Don't have the HH, laptop here and can't get HEM to work.

nl100, eff.stack 100$

I am in BB with 88.
Villain (CO) is - no stats, hem doesn't import - a TAG but in a somewhat nitty, uncreative way. I would think a semidecent player, probably knows what cards to barrel, positionally somewhat aware etc. Prob like 18/ 16 - 20/18 if i would guess.

I have a clean TAG image, haven't played big pots with him. No dynamics.

He raises 3.5$ in CO, folded to me and I decide to only call.

Flop Q 7 5 (7$)
I check, he bets 5$, I call.

Turn Q (17$)
I check, he checks.

River A
I check, he bets 14$, I raise to 45$.

Do you think this makes sense?
Love it or hate it?

I would think I can easily rep a Queen (or even better), he never has a Queen or better.

And the main point I thought he is the kind of standard uncreative player who doesn't call with the Ace often at all...

If I was him, I would call just to see the Q. In other words, I'm not really a fan of this.

So your point is that you have a hard time folding when you know you are beat?

I think my line is consistent with a big hand, i wouldn't c/raise a Q on the flop without dynamics. Also I have to have sth to call flop ( a made hand) , and i don't think a nl100 tag first would think I have a good pair that might even be good when making a river check-raise like this.

I don't think this line screams queen, it actually screams bluff. I'd never expect to get a better hand to fold, I think calling and folding are pretty close in EV. If you won this, you had the best hand, period.

dont like it because if you had the queen you are not checking the river

the way you played i would probly be looking to just c/c the river, but i feel as though betting the turn ends this hand a much high percentage of the time.

Why not?

Bluffing w/ what? Are you really c/c the flop w/ air on a regular basis?

OP, your line makes sense and I'd play almost all of my value range this way...the only problem is IME people still can't fold the toppest pair especially when the action runs off this way. This prob isn't terrible, but I'm not really sure how good it is.

uhm... yes we are?

Yeah, if you check the turn w/Q, you should be checking that river because it's such a good card to bluff at, so you'll get value from his bluffs, and if your opponent hit the A he'll probably call so you can get value from that too.

That's kind of why I don't like this as a bluff unless he's pretty good or particularly nitty.

I'm not saying against me anyone should be calling here, I just think with most 100NL regs this line with a Q doesn't happen and this is more often a bluff than a real hand. Against some super nit, it's good, but against 95% of players this line is bad.

I'd rather v-bet turn... and c/c maybe c/f river depending on reads/history

I think you have the best hand here enough of the time to make calling better than turning your hand into a bluff. Villain rarely has Qx, and the ace is a good bluff card.

what about b/f turn

Yeah, maybe, but if my feeling is correct that villain folds Ax big percentage of the time (which may be debatable) don't I have good extra value in turning it into a bluff?

he never rebluffs so I win the same amount as i would calling, but risking this 31$ to bluff when he should never have Qx i can also make a profit if he folds his Ace hands enough of the time.

It's weird because in finnish forum where I asked this - good winning poker players from small to mid stakes answered - and about 10-15 totalling like 90% of people thought this move was good or very good and liked it.

It seems evident that there is a big difference in thinking within the 2+2 small stakes sample and the scandi grinders.
Sample size might be skewed but still it's interesting - ofc i'm not saying we finns are right but just saying.

I think my line is consistent, and I do think that the nl100 grinder on average doesn't call here with the Ace. And ofc AK=A2, all aces have only value as a bluffcatcher.

Nobody folds an ace here at 100NL, and nobody play a queen like this at 100NL. Maybe 1% of 100NL players would do either of the aforementioned things.

I would fold an ace against an unknown, and it's super bad if you call river as standard.It's not like a standard bluffspot, nl100 players don't chekc-raise rivers as bluff and there are very few draws so i had to have a real hand on flop - it's not like i'm floating OOP that flop.

Also lots of other players in the finnish forum said they would fold an ace.

My read was also he is a bit nitty. It's a ******ed statement to say nobody folds an ace.
He folded something there at least in the hand, maybe a bluff but possibly the ace.

Also it is the best play to check-raise a river ACE when he bluffs it a lot and bets aces if you have a queen.

Maybe others are just more advanced in their poker thinking than you?

I play 200NL and I've cashed out a **** ton, I'm not trying to dick you around, I'm just telling you what I know. At 100NL when someone who isn't a fish takes this line, it's a bluff.

yes, me too i've played 75% of my poker career nl200+
But that's irrelevant

I just happen to disagree with you, I think especially nl100 players where I play at least are more timid and might very well fold an ace here.

Also as I said i think this line with a queen is very near standard if i did have it (check-raising river after this action)

lol, I'm not trying to argue who's better, I'm just stating my opinion on the matter.

Depends on where you're playing as to how often a typical reg somewhat on the nitty side will fold an A here. Some crazy Euro sites probably about never, probably a reasonable % of the time on like Stars.

You still haven't answered my question: what can hero be bluffing w/ on this board? Nobody (solid) floats OOP w/ total air to c/r the river as a bluff. I mean wtf?

And as for OP, I had a feeling that it worked out based on the post. Like I said though, I think this is fine only if villain is either pretty good at hand-reading and/or on the nittier side. You're right in that most solid regs would fold Ax almost always w/o much history and villain can really never have Qx or better after checking the turn. I like your though process at the very least.

One of the conclusions I have come into after analyzing this hand and reading replies here and on other forum is that I am not totally aware of how nl100 players usually hand read.

For me, check-raising this river (Ace) is very,very standard and undoubtedly most +EV because he should bet the A with bluffs and value so big % of the time. I think I am repping a lot, and not bluffs.

But it seems to me that the average nl100 player not necessarily understands that you should check-raise the river, which makes my play worse. If people think i don't rep much.

Flipside of the coin anyways is too that if I check-raise these rivers as value with my whole valuerange Qx+ and I DO, I should from a game theoretical point point of view also balance my range. And as I don't have hands with no SD value in my range I have to do it with hands like 88.
It's a nice image thing also if he calls, sort of, adds value to my check-raise value rivers and I still do think that this works a lot - he folds the ace too.

I just didn't know many TAG's think so differently than I.

I agree with this.

I like the c/r on the river if you think villain is a strong regular. If they are a weak regular calling is probably better. If they are a fish, folding is probably best.

A strong regular should stop an ask the question "could he reasonable expect me to bet this river?" The answer would obviously be yes, giving your c/r much more credit. They'll also think about what hands you could be bluffing with, and have to come to the conclusion you are turning made hands into bluffs for calling to be not terrible.

A weak regular will think "i improved on the river and have top pair, he could be bluffing" and call. However, they know that the A is good to bluff, so your 88 is good a decent amount of the time.

A fish will just call because the don't fold TP when all they are beating is bluffs.