So you would fold top set....? Is this really what you would do? If so you may need to post some hands you have played and get feed back because that is the worst advice I've heard in a while.

FYI flop is a shove 100% of the time and we have pretty damn good equity even against straights.

I've seen this done enough with an over pair that I feel we have to call this off, and if he does have 98, we at least have 10 outs.

The decision point is not on the turn. It's on the flop and he made a terrible decision. Especially considering that he didn't know what to do on the turn after the flop. That tells me he should never ever flat the flop even if a case could be made for doing so.

I'd seriously consider having a 0% cbet on this board OOP 3-way. But it's lol-1/2, and at least one of the players who has positions on us is a septuagenarian, so I guess it's mandatory to lead out.

As played, you should probably just ship flop and secure the cooler against lower sets and be at our equity peak when we're against a straight.

Once we flat flop, I'm definitely open shipping turn. Can't rely on this fart who cut his teeth on limit 5-card draw games to not just check back the turn for god-knows-what-reason.

Once he ships turn, we just gotta call and hope one of the good things happen and not one of the bad things.

Ship flop and print money, if he has a straight whatever good hand but as everyone else said, he has to have other sets and 2 pairs in his range and there's not enough money whatsoever to ever fold. Now if you were 1000 BB deep, you reraised flop and he shipped it, that's a completely different scenario for a different discussion. But you have a nutted and cooler hand, just get it in and live with it.

GII.

You raised pre and in his mind 2 pair and the other sets are the nuts against what he would most likely think is an over pair.

And repop him on the flop.

Grunch, if all we give v is 98 we have 25% equity. We need 36% equity if he only has 98. However, he's got smaller sets and spazz with over pairs a non-zero percent of the time. Call.

I discussed it more extensively with two other players tonight, and we think there are merits to both just calling the flop or shoving it.

I think shoving might get rid of a couple of hands that we beat and that we want to keep in. Granted many turn cards will be action killers and will result in a check down, but on bricks, we're still getting value from a few hands that might have in fact folded to a flop shove. Flatting also controls the pot and we can still fold to a super wet turn if V keeps betting and our equity has considerably gone down and we know that we're crushed.

The reasons for shoving OTF are also valid if we are absolutely positive that a lot of hands that we beat will call, and that should actually be the center of the debate. I think some Vs might fold two pairs as well as 99+ when we're jamming, and some might not.

So bottom line, I'm not ready to admit that shoving the flop is better than flatting with the intention of calling a shove on a brick turn, which also leaves us the option of making a big laydown and save money if the turn action warrants it.

I prefer shove flop but if I call flop I am absolutely never folding turn after repping a pair + FD on flop.

Great post. I think people often forget that letting the hand go to the turn risks villain folding hands he would have called a flop shove with. A bad turn card not only makes it harder for hero, but also for villains to continue with worse.

But people also forget that a flop shove gets V to laydown a significant enough portion of the time. Would you stack off with 33, 44, 99 or TT here OTF? I know I wouldnt. Probably not even with JJ or QQ.

Plus V is never raising us with 33-44 here ( and prob not even with 55), so im not sure why we're including it in his range and assuming he'd call a shove with those.

The bolding and underlining above is mine.

It sounds like the hands you're talking about are:

... and that's exactly the wrong way to look at it.

You need to think about how this hand plays out oop.

How do you expect to extract one more dollar from 33 and 44 later?

Hint: You won't.

With 33, 44, if you check turn, he usually checks back. You give him 4-8 straight outs twice to beat you. 2 set "outs" for each hand are bad for him since they give him strong second-best hands... but both of those put 4-straights on the board and probably freeze all action.

And if he checks turn back, sees a river, and does not improve, is he ever paying you one more dollar with 33, 44? No. There's almost no benefit to keeping those in. By the way, they're just 12 combos. You risk losing huge value by focusing your entire strategy on a small % of his range.

Run-out is also huge here. An enormous % of the time (like 75%+?), the turn or river card will put out a straightening, flushing, or pairing card or an overcard to the hands you're focusing on (33,44,99-QQ).

We talked about 33, 44. What is your plan to extract from 99-QQ after the flop?

Almost the *entire deck* is a scare card / action killer for, say, 99... think 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, spades, T, J, Q, K, A. You're often going to the check turn, allowing him to check behind with 99-QQ and allowing him to realize all his equity, which can be substantial. When he checks back turn with 99 exactly, he gets to see nearly 6 outs twice. With 88, he has closer to 10 outs twice. That's a lot of equity as a near freeroll.

Is there even 1 imaginable run out where villain calls a river value bet with an unimproved 33,44,88,99? Not really. If you bet/call flop, check turn, and reach the river, mostly one of two things will happen. You will a) lose chips with the worst hand, or b) win no more chips with the best hand.

By the way, a third thing can happen, and will happen quite often. That is c) villain can often use position to bluff you effectively on the river. Say villain has a spade draw, turn goes check/check, and river comes a 4-straight. He shoves. Your line puts you in horrible situations like that at a meaningful frequency where you probably have to give villain every drawing out, giving him simply enormous pot + bluff equity.

By the way, stepping back quite a bit, the biggest mistake you're making is that you're considering the run-out in the ACTUAL hand. You have to ignore the fact the turn was the 2. There are only 3 clear "blanks" in the entire deck for the types of hands you're thinking about: 2, 2, and 2. You literally binked a 3 outer in terms of "blanks."

You need to think about the 94% of the time the turn is not a total blank for the types of hands you worry will fold the flop.

I'll read your post in detail later, but please discard 33-44-55 from the conversation. As I said before we are not getting raised on the flop with those ever, they are just not part of his range.

I disagree re: 55, but w/e.

How about you focus on 88-JJ for the discussion when you read my post.

will do.

Im on my cell and not trying to type a lot, but in a nutshell I think you are considering WAY too many cards to be action killers or scare cards OTT. In this spot I think both hero and V's ranges are worried about spades and a few cards that connect straights, but not much else. One overcard of a different suit OTT will most often be as much of a brick as a deuce for what the flop reraise represents. If you're reraising with a set of 55-66 or two pair, would you really be that worried if for example a Q or J peels?

I think you need to reconsider what the real scare cards are. Because no, Neither ranges are scared of the whole deck except for deuces. Far from it.

Just to rehiterate, im by no means saying i dont like your suggestion of shoving over his flop reraise ( it does have its merits as i pointed out). But i also do not think flatting constitutes the mistake you are portraying it to be.

After he raises flop, I think we should just re-raise jam flop.

That's 20 cards.

I think most low stakes villains can have a non-negligible quantity of AA-99 when they raise this flop. I know it doesn't make a lot of sense, it isn't something I would do and it isn't standard for the average player. However, people do a lot of weird stuff and divert from their standard lines more frequently than we or they think they do (Mike Caro's law of "loose wiring" springs to mind).

All players can also raise the flop with various draws and, occasionally gii with them. They can also think hero can gii with draws on this sort of flop and decide to "take a stand" with a 1-pair hand.

Shoving the flop allows V to make the biggest errors most easily. Waiting till the turn allows him to:

- sometimes escape with half his stack

- overtake us without us feasibly being able to fold

- use a scare card to make us mistakenly fold

- check it down with a crushed hand like 66/55


For me the hand is most easily played by us when we shove the flop and it is easiest for V to make a mistake too. Best of both worlds.

And also, basically what Wilyoman is saying

Please learn what re-raise means.

I'm not just nit-picking. Misuse of this term misleads and confuses people (or at least me)

Sorry. Just a mistake. I assure you, i know the difference between raise and reraise.

My mother tongue is french, and the french term for raise is " relance", which is why i'll sometimes mistakenly add the "re" prefix in english.

Yes it is. And its very different from saying all cards are scary except for deuces.

OP, Willyoman is right and you are wrong. Yes, it is that simple. Try to learn from his posts.

With what hands is this villain raise/folding this board anyway? Very likely with none whatsoever. Get it in while he still wants to.

This hand doesn't deserve almost 50 responses imo.

This