Reads: Middle aged white guy whose a reg but who somehow I don't have a strong read on. The only hand I have on him is this...

Folds to him on the button, he raises to $10, only SB calls, Flop is K J 5 rainbow. He bets pot against SB, who calls. Turn is a blank, he makes another large bet, SB calls. River is a blank, check/check, and SB is good with KQ. Not a very telling hand...except we know he's not a super tight nit (i.e. he put in two bets with K10 or worse). Also, he recently checked down a heads up raised pot. On the river, he had 98o for nine high and could have bluffed, but he didn't (it was a decent bluff spot).

He limps UTG. Another limper in MP. Folds to me in the Co and I make it $17. This is an abnormally large raise size, but I made it due to the stack size and the fact that table was fairly loose preflop. Only villain and the other MP limper call.

$54 in the pot, $170 effective vs. villain and $150 effective vs the other limper.

I have QQ and Flop comes KK7. Checks around. My reason for checking is simple: pot control.

Turn is the 10. Villain leads for $25 and I'm the only caller. River is the 8 and he bets $50. Hero?

Don't really understand your question. You took a pot control line and a perfect result happened, he bet twice into you. Why would you do anything but happily call river.

If you're gonna take a pot control line, why would you want to bloat the pot with a river raise?

Actually now that I look closer at stack sizes and such, I think taking a pot control line is bad here. Just bet flop, turn, and jam river for value. Why are you making giant raises preflop and then trying to "control the pot" post flop? If you want to pot control spots like this, then just make it $10 to go preflop.

Call, he's not gonna call a raise or reraise you with anything you beat. Unless you have a metagame reason to make him lay his hand down (which I am almost always for, btw), then see what he was willing to bet with.

Also, all this, you size preflop to get stacks in OTT and then pot control flop? Huh?

Actually to me this really isn't about pot control. With an SPR of 3ish, this is about taking the line that gets the most money in possible from 2nd best hands. And checking the flop on a KKXr board does JUST THAT. And as you said before, we got the perfect result. Now call river. There's really nothing else to think about here. We don't have a strong enough read to consider folding at any point in the hand.

seems fine to me, now call river

Sticking rigidly to a plan is not good poker. On this specific board, betting the flop just folds out worse/gets called or raised by better. With a low SPR of 3ish we're committed here, and once we are committed we then have to think about which line gets the most money in from lesser hands.

Checking the flop is the clear winner here.

First off I think checking this flop is probably standard. But what hands is villain betting turn and river with? In the examples he didn't bet river for thin value or as a bluff. Now on a paired board he wakes up and bets turn and river.

His UTG limping range is going to be small PP and Axs and Kxs. Also like he said in 2 examples he played river passively with a hand he could've bluffed and a hand were he probably has TPWK or a missed draw.

River is a fold

I mean I get what you're saying, and believe me I wouldn't be ecstatic to call this river bet. It's definitely in the "crying call" category, but I'm just not gonna get in the business of checking the flop to induce action from lesser hands and then fold after a half pot turn and river bet on total blanks. To fold after that line, I need a VERY strong read. Decent inferences based on a couple hands is not good enough for me to fold after that action in a spot where I need to be good 25% of the time to show a profit.

I would also check flop to get two streets of value from worse PPs. Hand is fine as played, call river.

Grunch.
Bet flop. Aggression is your friend here
w/ your crap line, river is an auto-call. Obv not a fistpump or anything.
By not betting flop, you made the whole hand a mess.

Why are the turn and river the best two streets for value? I think small PP peel this flop more often than the turn because of overcards scaring them ott.

This situation is way different. In hand 1, he took two shots at the pot - same here.

We've underrepped our hand OTF. He could be bluffing as well as betting a worse hand for value. I also think that putting Kxs in his UTG limping range is sketchy as well.

Because people think if they call a flop bet with an underpair that they will have to call down if turn and river are low cards. Betting flop could also commit hero to getting stacked on later streets depending on the action and bet/pot sizes. Lets say we bet $25 on flop, V calls, then donks turn. Now what does hero do?

U have to take all villains actions in previous hands to piece together the puzzle. Hand 1 he bets flop and turn and checks river and mucks at showdown. Either he was A. Bluffing B. semi bluffing w draw. C. Had a TPwk or under pair. Either way in 2 hands he has never bet the river. So when he bets river here it's obv for value.

Yes he could have JJ-77 here. But since he has bet river half pot u have to put Kx in his range here. Honestly it's probably close. I would have to do the math. But I would expect villains at 1/2nl to open limp KTs KJs K9s ect. They do this bc they don't want to get reraised behind. It's their way of "pot control".

IMO only hands he is doing this with is JJ ( which he could open limp) or Kx. He has more combos of Kx. Obv we need to do math since he bet half pot but it's closer than just a snap call

Edit. Obv 77 88 TT in his range also but we lose to them. So only pp he bets like this are JJ. Thats 6 combos. He has 8 combined combos of KJs KTs. curious what math says.

But OP said he checked for the simple reason of pot control.

Again, OP said he checked solely for pot control.

You can tell him that's wrong, as I did. You can also tell me that sticking rigidly to a plan is not good poker, but you are actually agreeing with me here, he should not check the flop for pot control. I actually did not say whether or not he should check the flop, I just agreed with Imallinnow that OP was trying to play this hand 2 different ways. He should either raise less preflop and leave his options open, or bet more preflop and bet the flop. The only actual advice I gave OP was that, as played, he should call the river bet.

Hate the flop check. Bet 30$. This is 1/2 and you will get called extremely light. Then since your way ahead or way behind you can check turn for pot control. I would call a river bet if he leads the river and I would bet river if he doesn't.

Sent from my DROID X2

x2

What do you do when V donks turn after calling flop?

Don't think pot controlling flop is such a simple matter as OP.

lop check might be fine but you'd need to describe your rationale better, imo.

The intent of your line should be to extract maximum value from non KX and non fh hands and lose the least from these hands. Your line has you getting some (maybe maximum) value from non KX hands or non fh hands and yet still showing down against these same hands. This player has shown (limited data) an unwillingness to bluff at pots where he wasn't the pf aggressor and a willingness (limited data) to shut down on rivers when he doesn't have a big hand. If you think you wont get three streets of value against this opponent from your QQ (I agree) why not bet the flop and river. Since many players check back big flops in position betting here may look weaker and because he's unlikely to bluff raise yet might call the flop a c-bet might get you some value while also preventing both of your opponents from drawing a free card. However, if he raises or leads on the turn you can consider folding. Betting the turn on that board, after your pf and flop aggression, would likely fold weaker holdings but checking behind opens the way for him to call a river bet because your hand looks much weaker than QQ. As you played the hand you've put yourself in a tough spot because your opponent did exactly what you wanted but what you wanted is for a passive river player to either bluff or bet a weaker pair for value on the river which is unlikely. His bet gives you ~154:50 or ~3:1 to call with a marginal hand for that board against a passive river player. Are you ahead against this opponent after this action in this spot more than 25% of the time? If you think you are then call but it seems like the correct play is to fold.

Since he doesnt bluff much I would fold. If he has a bluffing range then I would call. Highly unlikely he is gonna bet out with smaller pocket pairs.

The casino I play at, I can't remember the last time someone donk the turn after calling the flop as a bluff. It's almost always a value bet, but im sure it is different in other venues.

Sent from my DROID X2

Given reads this is a must call. He can have busted clubs (probably unlikely) or be value betting weaker hands like Tx/8x that he's betting just because he doesn't know any better (ex. KQ hand)

I think your line is fine. Checking back flop certainly is okay since there are no cards that can come to hurt you except the lone A, and I would play it like this some % of the time. Other times I just take the initiative and start betting on the flop, then can either check turn, bet river or bet turn, check river.

Nice hand!

First, let me explain my rationale better for checking flop. By betting, I'm setting myself up for commitment. If I bet half pot and get a call on the flop, there's only a little more than pot sized bet left. Can I really fold turn then facing a shove getting 2-1?

In order to profitably commit, the villain must be willing to put $170 into a $50 pot. What hands would he do this with? I'd argue that the weakest hand is JJ, and even that hand may not commit. My perceived range here is very strong, he is likely putting me on AK or a big pair. Against that range, villains won't commit with JJ or A10.

I was planning to commit w/ an overpair...but thought this flop wasn't quite good enough to commit.

Results: I fold river and he doesn't show. The reason for my fold is I put him on an extremely good hand pre flop. To limp/call such a huge raise OOP pre is a sign of a good hand. I eliminated ragged Ace-X and small pairs but included KQ and some of the medium pairs.

Honestly, I think this is a terrible fold. You don't think he plays JJ or AT the same way? This is a very bad way to play big hands, trying to look for excuses to fold big hands.

Don't take lines that induce bluffs and then fold. If you want to fold, take a line that prevents them from bluffing.

Also, stop making such big preflop raises if you think they're only going to call you with "extremely good hands"