Hi guys,

First post in a long time.

I was involved in this hand yesterday and would appreciate your thoughts.

Villain has 450 and I have him covered.

It was a 2/4 game which I seldom play and he was an unknown. He was a well presented observant white male, late 20's who had been sat at the table for about 30 mins. He had not played many hands and appeared quite conservative and tight, but basically no other reads to go on.

I've been playing a loose aggressive game running over the table and no been facing any 3 bets.

Villain (440) limps, in EP, BTN limps, I'm in the SB with 55 and open for 25, folded to villain who calls, BTN folds and we are heads up

Flop 5 7 9r (59)

I lead for 45, villain calls
Turn is a offsuit 3 completing the rainbow.

I bet 80 OTT and he pauses and raises to 170.
I call

River 2 (489)

I check, villain ships and its 210 to call to win 699.


Obviously I'm beaten by bigger sets and 68 but ahead of top two and an over pair but I didn't think villain had an over pair.

Considering your image, V probably thinks you are weaker than you are. I could see him doing this with an overpair perhaps. Top 2 is a consideration.


However, I think he probably has either a set or a straight. It just feels like you're beat somehow. It feels like he is sandbagging here with a better set or a straight, given how he just calls the flop, then raises slightly over a min-raise OTT.



As played, OTR, we are getting better than 3:1, so I just pay it off.



I don't really like the PF raise too much in SB with 5-5 here. You did go HU, but you were pretty lucky to flop a set here. Most flops would suck for you, and you would be in a tough spot post flop being OOP with a small pair. I think there's nothing wrong with completing, and going multi-way.


The turn is where the real decision is. Either we make the decision that our hand is best, or we abort mission. Very read dependant.



What were your instincts telling you OTT? That would be the most important factor in this decision for me.

Welcome back, Big Fish.

And 46. I don't see 68 or 46 limp/calling pre from a conservative V very often at all. Unfortunately, neither are hands like 79 or TT+, so there's basically no two-pair combos or overpairs in his range either.

As much as I hate it, this is probably a fold OTT. On this raggedy board, there's almost nothing he could be taking this line with except over-sets. I'm usually in the "if you don't GII with a set and lose occasionally , you're not getting enough value with your sets" camp, but I just can't see any semi-bluffs or value hands you beat.

AP, I think we have to call river because POs. The mistake is OTT, imo.

just complete pre.

if his range ott was only straights and you were stacking him every time otr when board paired pretty sure you have enough implied odds to call

Thanks Garick and the replies from others.

Preflop, given the way the the straightforward & passive way the players were playing and limp calling, I considered that should I get a caller or two, I could take the pot down with either 1 or 2 barrels, depending upon board texture of course.

As for the the hand post flop, Especially on the turn I found myself lost.

I recently saw an Alec Torelli video where he made what was considered by many a hero fold folding bottom set on a 910J board. Torelli lead out into the field, was raised on the flop, with another player, Shawn Deeb in between and Torelli almost insta folded face up. In my mind, I think it was an easy almost trivial fold especially oop, with reverse implied odds and potentially no implied odds against worse. https://youtu.be/FJWyDNveGOU

Having removed 1010+ from villains limp calling range and disregarded 46, it was either 16 combos of 79, 16 of 68 (which cancel one another out) , 3 combos of 77 or 3 of 99.

In hind sight, given said combo's I think this should have been a bet fold ott as you guys have pointed out.

Once I called turn, I don't think I can fold given the pot odds.

In the moment, I was hoping to see a repeat.

Anyway, I called river and V turned over 68o. I do however think that I stack villain should the board repeat.

If I had had middle set, I'm not sure whether it changes much and what would have been the correct play??? Middle set blocks the possibility of top two but then I beat bottom set. This spot would be kind of tougher I think.

OK, but what about when his range is all bigger sets that will turn in to bigger boats/quads when board pairs?

Also, is a conservative and tight V open-limp/calling 46 or 68 in EP? Even suited, I severely doubt it. Maybe one combo?

I really think you have to discount those 79 and 68 combos, given the read you had at the time, as I noted above. Given results, maybe not, but given the read we had at the time, the very most of those I would give would be half of the suited versions of the one gappers.

Middle set I am basically never folding on this board. I gave basically no credence to top-two anyway, so this makes us near even money (with the occasional straight. Given dead money and the IOs vs the straights in his range if board pairs, I pretty much always call turn and GII on basically all rivers.

Wise words G.

So in conclusion if the same number of suited, (or both suited and unsuited) 68 combos cancel out the suited (or suited and unsuited combos) 79's we are in a set over set situation nearly always against this villain with the worst of it. We could also add one or two combos of 46s which reduced our equity further. I really don't think he is raising 1010 ott and certainly not shipping river with 1010/JJ when my range is capped at overpairs+.







Sent from my SM-G900I using 2+2 Forums

Not sure why you're disregarding 46 as a hand, it's just as viable as 68 from your typical live players limping range, along with all PP's up to 1010. Never forget to consider what your hand looks like to your opponent. Lets pretend he has a weakish hand, you raised preflop and have fired 2 streets. Do you really expect him to get cute here and try to suddenly bluff you off? Would you ever do that? About the best bluff any live player has is just a semi-bluff allin with a flush draw. Plus he gave you the dreaded minraise of death.

meh, it´s 100bb deep, and we are at the very top of our range, and crushed a board which misses our perceived range by miles.
I don´t have any problem with how you played it, the hand villain showed up with imo perfectly illustrates the difficulty of assigning villain a range when we are basically readless.

In a spot where we are readless, and I mean, the guy prob played 15 hands so far which counts as readless to me, we have to revert back to standard, not exploitable play. pre is debatable but not bad at all, we flopped gin for our actual hand, and as I said, have a much stronger hand than villain could expect here. if we aren´t stacking off in this spot, we basically don´t have a stackoff range.

I see Garicks points, and I think they are viable and certainly not bad, but imho it´s just mainly based on his assumptions about the player pool he´s used to see. It is certainly right to some degree, but imo we are just too readless to make a highly! exploitable play like folding bottom set here when we basically don´t know anything about the guy´s game.

we are just way too high up in our range and way too readless to consider making that kind of exploitable move imo

^Sauhund said it, it's 100BB deep. When you're playing 100BB deep, you shouldn't be folding sets at all, unless the board is very obviously bad (four flush, four straight).

With that all-in into that pot size, this is never a fold. Villain is the first caller, so the odds of him having 86 or 64 are low. If he has 99/77, so be it. Reload.

I kinda hate when people post stuff like this and don't even give the line they'd take in the hand, because it's pretty useless especially after results are given.

Basically I'm unsure of the point of your post. Are you advocating folding turn? Folding river? Or would you call and are just saying this stuff for no helpful reason? Because folding at any spot in this hand for 100 BBs vs an unknown is beyond insane

30 minutes of play is not enough of a read to justify folding a set here. Agreed that the turn raise just feels gross and like we're beat but without a much much better read I'm never folding a set on a non-flush, non 4-straight board.

Turn raise no bluff. Could be a misread of relative hand strengths by V. Only way you're not beat here. With facts as given, I think you have to call getting 3:1 but I'm not real optimistic about it.

You guys are MUBSy nits lol.

Hero is good here.

I don't get the raising out of the blind with 55 thing? you are going to wiff 80% of your flops with nothing but bluff catcher value, why would you raise pre there?

as played, call.

you are getting 3:1. probably not winning, but you can't fold for that price.

Thanks for all your thoughts. Interesting to realise that so many views are polar opposites which perhaps makes my call of the raise and river ship less incorrect based on villains hand range and perhaps my perceived range, if he was a player to even consider my range to any extent.

Isn't it more likely given my image that villain would raise a A9 and 1010-JJ or a unorthodox played QQ+ on the flop rather than just calling the flop cbet if he though I was fos?

A second barrel from me do show huge hand strength at this stake given the relatively shallow effective stacks.

I still stand by Garick's analysis that all things considered, I'm beat more often than not.

My decision to raise from the blind was based on table dynamics, my image and my willingness to fire two barrels on favourable flops to punish the limpers and any limp callers pre.

I was sat on around 1600, I had a winning image, the table was so passive/weak tight so it was a great table to wield my stack and capitalise on my 'he's hitting everything and running like god' image.

Usually it's just a complete pre flop the blinds.

So.. results?

Villain tabled 68o

Damn, was hoping for a happy ending.

This is not surprising.

Call Flop, raise turn is very strong line in 1/2-2/5. Almost never a bluff, most often the nutz and only falls short due to a villain over valuing a hand like top two.

Unless V is on super monkey butt licking tilt, he isn't taking this line as a bluff. Just doesn't happen.