Hard to be results oriented when the results haven't been posted.

On another note, any thoughts on taking a c/c d/3b line?
I like to take this line sometimes against some of the stronger players in my game who like to reach showdown cheaply with ace-high but are likely to raise top pair on the turn.

I don't have much to add, I understand why you played it the way you did, vs a lot of guys you took the max ownage line, and it sounds like you would never fold it against someone you shouldn't. That doesn't make for a lot of discussion though.

The level of thinking in some of these replies though...everyone should read what michael Davis said and then read it again.

I think your hand might be a good candidate to check call flop and CR turn.

It's a vicious nit cycle though. The more you do something nitty cuz your image is nitty and you won't get paid off and they won't have a wide range against you cuz they perceive you as nitty, the more you adjust in that direction in the future. Eventually you are just like "doesn't he know I have aces and I'm a nit? I guess I should just check and call/fold" and it's a bad place to be.

I'm going to disagree with everyone (not on the hand) and say if I forked the river I would absolutely do it face up

I wouldn't 3 bet the turn. As played b/c river. All of his nut spade combos missed and villian knows the only way he can win the pot is by bluff raising.

+1

Not sure why so many of you are shocked by this fold. Villains play is very strong. My interpretation of the read is that he's never bluff raising. AQ seems possible, but optimistic. KK makes sense, but obviously has to be discounted. We lose to everything else. I probably still call though because I'm bad.

You never cease to amaze me.

There are a lot of opponents who NEVER BLUFF here, so it's not necessarily bad depending on the opponent.

Not really. Post the same hand but getting called on the river. Or just calling the turn raise and getting fsdr'd. Different thread of replies guaranteed.

ITT:

1) Folding is highly exploitative, and often "correct" vs the field if they never adjust.
2) If you fold this hand and it's obvious what you had (e.g. waffle folding) then you become highly exploitable vs river raises vs the field.

For example, vs a Loose Passive fish:

We raise ATo on btn, he calls bb.
Flop A72r he xc.
Turn A722r he xr. We can exploitatively b/f up to 50-60% of our range. But if we b/f hands like AT we should absolutely act like we were trying to steal the pot as we muck. Be careful not to induce counter-exploitation.

Q4s/Q7 (I defend Q7o here, may be a bit loose) are also in there. I'd call AA here sadly. And vs this opponent id have a 76s combo (BDFD) FWIW. So that adds in a bunch of combos. Admittedly under bluffing with my 3 bet as well, so random air high xr that turned combo draw w/ 5xss, 98ss and AQ are the worse hands I'd have.

Still overfolding for sure, but not that extreme.

fold frequency only counts hands that beat bluffs - generally doesn't include busted draws ^_^

don't know if you're being sarcastic, but i completely agree. this way you'll never even consider folding in this spot with these players again.

encouraging people you take a highly exploitative line against to start counter-exploiting is like playing with fire.

Also, you're literally teaching a guy who isn't considering raise bluffing that there's value in it. Awful result imo

That's an interesting point. If I fold here, and anyone asks, I say I was bluffing. If you're going to go this route, occasionally making a ballzy fold against predictable, never tell the truth about your hands, or just never say anything or any sign of disgust, or always be disgusted, but never give anything away. It's a disaster if your opponents properly adjust to your play.

I didnt mean that as in insult at all. I think you play good. And I wasnt being sarcastic...I do commend you on posting this hand. Honestly I think Id be a little embarrassed to but I think youve built up enough "cred" here and it is an interesting hand.

Also its worth noting that this is a 40/80 hand and not a 20/40 hand. I think the river fold is way more defensible in a 20 game where river bluff raises like this rarely happen. 40 regs are certainly capable of this, ESPECIALLY against someone like jdr who is sort of known to bet/fold these sort of spots. I think perhaps you underestimate the typical opponent a little bit.

It looks like villain has a monster or air. A naked queen is never taking this line after the turn action. Plus the fact that we just called pre I think youve gotta put one more bet in and show down.

Really? Why is that the case? I've always included every hand I've taken a given line with in my folds. Assuming you are bluffing at the correct frequency I see nothing wrong with including them.

heres a question that I think is worth thinking about...

You said this guy is a regular, someone you play against quite often and is sort of tricky. This being a big pot and him taking such an odd line, perhaps specifically tailored agains you, I think we'd all agree that just knowing what he had in this hand would be worth a dollar amount above zero. So how much would you pay just to know, without even having a shot at the pot? I think if its worth, say, 20 dollars, its certainly worth another 60 considering you have some percentage chance of winning the whole pot. Plus factoring in the damage this play does to your reputation (we can argue over how much damage, but "sigh bet folding" this brick river in this big of a pot after putting in so much is definitely going to make it more likely that at least one person at the table is going to be more likely to stab at rivers like this in the future), I think its a clear call. Sure, maybe the math says that bet/folding is slightly better than bet calling, but factoring in all the meta stuff IMO tilts this towards a call. Not to mention, god forbid, he flips over AKss while dragging the pot. Tilt insurance if nothing else.

ILLOGICAL! What do you put him on on turn? you 3 bet! the river card changes nothing and you FOLD to his reraise? In that case why 3bet turn, fold to THAT raise instead.

The in position player can choose to carry certain aspects of his value range as a turn call of a 3 bet to raise river. His range isn't immediately capped by flaring the 3 bet.

The hand itself almost reads like something of a brag. Either your opponent is bluffing properly percentage-wise given the action (or overplaying TPTK), or not bluffing properly percentage-wise. It's not as though anyone else could possibly know better or add insight over jdr's decision, other than to say the obvious

1. The pot is big
2. Sometimes opponents bluff and folding is exploitable
3. Against an opponent who does not bluff enough folding is profitable in the long run.
4. Don't give a hint that you're willing to make laydowns (unless you intend to call when they are bluffing later)

which, you know, I am sure jdr is already aware of all this anyway. It's a decent brag imo, lol. I enjoyed it.

This thread is eye opening to me that so many people think the quoted above is right. It really shows me that people don't understand what "poker" is. Poker doesn't need a flop turn and river, it just needs incomplete information and betting. Most of the information in Holdem still comes from the betting (or lack of betting given the opportunity). Holdem just happens to be more complex than a "poker game" where we both get dealt a random card and gamble on who's is higher - that could still be a great game if your opponent is a fool btw.

Suffice it to say if you are trying to figure out how to play Holdem by board texture alone you are going to make a lot of errors. And we see them all the time, bad players constantly misvalue their hand because of it's absolute value instead of it's relative value. Here the absolute value of our hand was fairly unchanged by this river card but the relative value goes down a lot when he raises!

Many players get better initially by figuring out how much a specific hand is worth on a specific board texture and getting good at putting in that much action exactly. This ability, combined with good preflop fundamentals, can be quite effective in small midstakes games so it's not surprising at all to me that many 2p2 believe the quoted section true.

Ok but by that logic doesn't 5 bets with kings on turn and river here feel like too many?

Boy is that a condescending opening sentence...

I get what youre saying - even though the river is a brick, the fact that the opponent raised indicates super strength. Its another big piece of information that we didn't have on the turn. But what youre leaving out is that even with all this taken into consideration, its an 80 to win 1060 wager. Better than 13 to 1. I would need to shown QQ or 77 A LOT by this guy to even think about folding an over pair in this spot.

What do you think about my previous question...how much do you think is the correct amount for jdr to pay to see what the villain had?