I've heard good players saying similar stuff (that fish are scared of flushes way too much) very often. What do they mean by that? Flushes are indeed scary, is it not? *

* I'm a fish.

Just that some players assume a third of a suit means the other guy must have a flush

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Fish don't really think in terms of ranges.
It's more like, what ever card hits, changes their perception of your "range". If they were about to fold and a flush hits, then they put you on a flush.
If they wanted to float you again, now all the sudden you have a flush draw.

I think flush cards are decent for bluffing vs fish.

So basically fish are people who make excuses that aren't really logical without giving a second thought...

This sounds like me a lot when i'm playing, but mostly when i'm playing tho trying to work on my mentality in these spots/not tilt.

Like i make an assumption about villain's range then i will be in the same spot and then give a totally different assumption as an "excuse" to make a call even though logically it makes no sense lol

As a mid stakes reg, my basic gameplay is doing a lot of pondering about spots.
Here's what villain should do, here's what he shouldn't do.
How would this specific villain deviate from this line? What do I know about this particular villain? How does the population play this spot?
How does tight villain play this spot? What about very aggressive reg?

Through long-term experience, I'm able to put all the variables together in a very short time.
If I drop down in stakes, I will see villains do a lot of errors. Kind of what you described, they don't think about every possible detail in the hand.
I would say that getting to the mid and high stakes, is a lot about figuring out every small detail, and then finding inconsistencies.

So I would say that one of my strengths is to stay rational and logical in every spot!
And utilize the information I have at the time to my best potential.

I make errors at the time when playing, like bluffing too wide, but then I take time to analyze the hand and figure out what went wrong. This way, eventually I can turn a failed bluff into my strategic knowledge advantage later on.

Typical situation; fish raises preflop and gets called. Bets a J45 flop with two spades and get checkraised. Fish jams over the top with KJ and gets stacked by a set because he put him on a flushdraw.

^ This ^. I remember when I was a risk-averse newbie. (These days, I'm a risk-averse oldie lol). Every time a flush draw completed, I was convinced that villain had the flush, and every time the board paired, I was "sure" villain had a boat, so I would check-fold hands like top pair.

Mathematically, it is hard for someone to have the exact FD on the board. Even if someone is prone to call with Axs, you need to keep in mind that 3 out of 4 times, they have the wrong suit.

There are situations where you can exploit this fear. Take for example a case where you have a non-flush draw or a weakish type of hand. You have a villain that has a raising range of JJ+, AK. You call and on the flop you have TP, but below JJ. The PFR cbets. On a two tone flop HU, you can call representing you have the equity of FD as well as the bluff catcher hand. It can often make the call +EV, even though you aren't getting odds of calling either the FD or bluff catcher by themselves. It is a thing of beauty when the FD "hits", and the PFR x/f his hand. If they are a thinking player, you get the added bonus of them smugly thinking you're an idiot for your flop call and how superior they were for not paying you off.

Speaking from the side of someone who hate to see the flush complete, it's because very often when someone cracks my A' or K's with 3-5 making two pair on the flop and you wonder why someone plays 3-5 for a raise the answer is inevitably "because they were suited".

Yes, I know more often than not the flush does not complete, but when it does it sure seems like somebody has it. If nothing else it limits your ability to get value out of your big hands.

I was just talking more about mental game strat, but ofc you have to make decisions based on villain's ranges like that was a +EV call/fold/raise vs his range etc. even if you run into the top of his range or end up losing the hand (which is more results orientated thinking noobies go by when they think they made a good decision).

Making bad assumptions and making excuses to validate those assumptions is just a huge leak i continue to struggle with and i think most people struggle with.

All the previous comments apply to the question more or less. I would like to add that since a fish won't put opponent on a range, a 3rd card to a flush will almost always shut down his betting of strong hands or lets say made hands. A fish will always check the river and lose value if a 3rd flush card hits, fearing his opponent might have made a flush thus "fish hate flushes coming in"