1/2

Hero - middle-late position ($520ish) Tight ABC player who doubled up early in session and has been getting hit with the deck. Image is VERY tight despite limping a good deal of small pps and suited Ax hands at an incredible passive table. Generally fit or fold post flop.

Villain - early position ($200-250ish, Villain's stack size had been fluxuating, he also had a hundred dollar bill on the table which played and may have been slightly deeper than I originally thought.) Villain was a caucasian male in his mid-late 20s wearing headphones and not really talking or interacting with the table, seemed like a wannabe pro type with some really fishy lines. At the table for about two hours.

As far as some hand history on the Villain I witnessed him limp-reraise with AQs a very passive older woman's open, she had a sizing tell and would raise 15-20 preflop with KK+, and then stacked off on a queen high flop against her aces which ended in a river chop. He also rivered a flush vs top two pair but as I had just returned to the table from the restroom I wasn't completely sure of the context.

I was involved in two prior pots with Villain. Both times I overcalled his tiny raise with Ax suited hoping for a bloated family pot for cheap. The first time I flop the nut flush draw and checked raised his c-bet as a semi-bluff to take down the pot. The second time I checked dark first to act, flopped top and bottom pair with A-10 on a A -K-10 board and again checked raised his c-bet. In hindsight I don't like the way I played the second hand, but after I checked dark and hit on a connecting flop I was a bit lost and was hoping he'd think I was trying to push him around and stack off with worse.

As far as tendencies he would also make these tiny raises $6-8 preflop, even after limpers, usually followed by a small c-bet.

Villain in early position raises to $7 after one other limper. Hero reraises to $25 in middle position with KK. Folds around to Villain who calls.

At the time I felt he was weak and I was raising for value and to protect my hand, if I was paying more attention to his stack I might have raised a bit more $30-35 but that could just be nitpicking. I thought he range was very wide including all pocket pairs up to maybe queens and a ton of suit connectors. Considering how tight my image was and this being my first 3-bet in a five hour period I thought my hand was fairly transparent. When he called I narrowed his range a bit and took out all random suited trash and gapped connectors but I still had a feeling he was trying to put a beat on me and was tired of being pushed around.

Pot: ~$55
Flop: 10,8,10 rainbow

At the time I was happy with the flop. No ace, no flush draw, and with the board paired a number of his draws and hands that beat me were limited. J10, 109, possibly 1010 and 88 got there but if his range is large enough to include a 10 he could also have a number of 78s, 89s, JQs, KQs and pocket pairs.

Villain - Checks/Calls
Hero- Bets $30

I bet to get value from under and overpairs 77-QQ or something like 98, 78 maybe JQ suited. I think there should be a lot more I'm ahead than I'm behind of.

Pot: $105
Turn: 10,8,10,6 r
Villain - Checks
Hero - Checks

I'm suspicious after the flop call, in my gut I just don't feel like he's drawing here. The pots getting moderately large so I just check for pot control and to reevaluate on the river.


Pot: $105
River 10,8,10,6,4 r
Villain - bets $60
Hero?

$60 to win $165 with an overpair to the board.

Even with my tight image I knew this was never a bluff. This was a value bet on his part, so my question was what would he consider value after a turn check? Could he, or an average player, bet 99, JJ, QQ or any other piece of the board I beat for value? Or is was this a classic trap? With kings and the half pot bet on the river is this a call 100% of the time or could you find a fold here? I guess I'm a nit for even asking I was just so sure I was beat here.

All thoughts and critiques are welcome, thanks.

As played I think it's definitely a call.

The flop bet is a little small here. I don't mind checking the turn because a lot of the time we have the best hand, and villians in this spot tend to think "oh he has AK here, he c bet the flop and now hes going to give up".

I think he could be value betting much worse than you even said trying to get called by AK.

Very trivial.

Yeah I guess you're right. My image was just so tight I thought my hand screamed aces or kings, my 3-bet was literally only one of two or three in the five hours I was there, I honestly didn't even think a drooler would bet the river without the nuts which really made this feel like a fold in my mind. I ended up calling and Villain showed 10 9 suited. I guess It's never a fold there though, in the long run it wouldn't be profitable, more often then not I should be ahead. It just tilted me a bit because afterwards a few other players made some snarky remarks and I was pissed I didn't listen to my gut. Thanks for the feedback.

I deffo bet the turn. River an obv call. Our hand is underrepped.

Like u can't have really big win rates if you are so scared that you check back the turn here. It's not like the pot is evn that big or we would be committed if we bet.

Admittedly I do play more conservative than most but that still can be profitable at 1/2. I didn't think I was getting three streets of value from anything I beat anyway so rather than risk being check-raised on the turn I checked behind and got to see the river. Some people are more inclined to call a river bet after a turn check or even bluff the river, not that I thought there were any bluffs in his range here.

With a board like this, with the turn card being a straight card. On this flop, right away i would be thinking, this isnt the type of board I'm comfortable playing a huge pot on. With that said, I don't mind getting 2 streets of value instead of 3.


I think the main focus here is that our hand really is under repped. If Im this villian and I call with 76 or a bottom pair type hand, his check back on the river screams give up or very marginal hand, and I'd fire probably a but more on the river as a bluff, maybe $75 or $80

I don't mind checking the turn sometimes so don't worry about that. Snap call river.

I would stop checking dark. Also I would be betting the turn. as played this is a must call and I might even go for a value raise. I think you are only beat by two pair, other wise i think you are getting paid of by most queens and pairs underneath yours.

v a wannabe pro spewtard easy call. He can be betting worse for thin value.

Agreed, this is a call. If Villain bets 2/3rd to full pot I probably would fold. But, given the fact that you showed weakness, I believe this is a call. What you should be thinking about in this spot, is prior river action by this villain when he has a hand, and doesn't etc. If he's never betting the river as a bluff when checked to, or value betting small with big hands on the river. If that is the case I might change my mind, and say its a fold. But, as played I still think it's a call.

You must call here. Since you checked turn behind (probable mistake), you're very under repped. I wouldn't consider this a trivial call at all. Auto call.

Had you bet turn, he smooth called, and then donk bombed the river, THEN you have a decision.

I think you should reconsider on how the difference between raising $25 vs $35 is "nitpicking". If he has $350 in play (it's unclear if he does, let's assume he does), a $25 raise creates a ~$52 pot with effective stack at $325 for an SPR of ~6.25, an SPR that I think we'll be quite uncomfortable stacking off with postflop (especially if we think our hand might be a little face up). If we make it $35 (a perfectly reasonable raise amount give other dead money in the pot), this would create a ~$72 pot, for an SPR of ~4.4, which creates a fairly brain dead stack off spot postflop on non-crazy boards. I don't think this difference is trivial.

I'm fine with how you played the flop/turn, although I'd prefer a flop check / bet turn (obviously calling a turn bet). We're almost WA/WB on the flop (except for an A possibly killing things), so it's a fine flop to check back to guarantee pot control (noting that we also don't get ourselves into a spot where we'd probably have to fold to a flop check/raise). But I like the pot control strategy overall here.

I snap call the river. Our turn check back looks weak which might induce a bluff or a hand trying to set their own price (such as 99/77). QQ/JJ is not impossible here. The OESD did get there, but whatever.

GcluelessNLnoobG

+1

I think pot control and going for just 2 streets is much better here. Also, unlike someone else said, a turn bet is setting us up for about a ~PSB left on the river (i.e. we're committing ourselves).

-1

What two pair is beating us when the board is paired and we have an overpair?

GcluelessNLnoobG

I wasn't saying that the difference between raising $25 vs $35 is nitpicking in general, all your points were 100% on target which is why I mentioned the increased preflop raise to begin. I was just saying that in this particular hand I don't think it made a difference much, the core lesson being that I should have been paying more attention to his stack size to know with absolute certainty. If I thought he was sitting with $300+ the preflop raise would have been larger I promise you.

A flop check never really occurred to me, your rationale makes sense which is why I ended up checking the turn. I'm just not seeing the difference though between a flop check and a turn check, or rather the advantage of a flop check over a turn check. If I bet the flop I set the price and can happily get away from a C/R, I doubt anybody at my table including the Villain is doing that as a bluff, I charge any ace to continue and get my money in good against any PPs or draws immediately on the flop. I was c-betting most pots I raised so if he was going to continue light wouldn't a person be more likely to do so on a flop c-bet? I could be way off though so I'd love to hear what you have to say.

A lot of people here don't seem to like the turn check or the pot control but I thought going for the two streets just made more sense considering it did seem a bit like a WA/WB situation with a turn bet being committing. The check allowed another card to peel off and gave me the ability to call the river where if I had bet the flop and the turn and got bombed on ther river I would have had to fold.

I was just getting so much respect in the game the river bet here felt like pure value but I couldn't think of a hand that beat me other then pocket 88s or slow played aces, I really didn't expect the 10 in his hand after the 3-bet. I literally had a person on my left who was regularly commenting on how tight I was, I tried to handle the situation as best I could but to even a moderately thinking player knew I was playing very tight.

I guess after the turn check I have to call because I do look weak. I just thought if he had 77,99,JJ,QQ or any small piece of the board he would check or make a smaller more defensive bet, the $60 just felt like value.


The check in the dark was an isolated thing, it's not something I typically do and after that hand I doubt I'll do again. I was just playing the A10 suited for the flush, like an Ax suited, so the check in the dark first to act felt natural. I thought the dark check looked weak and might disguise my hand, and if I did hit the flop hard a C/R might look really fishy. Maybe I should be posting that hand instead of this one, haha.

Thanks again guys.

I think we'll have to fold to a check/raise and there's simply more chance of a check/raise coming on the flop than there is on the turn. Paired boards are good boards for someone to bluff check/raise (or "see where they are at" if they aren't completely certain, such as with JJ/99 here, partly for value, partly as a bluff). And if we've checked the flop, then he's most likely leading the turn if he's going to bluff or with hands that are worse but he thinks he is now value betting; very little chance of facing a turn check/raise on the turn if the flop checks thru, imo. And if we're going to pot control (which I'm cool with) then checking back the flop guarantees we accomplish this; betting does not (also think of situation where we bet flop, he calls, and then he donks the turn, ouch).

But it's just my preference here and bet flop / check turn is fine too, imo.

I like it. It makes perfect sense now that you've spelled it out for me, I'll have to keep that in mind if I'm ever in a similar spot in the future.

OTF i think a standard continuation bet is fine. If you checked the turn for pot control why would you ever fold to half pot on the river? It seems like you got exactly what you wanted deception and a bet out of the villain you may not have if he was missed draws or smaller pocket pairs. Snap call I think, unless you are going for slow roll tilt factor.

I probably bet/fold the turn here.
AP, I call the river. You are closing the action with decent odds, I'd say.

Yea I either take that line or ch behind on flop to get him to bluff future streets. You're going for streets of value here w this type of hand and board