So on one hand, Villain is too stupid to properly account for the size of the pot but on the other hand our villain is smart enough to accurately read OP for KQ and thus not fear ANY draw and minraise in hopes of extracting max value???

I'm sorry, I can't buy that. That is way too much mental contortion.

You can't have it both ways.

If V is smart enough to read OP for KQ and go for a super thin value raise on a super wet turn, then this same V would be smart enough to sense weakness and bluff turn right?

Anyone who sits at a poker table can realize that a gaggle of raises and bets usually means either high cards or high pairs. I'm not giving him credit for much beyond that, like being able to disect bet sizing.

OP, I know you've heard this one mirrion times, but I hate the small-ball against a passive and unbelieving V. FAT VALUE rules in LLNL. Extract FAT VALUE.

AP, I hate life and fold here, unless we've seen him active on turns and then check rivers. I crying-call this min raise OTR, but with another bet to come, which we can never call, no. Fold>turn hand into bluff>call, imo.

Very late to this thread, but bet $25 otf and $45 ott. As played call and re-evaluate river.

Intentionally or not, we have done everything possible to induce this raise from a holding weaker than ours. We can't fold, because there has got to be a one in six or seven chance that our apparent weakness has succeeded in causing the villain to raise light.

I like this line against a more aggro player, against whom the probability that we induced a light raise would be higher.

Against this guy, I think we call and then evaluate the river. If he is light, we will be able to better tell on the river. A legit looking value bet, especially on a bad card, would be a fold. A check will tell us our hand is good almost always (an ace on the river would muddy the water in cases where the villain has QJ) and a small bet will also usually tell us our hand is good.

these threads are pretty fun i just realized. i should post in here more.

I assume you called, OP? we can haz river action?

@dgiharris: I don't interpret a raise to $60 against an $18 bet to be wildly over sized. If the pot was $24 and the villain bet $18, it isn't even a pot sized raise. The raised player is getting 2.1:1 to call. With 100BB, that sets up a less than PSB on the turn to get it in.

@mepthy: He has to have some component of semi-bluff or bluff in his range. It just isn't there given the play. In order to make the mini-raise light, he has to be on at least 3rd level of thinking. You've got a lot of live play in now at 1/2. How many passive players can you think of in your game that are working on level 3 thinking against an "unknown." Even if they were capable of it, they would realize it would be useless against an unknown to play at that level.

Finally, even if he senses weakness, you need a villain that thinks offering a player 6:1 odds to fold is going to work as a bluff. Again, Split is an unknown to him. Even the relatively good unknown is going to struggle to find a fold at 1/2. I think the normal response from a 1/2 player in this circumstance would be, "Thank God, he's betting small, I'm going to get to show down cheap with TPWK/SP. Call."

I didn't point out that $18 to $60 raise example to show V oversizes his bets. The point of that raise tells me V takes the "standard" raise line when he is strong. Basically, the only info we have on V's raise sizing is that he raises "strong". So, combined with the description that V is passive I conclude that V raises strong when he is strong.

However, what I'm getting in this thread is a lot of the opposite, that apparently a weak raise is a massive show of strength because V must "obviously" want Hero to call because that can be the only reason for such a weak bet???

And lets put this in the context of the board. What hand could V possibly have that feels comfortable offering up 6:1 odds. There is no absolute nut hand on the board. Its not like the board is Q J 3 3 in which V has a stone cold nut hand. We are talking about a wet turn that puts a straight AND flush draw on board.

Which brings me back to V's other raise. That raise tells me V bets strong when strong or takes the "standard" raise line when he is "raising". however, in this case, he isn't, he's minraising.

The arguments in favor of V minraising so far are, "Well he obviously want's hero to call". But looking at this board there is NO hand that can give 6:1 odds on that wet a board, not even top set. Therefore, it makes more sense that V isn't all that strong.

So then, why the hell would V make this sort of minraise?

Because HERO has been dicking around on flop and turn and showing a lot of weakness and thus induced V to spazz and raise, yet V doesn't like his hand all that much so he just minraised.

Imo, I can believe that just as readily as I can believe V is super strong. If anything, I think my point is more supported by the facts and logical deductions. V doesn't have to be some Level 3 player here, all he has to do is react to the weakness Hero has been showing. And if V is "passive" then his bluffs are going to lack testicles and probably come off as weak.

And again, my point isn't necessarily that i'm right, but rather that Hero's line (weakness) has created a situation in which a lot of uncertainty has been generated, so much so that we have to call..

I have seen a zillion min raises designed to fold air or "for information." they are very common.

The villain's sizing is indicative of poor bet sizing and a lack of understanding of pot odds as often as anything else. It is also very often "I want to risk the minimum" to find out whether the bettor actually has a hand.

This is not a spot where split has been bombing the pot and got min raised; THAT bet is very often the nuts.

This is a spot where we look weak, and could have induced.

That is why I think we have to make a pot odds call and seewhat happens on the river.

I'm not sure we can make these assumptions about LLSNL players. These are recreational players who are playing for fun. For them an integral part of poker is bluffing---I'm thinking in terms of media stereotypes and the accompanying mythology of poker pros (e.g. Rounders or The Cincinatti Kid). Those who play a loose-passive style will attempt one of these "professional" moves every now and again just for kicks---and if they pull-it-off will be telling their mates about it with the pride of someone talking about their first-born.

So, in this respect, they are capable of Level 3 thinking, that is, an awareness of their perceived range. However, they are not very competent at Level 3 play and often it will take the form of a min-raise with a weak TP or strong MP or a busted draw, with little attention to the pot-odds detail of what they are trying to represent. Granted, it's a bit unusual for loose-passives to try this move on the turn.

In this respect, if I'm getting 6:1 on calling this raise on the turn with TPGK, when the only nuttish hands thus far are sets, I'm calling, especially as these LLSNL loose-passive type of Villains don't usually follow through on their bluffs on subsequent streets.

As played, I'm pretty excited that villain has bailed me out of my poor bet and gotten more chips in there for me. I call and evaluate river and expect to see a threatening check a significant percentage of the time in response of which we will then bet for value.

wow. we play in very different games

tl;dr: Don't underestimate any given player based on general experiences at LLSNL.

Some of the assessments of the Villain in this thread are symptoms of a problem I see with a lot of analysis in LLSNL:

"This is low stakes, they're all droolers, they don't know anything, they're just there looking at their cards, drooling."

While this may be true as a general statement about LLSNL players, I think it is too often used as a basis for a "projected read" on villains in HH's where better or conflicting information is given by the OP.

I hear a lot of "villain is incapable of this, villain is incapable of that" all the time in this forum; talking in absolutes really gets us nowhere in HH analyses. "Villain never/always..." Remember that just because a player is "bad" doesn't mean they're inexperienced or don't know ANYTHING about poker.

Take a bad player that has also played the game for a long time. Do you really think he is "incapable" of doing things like noticing pot size, bet sizing, or even hand reading? Maybe sometimes he does, others he doesn't. He can choose not to because he just likes to play the game and have fun. Maybe he's far worse at those things than us. But counting pot size is simple addition. It's not hard.

I just don't think based on Split saying this guy is "bad" we can make most of the assumptions about him that have been mentioned so far. Notice that villain also referred to Split as "tight," is somewhat discussing strategy at the table, and opens for 3x preflop. This guy may not be a good player, but he knows something about poker. Even a bad weak passive Level 1 player pulls something out of a bag of tricks every once in a while. A level 1 "drooler" can sometimes make a level 99 move on accident (probably not in this hand, though).

No worries. And to clarify Venice I've only written one ebook, but made a ton of videos.

I believe he turned a nutflush in a limped pot and CRd the turn

And here is the actual fun part of the hand (imo anyway):

I took about 1.5 minutes and called (most of this time was just thinking about my river plan...). As soon as I called, he dark checked (almost like a child who was throwing a temper tantrum and cartoonishly threw his arms up and then on the table):

---------------------------------------------------------

Live $1/$2 No Limit Hold'em - 9 players

Hero (MP1): $425.00
MP2: $-
CO: $-
BTN: $-
SB: $-
BB: $425.00
UTG: $-
UTG+1: $-
UTG+2: $70.00

Pre Flop: ($3.00) Hero is MP1 with K Q
2 folds, UTG+2 calls $2, Hero raises to $12, 4 folds, BB calls $10, UTG+2 calls $10

Flop: ($37.00) Q J 4 (3 players)
BB checks, UTG+2 checks, Hero bets $18, BB calls $18, UTG+2 folds

Turn: ($73.00) 6 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $26, BB raises to $52, Hero calls $26

River: ($177.00) Xx (2 players)
BB checks, Hero ???

a.) what do you do on a 2h?
b.) what do you do on a 3d?
c.) what do you do on a 9c?
d.) what do you do on a Js?