I don't think that V is as wide as you think in this spot. You limp rr and bet this flop. I think his range is mostly fds gutshots and some combo draws. Most likely KJ JT. Maybe bottom set. Don't give him a free shot at realizing his equity. Even if you think he's FOS a lot here, do you really want to have turn c/c then a super gross river peals off and he can put you in a tough spot. It's your money, do what you want, but I wouldn't check this turn.

I really have never been the type of OP to ask for help and then just bash anyone who gives advice contrary to what I did, but this just seems silly on a few different fronts:

(1) It seems like you're not trusting my OP, that he will call very wide on his button when reasonably deep. I don't think my weak flop bet changes a whole lot as he can float looking to pounce if I show weakness later.

(2) "Most likely KJhh, JThh. Maybe bottom set." Really? You think these 3 holdings comprise >50% of his range at this point? This has to be the epitome of what I call "2+2 bias" where people view a hand almost like a horror movie and assume that since it was posted on 2+2, something must have gone wrong and thus the advice is a bit tainted toward bigger bets, ending hands early, and putting Vs on stronger ranges.

(3) Let's say you are right and his range is mostly KJhh, JThh, and bottom set. Are you telling me that an aggressive LAG is not betting these hands close to 100% of the time on the turn when I show weakness by a weak flop bet and check turn? If you really believe he is on these hands, then why not just c/shove?

I said also fds and gutshots so really all combos of JT and KJ and any reasonable combo. Also I never said flop bet was weak. I would just size slightly larger given flop texture. Of course he could have the case ace a qx a unimproved pocket pair. I just think if villain is as good as you say it's obvious to him you are at the top of your range so it doesn't make sense for him to continue with random nonsense to "steal the pot later". Also I think it's uneccessary to be trying to 4th level villains in LLSNL. I wasn't criticizing you, just giving my opinion OP.

If you check and he steps into this one, you should just be trying to trap him all the time.

Ok I guess there is a mix of thought of check vs. bet, but my plan from the start was to feign weakness w/ a KK type of hand, so it was time to set the trap. Maybe I go a little overboard, but since V is a solid LAG, I also decide to throw a mild reverse tell at him by reaching for my chips and counting out some, before checking...

Turn ($200): AQ58 Hero checks. V bets $65. Hero??

We get it. You are saying he is balanced. Which is what makes him good. Doesn't mean you should check the turn. Why? Value. He has flush draws, straight draws, sets, in his range. Don't count on him making the mistake. Just bet.

+1 That's what I was saying. If hero checks I think he is making a mistake by letting villain realize his equity for free the times he checks behind. At least bet 50$. He will continue wide and we look weak. We are Still giving him an opportunity to make a move on the river also.

^^ Ok NutJob and D_Lonnigan, so I just got really lucky and after stupidly checking the turn, shockingly this LAG bets $65 (if you think his range is straight draws, flush draws, and sets, does this really surprise you?)... so now what do we do?

Ummmm....RIP. All in. You got what you wanted now get it in.

I am assuming your plan was to get it in the first place. At least I hope it was. Not sure what you are looking for. This is NEVER a call. EVER.

You have 1 PSB left and turn was a brick for all draws.

Fist pumping jam.

If you want to continue to look like KK or maybe ace rag suited or hope to call what we hope is a bluff when a heart comes, you could call and hope he tries to bluff river.

I probably just get it in here, partly because I don't want to let him draw and then pay him when he hits and get nothing when he misses.

You're going to fold out his bluffs and nonsense, but at least you got something out of them. I think a downside of playing the hand this way is he can also fold his best hands. Like, if you were ever going to fold bottom set with no straights or flushes out, this would be the time.

As I said, if he has decided to float/bluff a limp reraiser on this board, I think you should be playing to trap and bluff catch him very often. Unless he does have 55 or something, he is spewing and/or overthinking things.

Just shove here......I hope you did but I have my doubts.

Am I the only one that thinks this is a fold? River will be a ❤️ and villain has X ❤️ X ❤️. Meta game folks.

Okay so I should probably finish this up, to recap...

Hero ($400) open limped black Aces, another limper, V (good LAG-$550) raises to $10 OTB, SB calls, Hero makes it $45, only V calls.

Flop ($100): AQ5 Hero bets $50. V calls.

Turn ($200) AQ58 Hero checks. V bets $65. Hero calls.

Here was my thinking: I think this is classic Ed Miller "Playing the Player" LAG section. We are denying information to the LAG to keep his wide range in the hand. I am continuing to take the line that looks like a weak/scared KK/JJ. To be fair, I'm getting a little "greedy" since V only bet $65. Had V bet >$100, I would have jammed to (likely) take down the pot, as my line looks super strong. But his $65 bet leaves us with a sizable ~$230 effective left and I just felt that not only was he likely drawing thin, but there was chance he was drawing dead, and I wanted it all and thought it was worth the risk.

My plan is to check all rivers, and probably call any bet V makes unless both the river card and my live read tell me otherwise.

River ($330): AQ58J Hero checks. Villain bets $165. No live read on Villain. Hero?

If you are playing the player aren't you calling all rivers?

Edit: This is a clear call IMO. His turn bet actually looks strong to me. Not sure what he is trying to accomplish with it if he was on a flush draw because I don't think he gets many folds with that small bet.

Turn was a clear shove. As played, call and hope he has a set/ 2 pair type hand. He has a lot of those too.

I guess we can only call. We've lost a lot of money vs. a FD, especially if he would have checked the river. Lost some vs. hands like 55.

But, if this is all a ******ed bluff we've picked up like 150 BBs, I believe.

I think you may be allergic to money. You should get that checked out ASAP.

Called it.

Xc the turn is horrific

We have to call river as played

This thread is a classic example of why I encourage 2+2 OPs to "open up your range" of hands that you post on this forum to include hands where the result was good for you and where the result was bad for you. Ideally post equal amounts of each.

What you'll notice is that on hands that resulted well for you and went to the turn or river on moderately scary boards, many (not all) posters will assume early on in the hand that you are about to get sucked out on (because why else would post the hand, right?) so they will encourage lines that attempt to end the hand early even though they might not be the most +EV. Not that you should ignore their thoughts, but just make sure their logic is sound.



I really was (and am) wanting good feedback on the hand, even if the feedback goes against the way I played it. But when posters ignore/deny my OP (describing that V would be very wide pre-flop even after my limp/rr) and then have no answer when I point out that even if his range is really strong (on the turn) like they suppose, we should expect him to bet after I check, then it is hard to take the feedback seriously.

I don't expect a "solid lag" to show up here with 56s very often.

Especially if this is your first time limp re-raising before the flop.

I liked the way you played the hand overall, I just would of shoved the turn because against his range he does have a ton of gutshots and flush draws. By doing that though you do shut down his ability to bluff the river.

NH

Ok Joey. Here is my analysis of why this hand was played incorrectly on every street. Take if for what it is worth.

1) You are targeting or at least attempting to target a "good lag" when you are out of position. This in itself is flawed. You do not try to target an opponent that is balanced and will put you in tough spots, especially when you are out of position.

2) You limp AA and then back raise them to $45 and are met with a call. Pot is now $100 and you have an spr of 4. This will not leave you much room to play multiple streets. The goal at this point is to get it in. We have AA and we want to get it in. End of story.

3) The flop comes A Q 5 and is a great board for us. We flop major advantage. You bet $50. Not enough. We want to bet at least 3/4 pot. Our plan should be to get it in on the turn. If you had bet $80 and are met with a call, the pot would have been $260 leaving you with $275.

4) Spr is now 1 on the turn. We jam comfortably when the turn bricks an offsuit 8. End of hand. We no longer care if he calls or folds. Doesn't matter.

5) The point is we are nutted. We want to get it in. The real question is what other hands do you play like this? When you balance your range in a poled fashion you become tough to play against. You are not maximizing ev by letting your opponent set his own price on draws by checking on the turn. If he has a value hand then you should punish him on the turn by getting it in. He isn't folding AQ, QQ, 55, KJh, JTh, etc. So get it in.

(1) False, as clearly explained in OP, I was targeting the bad loose splashier players, and this situation was not what I was targeting.

(2) Agree that there is not much room for creativity with low SPR, but that doesn't answer how to get the money in, which is going to be villain dependent. With most villains (who are tight/loose passive) you are correct that us betting is the way to get it in.

(3) Completely ignores Villain description and you provide no logic, just assertions. If he is wide pre and decent, by betting as strongly as you suggest we allow him to correctly fold the majority of his weak range. Read Ed Miller's "Playing the Player" LAG Section.

(4) Again you provide no logic, just assertions. Your analysis seems desperate to WIN THE POT! versus making the most +EV play, like winning an even bigger pot. "We no longer care if he calls or folds. Doesn't matter." exemplifies how you are not thinking in terms of +EV but just taking down the pot.

(5) I think I played the hand precisely like KK through the turn and again I think you put him on way too strong a range. I think he has all the draws you suggest + most 1 pair (including PPs) options that sensed weakness on the flop and turn and thought there would be an opportunity for a successful bluff in addition to 2pair/trips draws.

Thanks. Yeah I don't expect precisely 56s much, but I expect hands like KQ,KJ, JT, etc. that are turning a poorly "made" hand into a bluff. When you get a hand heads up to the flop, especially against a LAG, I just don't think you should be that worried about a flush with only 3 of a suit on a board. In fact, against a LAG, if you have a solid made hand, I think you almost want the 3rd flush card to come up to give him a chance to bluff at it. Now it is totally different if you go to the flop 4-5 ways, bet the flop (with 2 of a suit on the board), get one caller, and then the 3rd flush card comes -- much more precarious situation.