NL50 second nuts on the river facing an overbet shove

This guy saw me stack off way too light twice against other tags and generally play like shit and kind of maniacal

it's like I can't put the ace in his range, but is he going to bluff 2x pot against me after I've shown a willingness to felt? These spots make me hate NL because I'd call a pot size bet SCRATCH THAT IT'S BECAUSE I'M BAD

Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (9 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

MP1 ($107.10)
Hero (MP2) ($50)
MP3 ($157.85)
Button ($50)
SB ($166.45)
BB ($114.85)
UTG ($72.85)
UTG+1 ($102.05)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with K, K
3 folds, Hero raises to $1.75, 1 fold, Button calls $1.75, 2 folds

Flop: ($4.25) 6, 10, K (2 players)
Hero bets $4, Button calls $4

Turn: ($12.25) 8 (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $4.50, Hero calls $4.50

River: ($21.25) J (2 players)
Hero checks, Button bets $39.75 (All-In), Hero folds

Total pot: $21.25 | Rake: $1.05

[swiggidy]

Why do you check the turn?

Folding seems fine to me.

what does he not 3b me with that still has an ace? Yeah, I played it way too passively on the turn, kind of like if I just had kings, not a set

[AnTman_69]

I b/c turn and stack off.

[Sup3rM4N]

I b/c turn and stack off.

This. Your hand strength looks wayyyy to weak the way it was played. B/C turn wud make ur river decision easier.

[swiggidy]

what does he not 3b me with that still has an ace? Yeah, I played it way too passively on the turn, kind of like if I just had kings, not a set

Well, you didn't list stats, but this could be something as strong as AsQs, he might not be a 3bettor. 1/2 PSB on turn could easily be NF trying to string you along, then an "oh fuck I missed value" push. Could also be 7s9s/Qs9s praying you have the As.

From my experience so far, don't stop betting when you have a shit ton of equity.

[a500lbgorilla]

as played, on river if I checked it's because I'd want op to bet.

[bikes]

I'm snap calling, Like hover your finger over the call button.

[BankItDrew]

as played, on river if I checked it's because I'd want op to bet.

We are only checking this river because we want to call any bet. This is a standard bluff catcher/minimizing loss to better hands line by us on river.

[Keilah]

and btw, lots of (bad) regs habitually dont 3bet AK, so you cant take ak/aq/qsqx etc out of his range.

lol i just noticed that you have the Ks, i was wondering why everyone said to call... they're right.

and zomg stack off on turn.

he wouldn't shove qs, he'd bet half pot for value imo

[badgers]

Why does everyone hate a fold??? I think a fold is good here. Also bet turn and maybe bet river for value depending on villain.

It's all very well saying I checked because I have a bluffcatcher but when a 50nl player overbet shoves 2x pot and we have a history of calling down light he isn't bluffing near enough imo. We can definitely call a 2/3rds pot bet, maybe even pot but 2x pot I dont think so.

actually I asked him and he told me he didn't have shit
he wasn't levelling either, he's the type that would bet a little with the nuts just to "guarantee" a call and bet high as a bluff to make me fold

then I felt retarded

[badgers]

i lose thread

[pgil]

he's the type that would bet a little with the nuts just to "guarantee" a call and bet high as a bluff to make me fold

why isn't this read included in op, and then with this read, why are we questioning whether to call this????

[mcatdog]

Why does everyone hate a fold??? I think a fold is good here. Also bet turn and maybe bet river for value depending on villain.

[Deanglow]

if you check the turn and river then call

[bigspenda73]

fold da riva at 50nl FR against a nit

[spoonitnow]

Pro Tip: Post reads in the OP

actually I asked him and he told me he didn't have shit
he wasn't levelling either, he's the type that would bet a little with the nuts just to "guarantee" a call and bet high as a bluff to make me fold

then I felt retarded

[nutsinho]

el oh el

[bjsaust]

Failed thread (1 spade).

Please post relevant reads with HH, instead of casually mentioning them halfway through the thread.

Pro Tip: Post reads in the OP

actually I asked him and he told me he didn't have shit
he wasn't levelling either, he's the type that would bet a little with the nuts just to "guarantee" a call and bet high as a bluff to make me fold

then I felt retarded

that's a read I had
AFTER the hand
I didn't have this information until I asked him what he had

[technician]

if i was him id tell you i didnt have shit also. if you asked if he had it he would know you had a hand.

this way if we get to similar spot again and i got cards.... your calling.

[bjsaust]

Players always tell the truth about their hands

[pokerfan]

Jesus christ!! if you check two streets and act this weak, you HAVE to call his river shove IMO.

[spoonitnow]

Pro Tip: Post reads in the OP

actually I asked him and he told me he didn't have shit
he wasn't levelling either, he's the type that would bet a little with the nuts just to "guarantee" a call and bet high as a bluff to make me fold

then I felt retarded

that's a read I had
AFTER the hand
I didn't have this information until I asked him what he had

The bold comments in combination make it seem like you have made up an excuse (believing him, he wouldn't level you, etc.) to protect your ego from worrying about folding the best hand. You'll retort assuring me that this is not the case, though, which is pretty standard.

[a500lbgorilla]

iopq, based on the sample size of this hand, you effing suck at FR NL hold'em. Stop schooling with all the other nits and learn the game.

Spoon, it's a nice that you're trying to scatch away at his ego to help him to learn! when are you gonna use that perception on yourself, ya big gay!

[a500lbgorilla]

and that's to say, " You'll retort assuring me that this is not the case, though, which is pretty standard." What do you think your P.O.V would be if you were some innocent 3rd party observer!?

[bigspenda73]

Jesus christ!! if you check two streets and act this weak, you HAVE to call his river shove IMO.

orly?

b/c 50nl FR regs bluff so much, and when they do it's usually for 2x the pot right?

[spoonitnow]

iopq, based on the sample size of this hand, you effing suck at FR NL hold'em. Stop schooling with all the other nits and learn the game.

Spoon, it's a nice that you're trying to scatch away at his ego to help him to learn! when are you gonna use that perception on yourself, ya big gay!

My comment was a continuation of an ongoing conversation I've had with iopq for quite a while now, and I've used "that perception" on myself since I was about 14. There are a lot of concepts in performance psychology that I've written about (including this) here on FTR.

and that's to say, " You'll retort assuring me that this is not the case, though, which is pretty standard." What do you think your P.O.V would be if you were some innocent 3rd party observer!?

If my comments were analyzed in the context of the other stuff I've posted here discussing psychological matters then it would make perfect sense to an outsider, and we both know that I'm never particularly concerned with how my comments appear to others, only the potential gains it gives the person I'm discussing with. Right now it's evident that psychological matters (and difficult ones to address at that) are holding iopq back, so I'm doing what I can to help, as always.

[nutsinho]

i agree w/ what spoon said to OP. and probably fold the river but ffs bet and go broke on the turn

[spoonitnow]

Pro Tip: Post reads in the OP

actually I asked him and he told me he didn't have shit
he wasn't levelling either, he's the type that would bet a little with the nuts just to "guarantee" a call and bet high as a bluff to make me fold

then I felt retarded

that's a read I had
AFTER the hand
I didn't have this information until I asked him what he had

The bold comments in combination make it seem like you have made up an excuse (believing him, he wouldn't level you, etc.) to protect your ego from worrying about folding the best hand. You'll retort assuring me that this is not the case, though, which is pretty standard.

I feel a need to clarify what I meant by the last thing I said here: "which is pretty standard." What I meant was that this is a pretty standard type of thing that happens in the thought processes of most players. When we encounter difficult or tense situations in anything, our minds often start throwing out things for us to latch onto in order to alleviate the tension in one way or another, and fairly often these things our minds throw out for us to grab onto don't make much sense nor do they hold up to analysis. This has the potential to happen while the situation is in the present (ie: when it's our turn to act on the river) and afterward as our minds try to justify our actions and give us reasons to not feel bad/stupid.

Tommy Angelo's book Elements of Poker touches on this indirectly in a number of places as well. You can improve on this type of thing by practicing maintaining the tension in situations where it's convenient, like counting slowly to 10 before you scratch your nose the next time it itches. I talked about similar stuff in this thread: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...go-t76505.html

These types of things are usually really difficult to discuss just because of the nature of the thing and how easy it is to become defensive and close up to learning. But anyway, there's some stuff to read if you want to jump in. If not, that's cool too.

[a500lbgorilla]

and that's to say, " You'll retort assuring me that this is not the case, though, which is pretty standard." What do you think your P.O.V would be if you were some innocent 3rd party observer!?

If my comments were analyzed in the context of the other stuff I've posted here discussing psychological matters then it would make perfect sense to an outsider

:/ not what I'm getting at, sorry man!

[spoonitnow]

and that's to say, " You'll retort assuring me that this is not the case, though, which is pretty standard." What do you think your P.O.V would be if you were some innocent 3rd party observer!?

If my comments were analyzed in the context of the other stuff I've posted here discussing psychological matters then it would make perfect sense to an outsider

:/ not what I'm getting at, sorry man!

Okay now I think you were referring to what I would think about the hand if I was a 3rd person? I'm not sure what you're asking me.

P.S. You're liberal scum. <3

wtf do you mean protecting my ego
I posted a hand that I played horribly on the turn
I also posted that I THINK I made the wrong decision on the river too

I asked him about what he had and he said that he'd bet half pot with the nuts because he isn't greedy
it would be an epic level if he appeared to be this stupid
like seriously, if he made up "I'm not greedy" to level me he's far superior to me in life, poker and everything

to protect your ego from worrying about folding the best hand.

this is the part of your comment that I don't understand
how do I protect my ego by finding out after that I probably had the best hand?

if I wanted to protect my ego, I would say "after the hand he told me he had the ace and that he only shoves with the nuts, never as a bluff"

[spoonitnow]

1. Villain saying something right after the hand doesn't prove that he would only shove with a bluff.

2. You disagree with 1 suggesting you have some previous knowledge that he's not lying about that since he would only shove a bluff.

3. The assessment made in 2 cannot be true because you folded the river, and because you ask "is he going to bluff 2x pot against me after I've shown a willingness to felt?" in the OP.

4. The only motive you could have to lie about 2 would be to clarify 1 so you no longer have to deal with the "what if I was wrong" (which is much harder to deal with than latching onto a supposed reason that you were wrong).

5. Some good ways to deal with 4 are addressed above in my previous posts.

1. This is true, but I can't prove it either way.
2. This doesn't follow, your logic fails on step 2
while it is possible he would lie, his comment "I am not greedy" is such an intricate level that I read that as sincerity unless he is VERY tricky in chat
3. What do you mean it cannot be true? It could be true or it could be false. If it cannot be true, that means that YOU ARE SURE IT IS FALSE. If you are sure it is false, you are the villain in the hand
nicely played spoon, now can I have my $20 back?

[Keilah]

ohhhh hey i should really read OP's more carefully. I thought it was like a PSB on the river.

If he's reg or nitty in any way (which all 50nl regs are) then fold. If he's a maniac/total unknown then call.

lalala ego warz on FTR.

[spoonitnow]

his comment "I am not greedy" is such an intricate level that I read that as sincerity unless he is VERY tricky in chat

ROFLMAO

I'm never going to get through to you so I'm going to stop wasting my time.

[nutsinho]

lol. thats like the most insincere comment of all time dude.

Well, I actually talked to the guy but I didn't save the chat log. He's not a good reg or anything. How are you guys so sure that I'm wrong here? It blows my mind that Spoon would say that "The assessment made in 2 cannot be true"

how can you say that? I'd say my assessment has at least a 1% chance of being true

[AnTman_69]

this thread is still going..wtf? Argue in irc me thinks.

idk, sometimes arguing with Spoon has been really productive
lately it hasn't been
is it me?