Lag CO opens, I 3 KsJs on the button,very laggy guy pre in BB calls. He will call any suited cards, any pair, all broadways. He play's carefully post. I suspect he would raise a jack and call dowm worse pairs on the flop. He is bluffy in the check to induce and 3 barrel sense. I haven't seen him get to out of line post in about a 40 hour sample size, CO calls. He tends to pay off thinly.

JcTh3d....I bet, BB calls, CO folds

JcTh3d7d...I bet, BB calls

JcTh3d7dQc...I bet, BB raises...Call or fold?

3-bet 3 ways preflop = 9 SB = 4.5 BB
Bet-call flop = 2 SB = 1 BB
Bet-call turn = 2 BB
Bet-c/r river = 3 BB

At 10.5:1, I'd call against a player that is "bluffy" in any sense. But folding isn't a bad option if you really trust your read.

Maybe you should look at the hand ranges *before* you bet the river and see what that says.

I'm starting to think checking back river makes sense. I'm really only targeting T's with a value bet. However, he should be raising with his good tens on ths flop against my range. But he does tend to play carefully post. I don't trust him to play nice on the river so I tend to pay off here. The Q crushes his flop and turn call range and reduces my ability to get paid off by lower pairs and maybe Ace high.

River is a bet assuming he calls wide preflop and calls any pair.

You're right, but expecting a call from 55 on the river here seems pretty optimistic. (I'm not saying it can't happen.)

Edit: The hand range on the flop call is critical in the analysis here.

What bluffs can this opponent have?

Not suggesting we shouldn't call, but this is clearly important for the math.

Hands that make sense for value include:

AK, QT, K9 (suited and offsuit?), 98 (same as before), Q3s. So what, 56 combos we want to go with?

So at 10.75:1, he needs 5.2 bluff combos. So let's work this out. If he gets to the river with 26 hand combos that bluff 25% of the time, let's call.

Folding is fine too here. You're probably at or near the bottom of your value range and you don't have a ton of bluffs here.

I think he folds the smaller pairs on this river. I would think he CR's all J's but maybe not. I think he over respects my range even though it's a steal situation. I don't think I would be giving up much value if I checked the river. If I am going to feel the need to call a river CR, it may be better to just check.

In reality, even laggy players don't up and CR bluff the river...especially this river...specially against someone who probably is not folding. My range is strong, I don't have many bluffs.....If he can have some worse J's it's an easy bet. If I'm only targeting T's it's closer.

Overall, it's probably a bet/fold since I'm not sure how wide he will call down.

Just my $0.02...if you are questioning whether or not you should fold, then you should call. Folding the best hand here is a catastrophe; if you’re not sure, then look him up. Worst case is that one more bet buys you some very good information that will be helpful in the future.

I dispute that the bet will necessarily buy you "very good information." It's information, but how "good" it is will depend on what he shows. If he shows QTs, you really haven't learned a lot from the scenario.

There's also more nuance than just saying it's a "catastrophe" because that's really only dependent upon the result and not the scenario. If he's bluffing with EXACTLY one hand, and this happens to be the time that he's bluffing, you're losing money a lot of money in the long run by thinking that this is a call.

I don’t necessarily dispute anything you say here, but you glossed over my main point.

If you are seriously asking “I wonder if I should fold or call” in this spot, and the answer is NOT CLEAR AND OBVIOUS to you...then you have a clear call; you don’t know your opponent well enough yet to make a fold the correct play.

Of course, you can construct all sorts of hypothetical scenarios based on various ranges he holds, and debating the math behind those can be a valuable use of discussion; my point was a matter of actual practice and not intended to take away from the larger conceptual discussion.

I would disagree with this very strongly.

As far as a playing heuristic goes, sure. "When in doubt, call." I can go with that. We use heuristics in tons of situations. But it doesn't make it the right or wrong play. It's just a way to make a decision when you don't know how to make a decision otherwise.

But the idea that if you're not sure in one direction, then the other direction is clearly the right way to play is a patently absurd way to look at it. It's just a huge overstatement. If there's enough information to pull one from one play to the other, then there's a middle-ish amount of information that will let you conclude that it's close.

Lol, now your just being silly, or you like being argumentative. Either is ok by me!

But you clearly misstate what I’m saying. The choices are NOT equal. With pot odds of 10.5-1, you need to be more than 90% sure your opponent has you beat for a fold to be correct. If you are, fold away. If you’re not, call.

If you are 50-50 on the situation and you can justify a fold, you are cordially invited to play at any table I am at. I need to go play a show now; great chatting with you. Cheers!

I think you are the one guilty of misstating. I never said that the choices were equal in probability. Also, this statement dramatically different than what you said in the previous post:

This is my position: I think you're overstating the strength of the heuristic that you're promoting. My claim is that if you believe that there can be a point where you have enough information to shift a decision from a call to a fold, then there is a point in the middle where there is enough information to declare that the decision is close. And if the decision is close, there's no sense in which you have a clear call anymore.

No one folds a pair.

You certainly should know whether you are going to b/f or b/c before you bet.

Perhaps at your tables, but as a general claim this is false.

Just for the sake of argument, do you think the BB would fold A7 here. If so, when?

It seems probable he would fold this hand preflop. (I read "broadways" here as broadway combos, not a solo-broadway card, so J2o would get a call.)

And it seems quite likely that if he called preflop with this hand, would fold on the flop with zero pairs and zero draws. Careful players aren't peeling super light.

There are players who never fold a pair. There are players who will call down with pairs, but mostly in two bet steal situations. This villain would feel crushed, and rightfully so after I bet this river f he had a small pair.

Here is a bonus question.....What hand from my range should be checked back on the turn? What hands that I bet turn with if any, should be turned into a bluff on the river? This is assuming villain would fold small pairs.

My range is...44+ QTo+ KTo+ 9Ts+ J9s+ Q9s+ K9s+ A2s+ A8o+...........Maybe I should tighten up a pip with the QT and KTo+ with the BB willing to call 3 so often. I would 3 bet A6o+ against this CO if it weren't for BB. Feel free to comment on my range.

Any guesses of the proper bluff 3 bet hand here? My guess is AJ. This is why I fold KJ without a read.

It's either AJ or KQ. AJ prob better because we're targeting Queens up to hero fold if we 3 bet, which is problematic if we have a queen

KJ is prob better than AJ since KJ reduces both AK and K9

I'm not sure that AJ/KJ are in the value betting range here, so I'm not sure they would be appropriate 3-bet bluff hands.

I'm not even sure there's a reasonable 3-bet bluff range here. I think our hand range is too small so that it would be something like one combo and maybe only x% of the time. In practice, I 3-bet bluff nothing here.

If KJ is a river bet, then AJ surely is. If AJ is the proper 3 bet bluff combo, then KJ is a clear fold without a read.

Both if-then propositions may be true. But I'm currently doubtful of both hypotheses.

Is KJ a river bet? I'm skeptical.

Is AJ a 3 bet bluff? I'm even more skeptical of this than I am of the KJ river bet.