H: MAWG, obv a reg, keeping the chatter going. Friendly loose table, weeknight.
V: YAG, never seen him before, from comments when he arrived he fashions himself as a good player. Bought in for $200 ($400 max) so obv I have a different opinion. We'd been together about 2.5 hours, he's on my direct left.

V's play history: Limped btn K3o over 1 limper. His only 3bet was a min 3! vs H, his AA vs my QQ, Q on flop, bye Felicia (about $180). He rebought for 200. Defended BB vs BTN open with K8o, TP called 2 streets (river checked through). Opened KK EP and bet all streets in MW pot (HU after turn) on T64T4 runout. He's chipped up nicely to $650, no dramatic showings, the KK was his most significant hand.

Hero's showings: very early in session as pfr I bet/3! a Q87cc flop, folded to shove from Asian woman, topped up. The QQ hand, and MP open T9s, flopped the straight, bet flop, bet/call a shove on turn. Otherwise a fair assortment of iso raises so perhaps a fast image. H covers.

OTTH 1/3 $650 eff

EP limp, H btn raise to $15 TT. V calls SB, limper folds.

Flop ($30) A95 ch, Hero 15, call
Turn ($60) T. Poker gods love a donkey. check, H $50, V thinks maybe 20 sec, calls.
River ($160) 3. V thinks again about 20sec, leads $80. Should H call or raise?

TYIA.

I think I'd make a little raise here -- maybe a little over min-raise. What diamonds could he have? I really hope he has two pair. Sadly, we have to fold to a re-raise, but you might get a little more from him.

I like the smallish preflop sizing as this deep it gives us a much more manageable SPR, especially since we can't setup a commitment one.

From the HHs, it looks like this guy is fairly ABC and not getting out-of-line, although might see us as a bit aggro? Against most ABC guys and with a good image, I typically just 1/2 PSB this flop and then I'm pretty much done with it. With our slightly more active image, and maybe *perhaps* debatable whether this guy could do something tricky, I might lean towards checking back to get to showdown (although obviously a chance of a lot more sucky cards on the turn).

Ha, nice turn. I bet slightly more ($60 is exactly equal to $50 in terms of calling frequency, right?) but whatever.

Thanks to big SPR we are nowhere near being committed with a raise and can raise/fold. He seems kinda just bad loose from HHs, so it's possible he has something like 87dd. Doubt he could have a better flush than that (can KQdd really get to the turn?). So I think we can safely fold to a raise. The 3 is rather unlikely to have improved any other hands other than A3, and you'd sorta think we'd have heard from better on the turn on this now drawy board, so that's concerning me a bit. I dunno, I guess he coulda slowplayed two pair / set by the turn, especially deep and not wanting to build a monster pot. I think I minraise/fold here, although in game time I'm probably too passive and just call more than I should.

GcluelessNLnoobG

I just call here.

V's history indicates a relatively passive, straightforward player. I think the lead on the river indicates a real hand. That definitely suggests considering a raise, but there are other factors to consider.

Many LLSNL V's aren't expert hand readers and view a 3-fl board as scary. Even though it's a BD draw, I would expect V's to be a little less likely to bet worse hands.

Conversely, any flush is very likely to lead out.

V can have some flushes around BDFD draws with a pair on the flop. Things like Jd9d, 9d8d, 9d7d could very well peel a flop. V previously called out of the BB with K8o and called two streets, so he's not tight.

I would expect to see an underset or flopped/turned 2P to speak up on the turn. Board has 2 diamonds and the T9, which would tend to guide many LLSNL V's to lead out (or, more rarely, x/r).

Calling pre, flop, turn, leading out river I think generally indicates a hand that got there OTR. In this case, that's flushes and A3. (I'm discarding 93, T3, and 53 even for this loose player.)

V could certainly have A3. The tank on the turn could be either a flush draw + pair or a weak A, so not much help there.

I think it's about 50/50 on combos, but I think A3 is slightly discounted because it might not lead out on the 3-fl board (and might on rare occasions find a fold).

I don't hate a minraise, but I think it's likely right around 0 EV, slightly tending toward negative.

Call.

I think this is a medium sized raise and fold to a 3!.

Flush seems pretty unlikely. Those 20 second pauses seem likely to indicate some kind of decent made hand here where he wasn't quite sure what to do. Probably just has A3 or T9, maybe even a scared 99 or 55.

Tx guys. I prob took a minute with this one, and my thought process was, What flushes can he have? Can he have 2p or a set? Or just get sticky with an ace? Then I started counting up possible flushes like mentioned above.

At this point his only aggro was when he was pfr (iirc), so I decided with my image, he could feel comfortable letting me barrel off, so he'd feel no need to raise turn. (He would be right fwiw.) By the river, I think he can lead both flushes and 2p+ if he's worried I'll check back AK. I didn't do exact combos at the table, but I gave him about/over 20 2p+ hands and just 10 flushes (including 42dd). As stated, I should almost never get 3!, supremely easy fold if he does.

I debated between $175 and $200, went for full value at 200. Will post results tomorrow in case others want to pipe in. Tx guys.

Raise 100% of the time, $250

Only losing to 9dxd, 5dxd and 24dd

So I raised to $200, he made what he thought was a crying call with 54dd. I'm still (mostly) OK with the raise. Tx again for the feedback.

This thread is proof that most people can't hand read.

It's also a reminder that the trolls on 2p2 ruin the place for lots of people

Troll? I gave you a straightforward and correct answer.

This.


Riverraise is not good in this spot in my opinion when the exact line villain went with here is loaded with flushes.

We're hand reading right? Because sb calls with so many of these dd combos pre right?

Echoeling: Yes, sure we are handreading.

Your argument is not valid and can easily fool people. When you witness a certain line postflop and certain betsizes go in relative to the stake your playing- that information trumphs wich amount of diamond combos you subjectively _think_ villain calls with pre.

Pre is just the start of the hand where we start basic ranging in our head. As soon as we get more in depth information about villains hand ranges on later streets, we just need to put weight on the most important information.

It doesent matter how many diamond combos you think villain have preflop: what matters is that once villain executes this line of check-calling turn, then donkleading when the flush hits with a large riverbet relative to 1/3 stakes then his range at that point is packed with flushcombos. Its a classic line to take for the population at 1/3 (and LLSNL overall really), because they have experienced the river to go check-check so so many times if they indeed check. So they go into desperation mode instead as an adjustment to this dynamic, and just blast out in front themself to avoid river getting checked back- even though it turns their hand face up.

To end this rant i will add that this kind of thinking is an insane big leak for many players, and i see countless examples on this kind of flawed reasoning almost every session i play.

This thread is proof that most LLNL players are terrible and will call down / chase with anything. We should be making a fortune against them. He should not have any flushes in his range, and he sure as heck shouldn't be here with 45 from the SB, even sooooted. Of course, he is a YAG who bought in for $200, so that says something.

I guess we should just get used to the fact that there are still terrible players out there, which is good, but we can't really range them because they are terrible, so just go into call/defense mode whenever they show aggression.

What are you talking about? For sure we can range them. However, people needs to stop ranging them after what they _think_ fish and rec players should have in their range based off their own perception of how the game should be played, and rather range them based on what you actually see at the table.

Like for example keep in mind that the line villain went with in this hand is a classic line for a flush/nutted hand when the obvious draw coming in and they suddenly want to blast in front after check-calling previous street(s).

I don't consider a half pot bet a blast. Maybe the reason to just check the river is because he can't call with much and we are ahead of everything but a flush. However, he probably should have folded a 5-high flush to hero's raise, because hero should easily have bigger flushes in his range. I would have played KdQd, KdJd or QdJd or even 9d8d or 9d7d the same way from the button. Nobody can fold a flush, though.

There you go, youre making arguments that support what i talk about in my previous posts. "He probably should have folded a 5 high flush to heros raise". Youre projecting your own views and knowledge about how poker should be played onto your villans, wich is indeed a dangerous exercise.

I dont love to go into semantics, but lets just say that a $80 riverbet is a sizeable bet at 1/3 stakes. With the line villain executed in this hand i would more lean towards an exploitative fold rather than a raise. I woudnt fold against unknowns that i cant range accurately enough when they take this line (then i would potenially fold away too much raw equity and money if i am wrong for x amount of reasons), but i certainly have players in my playerpool that i can fold against on the river in similar spots. Just because their range is so narrow when taking spesific lines, and they just dont shift gears. What you see is what you get: they bet when they have strong nutted hands, nothing else.

I'm not projecting. I'm just re-iterating how bad players actually are and how we should be making money. I guess we just bet/bet/bet with value hands, bluff when appropriate, and slowdown/fold when they show aggression. Seriously. I think this works against the average/bad player.

What you're doing isn't literally handreading, it's just exploiting that you don't think a lls villian leads river w/ anything other than a flush. Hand reading would dictate he gets to the river with very few flushes. Obviously from your experience he doesn't lead w/ anything less than a flush so if that's the case then we should seriously consider folding. From my experience he leads the river with a hands such as a5 and a3, wouldn't surprise me to see a hand like 910/ak either. This to me is a raise ainec.

Yes you are, its a textbook example. Youre hammering on the fact that YOU think that villain should have folded a 5 high flush to the riverraise. Youre showing us that you want villain to play the way you think poker should be played.

But youre missing the big picture, it doesent matter one second what YOU think villain should be doing. They play the way they want with their amount of rationale and logic behind it.

My prediction is that many players winrates would go up significantly if they change the approach and avoid the kind of flawed approach youre illustrating with your statements.

Focus on what your villains is actually doing,accept it: and adjust relentlessly.

You're doing this exact same thing you're telling us we're doing, that from your perception of how he's playing its is only ever flushes, when in reality it isn't - $80 bet after calling a $50 bet isn't exactly a monster bet either btw

No i dont. And you dont really get the main point do you? I base my decisions of what i have actually seen through several thousand hours of livepoker in different venues around the world over the last 6-7 years. Ive seen this exact spot over and over and over again, and you gets shown a flush a huge percentage of the time is my opinion. Not 100 percent flushes of course, but they show up with a flush enough of the time that a riverraise is pretty bad.

I dont base my decisions of how i think my opponents should be playing regarding to my own knowledge and skill level. I dont add anything in terms of my own perception onto my villains- i observe with intense focus of what i see from villains in different spots, different lines combined with board texture and bet sizes. That information is the base for everything i do at the table.

So you aren't handreading at all, it's basically the opposite, your just drawing from experience