1)Yes that's true. He didn't say that your right, however the limited info sways me to villain having some degree of competence and wouldn't lean me towards a station/whale type. Maybe that's too much of a leap for you, but I'm going on sterotype based on limited info until I see stuff to the contrary.
2)Also correct my bad. Ok let's agree this makes ace high more likely as a cbet.

What about once he checks the turn 2way after c-betting 3way when the ace falls? Can we rule out any amount of aces from his range because he checked and did not continue to bet for value or represent the ace as a scare card?


You honestly think he has more top pair plus on the river than kk and down, including occasionally his own draws?

What do you think the fold equity is on the river if any?

I agree that as played a turn check is better, but I still don't think a 3/4 pot turn bet is bad. Thoughts?

Like basically I don't mind the turn if we follow through the river. Because in my experience too many people will continue to only the one barrel making it burn money.

Once he checks, we know he has a hand that has some degree of showdown value in most instances, so I don't see a single stab on the turn working nearly enough to be profitable.

I think it's totally fine to think that Villain has "some degree of competence". The problem really is that we don't know how much he has.

Is he at the level where he says, "OK, my pair below top pair suddenly doesn't look great, so I'm not gonna go broke here"? (If so, your double barrel line is not too bad.)

Is he at the level where he says, "Based on the action I think my KK-JJ is equivalent to AK so I'm not folding this hand because I would never fold AK here"? (If so, we have to give up.)

Is he at the level where he says, "This guy called me on the flop to float me, so I'm check/calling all my good one pair hands, including Ax, all the way down as long as no heart shows up"? (If so, we have to give up.)

Thinking Villain is competent is not enough. That's what I mean by not having good enough reads to try to bluff him off a pair. If we think he is a thinking player, we still shouldn't try to bluff until we know HOW he is thinking.

You wouldn't call a tiny 3bet to $45 when you already put in $20??

you have an odd sense of humor

also lol @ fold pre

So what did Hero do and what did villain have?

You checked back and he won at showdown with TJhh -KQhh?

You shoved in and got snapped of by ah3h or ah 8h?

I have no issue with how I played PF. I was accumulating chips with late position nudges after the flop and the min-raise from the V was not enough to warrant a fold.

On the flop, this is a raise and I didn’t do that. I really don’t know why. I’ve been in that situation 100 times and I’ve probably raised in 98 of them.

On the turn, the $180 was definitely a bet/fold once he checks. There were three outcomes:
He comes over the top and I reluctantly fold.
He folds and I take it down (which seemed fairly possible considering the check made it seem like he had TT-KK).
If he calls and checks the river, then I’m shoving. It really wasn’t even something I put any thought towards once I made the turn bet.

After he checked the river, I shoved. He tanked for a long time. Almost uncomfortably long. The table was starting to look at each other to see if anyone was going to call the clock. I’m guessing since it was a decent pot ($1,500 or so), people gave him a little more time, but it got weirdly quiet at a pretty friendly table. I was absolutely sure that he had TT-KK and I was 90% that he was going to lay it down. Finally, he just threw some chips in the pot without even saying call, flipped his black QQ over, and took down the pot.

Even though I lost the pot, I still think the river shove was the best play based on my read. I don’t think he made a good call there (although every other person at the table said, “Wow, great call” after he made it). He has to be good there about 30% of the time and I don’t think he is. I lost the hand on the flop though, not on the river.

The funny part of the story is that I got him to put in $800+ in the middle about an hour later my KK vs. his AQ on a queen high flop. If I would have known that he would make the big call, I would never have made the original play.

I think it is a good call, and that he is good in this spot the majority of the time, not just 30%.

If you disagree, can you come up with an honest assessment of what hands you would play this way, both for value and as a bluff? Given how wet the flop was, wouldn't you have often raised sets? And how much do you have--and shove the river with--Ax here really?

I think it's a little too easy to come on the forum and say "I played the hand well and only lost because Villain made the play I needed him not to make, so that play must have been bad." Villains are allowed to get reads on us just like we are allowed to get reads on them. You should allow for the possibility that he had a good read on you, and went with it despite being scared of the ace (which he clearly was given his tanking on the river).

EDIT: Or, if he didn't have a good read on you, then he's a station, which makes your whole line bad on the turn and river.

The pre-flop question is not "how much to me?"

It's, "what does this guy have?"

When is this ever something other than a big pp/ak? Anybody smart enough to 3bet you light is smart enough to wait until he has a read to do it.

You guys don't have good enough reads on each other to get fancy. He doesn't know you will open 56s. And you don't know if he will lay down his big cards to pressure.

It cost you $750 to find out he's just a big, dumb, lovable calling station. You could have figured that out for free -- and still took him to the cleaners with your KK -- if you'd a watched him play for a few minutes.

^^+1 on you repping really thin and having more bluffs than you think

Also, why do you think it was a good shove after seeing that he calls off with QQ?

His QQ is just a bluff-catcher only. There is nothing that he can beat in this hand except total air. That air pretty much consists of a non-ace heart draw that didn't hit or a fairly complex float and leveraged shove by me which I'm sure doesn't even cross his mind.

If someone called your flop bet, bet out on an ace on the turn after you checked it on the turn and then pushed for 2/3 of the pot on the river, your queens are not good 30% of the time.

If I posted the hand in reverse and the Hero was holding the queens, 90% of the people on here would advocate folding on either the turn or the river. Of course, I could never do that because there would be 30 posts about 3-betting to $45 and 20 posts about checking the turn before that discussion even took place.

Listen, I made the error on the hand on the flop, but I will stand by my ascertain that this would be folded more than 70% of the time, but I understand if you feel differently. Good discussion.

Agreed. Now how many value combos in your range do you play like this?

Because only an idiot would call with QQ.

I'm not disputing it was a brilliant play (although I'm interested to see where Vernon goes with this). I just think the villain was an idiot.

Well we know villain can call down light, and that's it. It's really too early to say he's an idiot. He could be tanking because he's a station and that's all but also maybe he knows he's calling and is obligated to make it look like it's a tough decision. You never want to snap someone off when your calling that light, you will discourage them from ever making that kindof play vs you again. It was part of the risk of making this play. We know that a lot of villains just can't let go of their cards. I don't think it's 70% because you are targeting nonthinking or risk everse tags, weak tight/scared money, and the weekender who "knows your full of it" but can't stomache a call and will wait for a better spot. I think it's a decent play but it's close without reads, we are hoping villain falls into a certain category. I think its very close to what you need which is for it to work about which would be about 40%(might wanna check the math) when we shove.

Like I said when we are wrong it's not horrible and if you know how to use it, it's good for your image and getting paid off later. It's possible your history with this villain led to his decision to get it in light later with the aq hand.

Dismissing someone as a tard and thinking were brilliant really doesn't help us improve just because they didn't do what we wanted. Just make a note that he's not a good candidate to bluff in the future, but to valuebet thin that's all. I would leave it at that.