Villain in this hand is a ~40 year old black guy. Seems to play reasonably well. Up a lot tonight. I think I'd seen him value-bet somewhat thinly for 1/2 and has also induced a bunch of folds tonight (never shows, so no idea whether he had the goods in those hands).
Hero is up a little tonight. Mid-30s white guy. Playing pretty TAG but will limp along with PPs and suited connectors/one-gappers.

Limp-happy table. Two decent guys to my left and villain to my right. Otherwise play is pretty fishy.

Effective stacks $250. There are also some short stacks ~$100 in the middle.

Hero is BB with 74. Villain is on Button.

Limped around 6 ways, including SB. Hero checks option.

Flop ($10 after rake and BBJ) 985
Checks around
Turn ($10) 6

SB checks, Hero bets $10, folded around to Villain on button who calls, SB folds

River ($28) 6
Hero bets $15, Villain raises to $30

So it's back to hero. This seems like such a value bet with either T7 or a turned two pair that backed into a full house. But it's so small that I feel priced in.
After the rake it will be $15 to win $70. But I'm probably calling for a chop at best, making it $15 to win $35.
If he makes it $50 instead of $30, I should definitely fold.

Thoughts on this hand (sizing, river decision) in particular? Also, I'm looking for insights into playing one-liner boards in passive/fishy games. Any threads on this topic more generally.

Obv pre, flop and turn are all good.
I like the sizing on the turn and the river.
If the river doesn't pair the board, I think we can bet more for value, but it's harder to get calls from worse on this board on the river.

As for the min raise on the river: I think it's hard for him to ever be raising any worse for value here, or as a bluff really. The min raise just yells "Please call me."
I would fold here and feel ok about it.

Re the general case:
Bet/bet/bet with your value hands.
When you get raised, evaluate, and tend to fold with marginal hands. If they are passive, and then suddenly not passive (passive agressive? lol) there is normally a reason. There is no reason to pay them off when they turn their hand face up for us.
People will call down with all sorts of stupid stuff, so just keep on betting any time you have a strong hand.

Line looks fine, I'd call river every time for $15 here. Too cheap not to. Even if we assume he's never doing it with worse I think a call is good given the price you're getting.

Please do explain.

Sent from my VS840 4G using 2+2 Forums

Thanks for the feedback.
Result: I tank called, he had 75 and we chopped.
I have no clue if he was turning his straight into a bluff or betting to get called by worse.

I completely agree with this strategy if we have the straight. Bet fold nearly all the time with the one card and bet huge with nut straights.
I'm more interested in the efficacy of bluff raising. He nearly got me to fold for a 1/4 pot size raise. If he had made it slightly more, I would have folded.

With four to a straight on board and the possibility of a higher straight and/or a full house (so not four to broadway or a paired board) but no flush possibility, it's likely that a 1/3 or 1/2 pot raise would get a fold from the right opponents a large % of the time.
There are always a few who will never lay down a straight, but it's got to be a profitable play against about half of opponents at 1/2.

Pot will be $88 if we call, so even assuming we never do better than chop, we're calling $15 to win $44, and so need to be chopping at least a third of the time to be good. I think we're doing that easily.

I'm calling for that price. If he would have made it $60+ it would have been a tougher decision but I still might call as a lot of 1/2 V's will raise here with just a 7 because "it's a straight, ldo"

I obv wouldn't call an all in but I would think most V's would bet a set or 2pair on flop so I think a 7 is good a lot here. Also V dependent.

It's incorrect.

You do not consider your own $15 call as part of pot.

It is $73 pot and $15 call, 73:15 or 4.86:1.

Chopping = 1/2 of $58 is $29, which means that you're calling $15 to win $29, or 1.93:1.

If you think we are chopping 1 out of 3 times, this is a call.

Fold.

He haz a straight and tarped u

Sent from my SCH-I545 using 2+2 Forums

Call river. Probably folding for any more.

Might as well c/c otr. What are you getting value from? The diamond draw ott didn't get there. There's no lower straight, only a higher one. And now boats are possible.

c/c otr is usually a weak play. Bet if you think you're ahead and going for value. Check with the intent to fold if you're behind. c/c's should be reserved for aggressive Vs who can bluff on the end (which missed diamonds might do here), but it works in this spot too.

My answer was correct, I just used a different but equally valid method. As you can tell by the fact that we both got to the same answer.

15 dollars on a 4 straight board with 30 dollars in the middle is some pretty ambitious betting

villian should never have a boat because his hand would have been pair+gutshot (56/86/96) on flop and the majority of players stab with that on the flop. villian can have two random diamonds which peel the turn and fold river but might bluff if checked to.

i guess we can go deep and villian can show up with a set that tried to trap on the flop, pot controlled vs the 4 straight on the turn and now is minraising for value on the river.

thus against a viable calling range which consists mainly of 8x and 6x, i think you should bet 5 dollars on the river or check with intentions of calling all bets.

No.

15 to win 44 equals to raking in $59.

You will run into a long list of issues when you're doing more complicated poker math.

Everything seems standard. I call small raise on river bc it's so cheap but I would not be surprised if you're beat

So your problem isn't my maths but my grammar - I was basing the calculation on raking in 44, hence why we came to the same answer. You can do the maths either based on the full pot size after your call or before your call.

What are you talking about? This isn't about grammar; it's about basic understanding of a math problem.

In other words, that's 44:15.

However, that's not correct, because we are not winning $44.

You are calling $15 to win $29.

In other words, that's 29:15.

Can you see the difference?

------------------------------------------------

Oh I see why you think we're saying the same thing...

No, because of the following:

44:15 = 2.93:1 - has to be good 1 out of 4 times, or 25%.
29:15 = 1.93:1 - has to be good 1 out of 3 times, or 33%.

Still don't know why you guys are leading not c/c. What exactly are we getting to call otr that's worse?

Hungry Hippo appears to be a literal rem and spacker from what I can tell. I didn't assume it was 44:15. Me saying '15 to win 44' is my way of saying 29:15 because I've counted the call value in the winnings. I do that because if you just divide amount won (including call) over call value then you have the odds you need, which is a simpler calculation to do quickly.

Hence why the calculation I performed was 15/44 which, if I need to spell it out for you, is the same as 15/(29+15).

Wrong, very wrong.

Calling 15 to win 44 means one thing and one thing only. If you need help using a simple marble system to understand, just ask.

What? It doesn't even make any sense.

Yes...15/44 is the same as 15/(29+15), pretty much the only thing you actually got right.

Jesus I give up, enjoy only knowing how to do things the exact way you were taught them.

This isn't rocket science it's re-arranging equations ffs.

I feel bad that you have so little capacity to learn.

And no, making up your own math doesn't work.