP calls $12.

Flop: ($33) K, 8, 9 (2 players)
Hero bets $18, MP calls $18.

Turn: ($69) 7 (2 players)
Hero checks, MP bets $66, Hero shoved

I won this vs. AKo.



I have just been sick of the standard lines with AA/KK that people so easily smell out and seem to either fold at the right time to big betting, or stack you on the turn since your bet sizes have been so large, or if you like folding for 40bb... I guess you could.

Trying to find other profitable lines besides the obvious. I just don't see why its SOOOO BAD to everyone here considering our monster redraw. I'm just trying to open up the range villain calls with for value.


Jack: I bet mega draws if I don't already have a hand where I am way ahead. e.g. Nutflush draw+ gutshot, or OESFD. We want to get it all in on flop. But here, I think we lose value against many hands that come along for the ride if we just bet huge the whole way, and just sets follow along.

mix- the problem with ur line is that it u will never be able to bluff a good player again

Hand 1: Isn't that essentially a 2-outer because you're folding on a non-K river?
Hand 2: Isn't the money going in regardless?

Maybe taking alternative lines is sexy but where I play bet/bet/bet is awesome because it induces bluff calls.


Also, your original post, UTG obviously fucking sucks; if you bet just a little bit bigger on flop + turn you could stick him in on the river easily and he wouldn't be able to fold.


Maybe I'm just not understanding, but I'm yet to see an example where bet/bet/bet wouldn't have accomplished the same thing (apart from the KK vs AJo one, i guess you have reads in that therefore your line is optimal regardless).





Interesting stuff though for sure, it's cool reading your thoughts and trying to work out whether or not they're good to add to my arsenal.

sauce -I don't take these lines with regs, or people that are unknowns. Ok then?

ash - I am willing to call light when villain shoves like that if the previous line doesn't fall in line with how it played it. anything except an A and I would call, I put villain on ace-something, or mid pp

'second' hand I don't know if all the money is going in anyway. Maybe. Most players I play against at 100nl dont stack off with just TPTK

also, I really doubt villain in original hand is stacking off with KJ there. I think he'd raise if he wanted to. It's the way I played it that got his stack.

Originally Posted by mixchange

'second' hand I don't know if all the money is going in anyway. Maybe. Most players I play against at 100nl dont stack off with just TPTK

also, I really doubt villain in original hand is stacking off with KJ there. I think he'd raise if he wanted to. It's the way I played it that got his stack.

I reckon villain in original hand is stacking off with KJ, esp. if the river pot is 170 as it normally would be (and that's with fairly small bets) - he called your 3bet with it so he's obviously stupid.

And 'second' hand - he's obviously stacking off with TPTK, if he wasn't going to stack off he would've checked behind on turn for pot control.

yea its a lot better than, but im still not exactly convinced

ash, what your missing is in both hands if villain wants to stack off he can do so by raising. they are not confident in their hand until we show weakness.

The post-analysis includes alot of reads for a hand against an opponent whom you have absolutlely no read on.

I still believe, after some head-scratching, and after Chopper pointed it out that QJ is the most likely hand that the villian could have had.

KJ? So he has top-pair kings / jack kicker and then suddenly decides he has to shove the river? What a nutter!

I maybe wrong; maybe it isn't correct to raise QJs utg, or to call a preflop reraise if you do so. However, I think this is the only hand that makes any sense given the hand described and that this the hand you'll usually be up against.

If you make that play a million times and villian has KJ a million times, then you'll make money a million times. However if the villian has a normal range of cards I think it's a marginally losing play; generally you'll be beating air.

Looks like a set or air.. I call the river here though with 2-1 odds... if he has it, its bad luck.. move on. I would of check-raised the flop as you had the nut draw and there's no way he allows a free card if he did hit his set.. a check-raise might cause him to call once then fold a set on the turn? At any rate, you know where you are earlier with less money lost using this line.

mix- im gonna throw this out there one more time, but u played every street of this hand very very suboptimally

u realize what happened on the river was that u checked and the villain shoved KJ for value- meaning he def calls a river shove, and a turn shove, and a large flop bet...

my question is now with the second set of hands.

in the first one...the KK? yes, you induced that bluff. but, do you call that push with AK? TT-JJ? you kind of acted like you made some fancy call with the nut boat. pretty easy call, to me. however, with lesser hands, i think he blows you out of this one.

and the AA hand? i'm not convinced that he can drop AK here. with you betting harder, i think you still string him along, reluctantly, but all the same. i think the money was going in.

i just think you are inducing bluffs...very well i might add...but with non-monster hands. where you could be valuebetting and folding to big raises, you are essentially turning all these hands into thinner value because you are relying so heavily on them bluffing.

Originally Posted by sauce123

mix- the problem with ur line is that it u will never be able to bluff a good player again

can you elaborate on this sauce?

Originally Posted by will641

Originally Posted by sauce123

mix- the problem with ur line is that it u will never be able to bluff a good player again

can you elaborate on this sauce?

RANGE BALANCING


Oh and im interested in if people think opps thin vbet was good? Seemed pretty bad imo.

Originally Posted by mixchange

anyway I will just have to disagree with everyone.

why post if you've already made your mind up?

I agree with sauce, I'm not convinced you induced a bluff here.


Villain's reasoning in the hand:

Pre-flop: "He re-raises me?? Can't let them push me around. I call!"
Flop: "Top pair!! Hope he bets... Yes!!! Ok, I'm gonna slow play like I saw in Rounders."
Turn: "Omg, this is going to be the biggest pot ever. $$$!"
River: "$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Originally Posted by Warpe

Originally Posted by mixchange

anyway I will just have to disagree with everyone.

why post if you've already made your mind up?

you misunderstand - I start threads and most of the time feel I am wrong or made a bunch of mistakes after reading responses. this one I don't. Is everyones mind made up if they disagree with others? c'mon. Check my "IS a check fold here OK? thread where I start out with posters who agree, I agree, then sauce totally changes my mind. most of the time he does, hahah


- my original point is being missed here on Hand #1

the way I played the hand got villain's whole stack... and all he had was KJ. That's fantastic value. I don't think the big bet the whole way approach gets the stack.... 160bb on KJ? I highly doubt it. That fact just seems to be glossed over... If I bet big on flop and shove turn, he just folds.

It's possible he put me on Queens and is "shoving for value" but I really doubt it, if he wants Queens to call him he bets like $50. So I just don't buy it. It's a bluff. If he wants a call, he bets less. He's not thinking at that high of a level, you are thinking of 400NL type play sauce. He bets that much because he doesn't want a call.

lars... give me a break. If 100nl was that easy i'd be at 20pt

Originally Posted by Chopper

my question is now with the second set of hands.

in the first one...the KK? yes, you induced that bluff. but, do you call that push with AK? TT-JJ? you kind of acted like you made some fancy call with the nut boat. pretty easy call, to me. however, with lesser hands, i think he blows you out of this one.

and the AA hand? i'm not convinced that he can drop AK here. with you betting harder, i think you still string him along, reluctantly, but all the same. i think the money was going in.

i just think you are inducing bluffs...very well i might add...but with non-monster hands. where you could be valuebetting and folding to big raises, you are essentially turning all these hands into thinner value because you are relying so heavily on them bluffing.

Chop -- No, definitely not a "fancy call". Calling with the boat is easy, of course... What I like it the turn check... this villain had been bluffy, so I wanted to bait him into something. as long as an A doesn't fall, I feel I get more $$. And if he has like 1010ish hand himself, he may check/call a fairly large bet himself because of how bluffy a pf raise, flop lead, turn check looks

Yay lets use bad and results oriented reasoning to justify our play!!!!!

whatever ISF

thanks for the useful contribution.

I just never heard a good reason why I should be trying to blow opponent out of water with nutflush+set redraw

it never got explained to me...I almost never, ever play Hand #1 that way.

There are nearly 70 posts in this thread

Originally Posted by mixchange

whatever ISF

thanks for the useful contribution.

I just never heard a good reason why I should be trying to blow opponent out of water with nutflush+set redraw

it never got explained to me...I almost never, ever play Hand #1 that way.

ur trying to maximize value vs hands other than KJ

and theres like a 2% chance u "induced" top pair good kicker into a bluff, hes prob just a donk and doesnt realize ur re raise meant AA or KK 99% of the time, not to mention ur postflop line.

ok so heres a list of problems with ur line:

1. building the pot (when draws r live)
2. inducing large semibluffs
3. preflop preflop preflop
4. controlling information
5. balancing for the times u dont have AAs or sets or AsKs

dont be results oriented, this hand is very, very poorly played on every street.