At what point do you decide to go home, given a good game?

I did something really ******ed, that I can't for the life of me think of why I did it???

1/2NL live Niagara,

Table is on monkey tilt. I've been there about an hour.
Half the table is totally ******ed has over 200bb.
I've been a LAG.

I'm tired and I should go home, but the game is sooooooo good.
The guy beside me says, "Before you got here we had $3 pots" This last orbit $2000 has changed hands (1000BB).

I have about $500.

EP 99, UTG limps.

I raise 7.5BB
5 callers.

Flop T84

Everyone checks.
Pot $90

Turn 4 // good card to bluff with

UTG bet $20. (He has $400 behind)

Only a real idiot would try to bluff 5 ******ed players.

I (******ed) bet $100 with 4 players behind.

Folded to SB who tanks and shoves AI for $70 more.

UTG folds...

Fold or call the $70?

You're getting 4 to 1 but you have 99 do you call or fold?

SB is a very weak player. He's on his 3rd buyin in an hour.

call obv

Sorry to say fold. You cannot beat a T and you cannot beat a 4.
SB was laying in the weeds and trapped you.

Yeah, getting more than 5 to 1 on your money doesn't really matter when there's like a less than 1% chance villain is ever bluffing.

I'm not sue why u figure that the 4 is good card to bluff...

...I hate folding here but I just can't see u being good here very often (although I've seen stranger things.) If u play this hand out 100x does this horrible player come up with a couple overcards or a smaller pair 16 times? Maybe but when he does have overcards u'll lose 1 in 7x anyway lol. Save ur money.

umm, call the $70, you can't invest $115 with 99 on a board that ends up being T844 against people described as terrible, and then fold when you close the action for another $70.

I also don't really understand this post, this isn't any type of majorly botched hand or big leak, or all that interesting to be honest. You keep referring to it as a major bluff and being "******ed" even though there's nothing here that is. Flop action looked weak, guy made a dumb turn bet, you decided to rep strength with a raise (in a spot where your hand may have been good anyway). You got caught - it happens. Nothing major.

um you could just flat the $20 bet. calling isn't just for calling stations -- there is a possibility he's betting ~1/5 pot with an 8x hand. since you checked the flop you underrepped your hand a bit. anyone who called preflop would often bet a Tx once you check the flop. so i think it's worth calling to see if anyone behind you pops it, and possibly call a river bet too. who knows, you might spike a 9.

your raise amounts to turning what might be the best hand into a bluff. and once you've decided you're bluffing and he reraises, the consistent thing to do would be fold.
edit to add: define "weak player" - usually this = a guy who only bets big when he has a big hand, but if he's a spewmonkey then you could argue for calling off the rest. i don't know, dude, use your judgment at that point.

Also by my math the pot is 90+20+100+170-5(rake). This is $375, you need to call another $70. You're getting 5.3-1, which means you have to be ahead here very, very infrequently to make calling +EV

He needs to be ahead a little under 20% of the time here. Problem is he is ahead here 5% of the time at most. This is a snap fold. Passive donks aren't bluff cold 3betting on the turn into 5 players.

I completely disgaree. For starters, there are more thinks at work here than simple +/-EV calculations. It is insanely weak to stick in a raise the total size of which is $100 with what could be considered a reasonable pair and then fold to a total-size bet of $170. This is letting a donk run over you and basically giving money away. If you want to argue that the turn raise is silly, or too big, that's fine, but once we stick in $100 (we have $115 invested) we can't fold anything for another $70 in this spot.

There are very, very few players who will have worse than 99 only 5% of the time in this spot. Even if it were only 5%, calling would be a very tiny -EV scenario.

Metagame issues are the only reasons you could justify calling off the 70 only because ZOMG Im already in for 100.

The raise IMO was bad, are you trying to get called by an 8 or fold out a 10. Your flop check means you dont have JJ+.

The person has tank shoved. This is never an 8, if he shows an 8, he will show you two of them...

Its a fold everyday of the week, and I call the turn before I raise...

derick's law.

******ed players never ever check raise bluff.

How many CR bluff's have you caught this year from ******ed players?

I haven't caught any. Zippo, Zero. None...

It doesn't matter what his line was, we're getting 5.3-1, we can't fold. The SB has been described as someone terrible, he needs to have 8x, 77, the other 99, or J9/97/76 that picked up a turn flush draw, very very infrequently to make calling +EV. Even if he has these only 5% of the time, calling is -EV by an extremely small amount, we'd be sacrificing a tiny bit of equity in order to not fold for $70 into a pot where we have already invested $115

I caught one because the guy misread his hand... 4 flush < one pair...

Its far easier for this guy to have Tx then any of those hands mentioned, because he dosent check, check, what, two people have shown aggression, ok I shove... with worse then 99

2outs, I know what ur saying and at the time I make this probable donation because I'm getting >5->1 but sitting here at home it becomes painfully obvious that there is no way we're good here enough to put the $70 in. If u call u'd be totally justified and like I said, in this situation (in real time) I 'sigh' and put the 35bb in praying that the SB has lost his mind or that I spike a 9 but it really is just compounding a mistake. I guess the more I think about it I could be persuaded either way... could this be an 8, 99 or two overcards 16% of the time? I guess it could but it really does feel like throwing money away.

I still can't figure out why u feel the need to 'bluff' here when quite possibly u have the best hand. Nobody in this 'motley crew' is going to laydown a T to the table LAG anyway and u have some showdown value.

Folding when you have $115 invested in the pot with $70 left to reach showdown against someone described as terrible would also be construed as throwing money away, not to mention extremely weak and non-competitive.

Let's say OP somehow was in this exact same situation with Th5h. No one here would advocate folding, even thought it's essentially the same hand as 99. (Possibilities for a chop would be the only thing changing the equity)

This hand is butchered. Bet flop, flat turn, fold turn as played. Anyone saying call turn, give me a range that a weak tight player cold 3 bets bets all in multiway that we are ahead of. This is a fullhouse, quads, or a poorly played KK+ 99% of the time.

This is a huge stretch...

In a sports betting thread a guy was bragging that halfway through the NBA season he got Oklahoma at 75 to 1 to win the NBA championship when the best price available anywhere was ~35 to 1. That was an incredible price to get (a bargain, a steal, w/e) only trouble was... Oklahoma had exactly 0 chance of winning the title so he just wasted his money.

The range only has to include the occasional bluff or 77 to make it +EV, at the very least neutral EV. We have $115 invested (due to our own mistakes) and have to call another $70 to reach showdown. Folding is extremely weak and would be tantamount to flat-out telling the table that we open preflop with a hand that completely missed this board, then tried to steal the pot on the turn but failed. This is not good at all.

2outs, he's got 77 and bluffs in his range exactly never. Weak has nothing to do with it at small stakes where everyone is on level one. Calling is burning money, plain and simple.

You are flat out 100% incorrect.

Explain to me how it is possible that SB, a weak terrible player, decides under your theory to flat call preflop, check the flop, and then check/raise all in on the turn with overpairs/88/big T's. Such a line would make no sense. It's impossible that someone would take this bizarre line with an overpair BUT be completely incapable of putting money into the pot with a hand that 99 beats.

We are getting 5.3-1 in this spot. If the remaining $70 were a leak at all (it isn't), it would be so by such a small margin in terms of it being -EV that we'd literally be talking about a handful of cents per hundred hands. It's just completely impossible that someone's hand range is so narrow here that we aren't good close to 15 times in 100.

The turn may have put a backdoor flush on the board (this wasn't referenced). SB can't have something like J9 or 97 here that picked up outs when it turned a FD?

Also, the whole "everyone is on level one" theory is so idiotic. OP isn't on level one; he's on this site posting the hand. Why do we automatically assume the other 9/10 players have no poker knowledge simply because they're at a low limit live table (the same table at which our OP happens to be seated)?

This is what I think.

I admit my bet, especially the size may be ******ed.

In the heat of battle I bet because...

The turn bet is so small.
There's little chance that he has a 4.
It's unlikely anyone has JJ+
I'm going to take it down now.

However, I agree with your point.
I have *WAY TOO MUCH EQUITY TO BLUFF*....
Sorry... I had to shout that.

2outs, if op's read of villain as weak tight is accurate, your assumptions are very lol. No offense.

1. Nobody who posted in this thread is 100% anything. We're arguing over whether hero is good >16% of the time or not. You are saying yes, and others are saying no, more like 3%. I would say it's really tough to know that without all the sensory information available at the table.

2. How about 4x, does that make sense? also, if he has deduces that hero does not have a Tx/overpair, from the flop check then he would be reading hands well to shove here with a 10 (while the check lets him see if someone in LP accidentally caught trip 4's)

3. now i am wondering if the hero is in the SB with air and the image of a card dead losing player....and switched the roles around to see how likely he would be to fold out a hand like 99 held by a tag. hence the title, "******ed bluffing" hmm?