I´m new to the table but was already involved in 5 or 6 hands, won 2 small pots. No spew. Villain is complete unknown young guy.

Stacks ~200€

I raise to 14 with AdAh in MP, all folds but villain in SB who calls.

Flop is 2h5hTh [~28€]. He checks, i bet samllish 14€, villain c/r to 38. Alarm goes on, but i decide to 3-bet to 90 in case he has some odd 2-pair draw. Also, i think he should have to pay if drawing to the flush.. He calls.

[~200€] Turn is a brick. (3c). Villain checks. At his point i am sure he has a hand like Tx Kh or 2c5c. So i make it 65€ to go, he crAI and i call the remainig ~50€.


So my play can´t be that bad obv, but i have some questions.

-Next time just call flop and hope to improve ? What is his flop c/R range ?
-What range can villain have if he c/r flop and c turn ? c/R flop and c/r turn ?
-Anybody checks behind turn ?

wish you had bet larger on flop so u can bet/3bet AI here... but as played i do not see what is wrong with a call down imo.

I'm dumb, but can you clarify this please?

1. Easily wide enough that you can call.
2. Worse hands than yours/head assplode in 1/2 lives game.
3. Not me.

1. Heads up, I just call his flop crai.
2. Depends on villain. Here you're in a way ahead/way behind situation=pot control(unless you're certain you're the one who is ahead)
3. I check back turn. I'm not sure why you bet if you thought he had 52 or KhT?

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Whoops, you're right. I would still pot control.

Pot control WHY?

Just stack off after you decide to 3bet since you're obviously never folding so do it when you have the best equity.

Calling the c/r on the flop is "okay" too if villain is likely to have air or put you on a flush draw if you flat, and he's also likely to bet thinly or bluff if he senses weakness. I think 3bet/stacking off is okay too. Depends. As a default readless I tend to just stack off.

i think we need to play carefully here, with villain showing this much strength on this flop, this could be a somewhat poorly-played made flush. however villain's c/r seems more indicative of his having a set here rather than a flush.

i think TT, 55, and 22 are the most likely holdings for villain, absent any reads. 25s as OP suggested is ridiculous IMO, i dont think he ever calls pre with that.

as such, with the NFD and outs to a higher set, i think the way to play this hand is to flat his flop c/r (which, conveniently for us, is undersized) and try to play a small pot unless another heart peels. if the board pairs we're instamucking to any bet i think as our flush outs are likely no longer clean

Unless there is something terribly wrong in your post, I'd hope he is drawing the flush since you have the nut draw.

Why is check raising a flush "poor"?

donking or c/c is more +EV i think. c/r is so strong, villain should expect a fold most of the time. with the made flush against hero's PFR range, if we are villain we don't want hero to fold. c/r here IMO is very nitty, low-variance poker, and less +EV.

(i think if i were villain and had a made flush i would actually opt for donking this flop, hoping hero would see it as a stab at the pot with a hand containing a single . i would probably do this more with small flushes, hoping to accelerate the action OTF, and with Q- or K-high flushes i would probably opt to c/c most of the time)

the other reason is with villain calling pre from OOP, we expect his range of made flushes to be tilted a bit towards higher flushes, which are less vulnerable (for example if villain had K9, he can perhaps continue to bet for value if another heart peels, whereas with 83 another heart should shut him down).

this is why i think if villain did make his flush, he didn't play it well. what are your thoughts?

i chk back this flop. No need for balancing, nobody cares.

What range will villain call with here on flop. Maybe some, but not a lot. Somebody with a black midpair is just going to say FI, and fold.

So yea, i see it as a WA/WB spot myself. I want villain to think his Qh is good now if it comes, because who in their right mind would not bet the Ah, right?

We have the perfect bluffcatcher in the event that this villain starts bluffing if we start checking.

Lets put it this way. IF a ton of money goes in on this flop, who is behind ALWAYS!!! So that being said, now who wants to start escalating the pot with bets and raises?

Thisis a hand that im not wanting to fold. So, i allow villain to valueown himself if he has Tx with a heart, or JJ with heart etc. I am careful betting the turn if villain can raise me off it, since i want to see river badly and would be catastrophe if i cannot. For those that think you should bet bet bet, just tell me what hands (how many) will call us down with a super strong line like that and be behind.


Note: I also think that betting flop, calling raise, call turn and soul read river
is totally standard. I would change between the two lines depending on villain tendencies and how best to exploit.

i think i mostly agree with this analysis. however i think betting flop is better than checking back. it carries some FE and also sustains our position as aggressor in the hand, allowing us to likely get a free card going to the river. villain does get the opportunity to check-raise, but this is rare enough that i think this is the best line. thoughts?

FE means villain might fold better, or fold draws that i dont want in. I dont think we have any. I dont want villain to fold his 5 outers.

And i dont doubt betting flop is standard and better, i just usually give villains the opportunity to bluff even times when i dont know they bluff a lot.

FE is not the point. Value is the point. If villain will call down multiple street with pair and say Q or K redraw, then betting is better. If they are tight, but will stab with a high frequency when they sense weakness, then checking back is suddenly more appealing, especially if they are high intensity and will think you never have a nut flush draw unless you flopped it.

I would think that this is read dependent, though, and standard is to bet. Villains live are more likely to be passive and stationy than super bluffy.

I agree on checking behind this flop sometimes with the Ah, I think it's a decent play with KK/AA on monotone flops where we have the flushdraw. I wouldn't always do it though.

actually ya you're right. i don't know why i said FE. it's true we're not folding out better here.

i think what Artemis said is probably right, in light of that: that the right line depends on villain tendencies. at the same time, betting flop means we stay in control of the pot, which is probably what makes it the standard line as opposed to checking back. i can see the merit of checking back in some situations though.

good discussion. OP, results?

cbet much larger and jam flop when he c/rs. Aybody who says check behind turn, put them on ignore.

Or the flop.

There are balance reasons for having the nut flush draw when we check back so people cannot instantly barrel then overbet shove the river when the flush hits.

That said, we can fix this by checking back hands like AT A2-5 with the Ah and still accomplish this. Admittedly this is not the best board for it, but a hand like AT on JT4 when you have the Ah is acceptable in position.

Don't you mean a slightly behind/way ahead situation? you can't be in that bada shape on the flop. The way you played it, you pretty much have to shove the turn... you don't want to give him a cheap river if he is behind... and you're committed if he's ahead... so just ship it.. reverse implieds I think its called.

urhhhh missed value much?....

on that flop there is no way you can insta (and solely) put him on sets... insta muck on a quite possible conterfieting pair the board? Also flatting his reraise on flop seems really bad as you're putting 1/4 of your stack in... and likely to be just calling the rest off if behind or checking back if you're infront... not so much