My first instinct was to flat his raise on the turn to keep his bluffs in.

I think the math pretty clearly shows we should be inducing a bluff on the river if we think villain is bluffing. Not only does math prove it but it's also common sense.

You're assuming he will continue with his bluffs on the river % 100 of the time and you're not factoring in times when the river scares him and he doesn't put another chip in with the "value" hands in his range that he would be willing to get in on the turn.

You're assuming villain gives up with air in a $4500 pot where he can clearly rep a ten better than we can and hero shouldn't have very many tens in his range because of the preflop 3-bet. You're also assuming villain chooses to make a pot committing raise with sets on the turn, when the board gets worse for his hand, instead of raising the flop.

There is a ton of leveling going on ITT, no doubt V had a Ten FFS and the $$$ effected his judgement because hero never has QT here.

I'm always amazed at how thinking players can level themselves into thinking V can show up on this turn without a T. 30bb, sure it can be semibluff / bluff, 60bb sure, 100bb maybe, 300bb w 400bb behind vs the one player that can stack him... Never. Never not ever... Not unless you are in the middle of a leveling war and alcohol and cocaine is involved.

If you think otherwise then be prepared for some serious pain when you are 400bb+ deep.

There has to be a bigger chance of villain raise/folding on a bluff than him raise/folding $1600 with $2000 behind with a ten, especially when we have 2 tens in our hand.

If villain had 10 he was just thinking "omg pots too big, he must have nuts despite that making absolutely no sense"

I disagree. He's not folding a 10 for 2000$ more. Because he probably knows V never has QT here. He probably was thinking Hero didn't have a 10 and was trying to bluff him off.

+1

That amount of money/bb gets to people

-1

Definite level

I think the problem with 2+2 is that we are so biased and can't help but think of these situations from the standpoint of a +EV player.

We too often forget that the rec-fish who play poker "for fun" do not think like us.

You have Joe-Blow rec-fish who is having the best night of his life. He buys into his normal 2/5nl game for $500 and then he RUNS IT UP TO $4k

He's got all the money in the world in front of him, then he is in this spot with Tx and he puts in a raise and then he gets shoved on...

You are smoking crack if you think the money doesn't effect him.

Now this sort of spot can go one of two ways.

A) V regresses into level 1 donk mode and just says, "I haz a ten must call..."

or

B) V regresses into MUBs mode because of the money involved and thinks, "Man, that is alot of money, it 100% has to be the nuts and I don't have the nuts and I still have $2k behind which still represents a really good night and if I lose it all I'm going to slit my wrists and drive off a cliff... okay I fold..."

Money and effective stacks are a component of the game that can and will impair judgement. its easy to sit here behind our computers and think in strict terms of EV and ranging and bluff frequency etc...

But I'm telling you, when rec-fish are sitting at the table when money in front of them, a lot of time that goes out the window. the money will impact and impair their judgement which is why in this spot his turn raise is never a bluff.

Sure, in the pure math sense he can be bluffing here, but in the real rec-fish world, it is never a bluff, just never.

If you think a rec-fish can be bluffing in this spot on turn then your compass is just off and you are leveling yourself in a ton of other situations in which the writing is on the wall but you won't be able to see it because you've got too much 2+2 on the brain...

DGI, as usual, with a much better explanation of what I was trying to say. Everyone is trying to decide what we should do based on a thinking, rational villain without considering the psychological factors that are likely distorting his decision-making process. Being this deep has tremendous impact on most live players. And often live players, as DGI said, have the stack-counting syndrome where, regardless of pot size, they will look at their stack and want to preserve their profits.

Also, I don't know why everyone is assuming that villain thinks we can never have QT here. Surely, there is a greater chance that we decided to 3bet QTs than we decided to randomly turn 1pr into a bluff. Just like he can have QT because it is much more likely he called a 3bet/flop with QT than him turning anything into a bluff this deep.

After he tank/folded I would say there's a 95% chance he folded Tx.

This is a fantastic post, I pretty much completely agree with you.

However, I think this reasoning can also extend past "rec-fish." This hand took place at 9 am after Parx's eight 2-5 tables had been condensed to three tables, with mainly regulars. The villain was certainly not just a rec player, he was a pretty good player. However, money is money, and I think the prospect of calling off another $2k without the nuts would probably impact some decent players, not just rec players. The fact that the table had been playing very aggressively and players, including myself, had been raising PF with any two perhaps gave him some pause that I could have Q 10.

But your general sentiment that he was not thinking clearly in this spot due to the money involved is spot on, IMO.

nh OP

It was always pretty likely he had a T IMO for lots of reasons spelled out ITT. I just don't think he ever has the nuts and riding the lightning this high can be rather...unpleasant.

There was a thread just the other day (week?) about someone getting in lots of money in a likely chop situation. These 4-to-a-hand positions can be very interesting.

Trying to avoid huge run-ins so we 3-bet TT oop against an 800bb stack... mistake number one. Just flat pre.

We flop an OESD with one pair and overbet (while trying to avoid huge run-ins)... mistake number two. Betting is fine, but what does $300 accomplish? NOTHING. all sets are calling, almost all random 10s are peeling here, as are nut flush draws and combo draws, Q10 has a boner, and every worse hand folds. Bet $175 or so. Maybe even $150.

You make your hand on the turn and lead... This is the first action I completely agree with. You are underrepped ( your hand looks like an overpair), and the pot is huge so you should expect action almost always.

V raises to $1600 and Hero doesn't know what to do... mistake number three. You have to have a plan here. This is a huge pot that we don't want to make costly errors in. You need to know V's tendencies well enough to either make an easy fold or easy shove after his turn raise.

As played, good luck all in. V is not folding and our hand is not supposed to be a straight, so yeah... get the money in the middle. FWIW, I would expect V to have a set a decent chunk, have a naked ten most of the time (J10 just seems to make sense because so many players overvalue it), and have Q10 occasionally but not a whole lot.

I don't love your spot, but I think we just have to go with it and cross our fingers...

And I think the most important thing to consider is booking a sexy 5k day before this hand starts. Why are we playing a random 2-5 game with 1000bb? That's not to your advantage. Just get up and celebrate with a beer or several.

Yes. But your assumption that there is a reasonable chance an LLSNL villain can turn basically anything into a bluff this deep on such a coordinated board is an unreasonable assumption.

This thread makes me feel like games other people play in are drastically different from the ones I have played in. I wouldn't consider there being ANY chance that someone turns a set into a bluff here. And I just can't imagine anyone doing it for value this deep. Especially after not raising the flop.

Your last paragraph is how the vast majority of LLSNL players feel with a big stack. And is basically the EXACT kind of thinking that makes me think there is a very limited chance villain is ever bluffing here. People just don't risk their "big wins" any more than they have to. Bluffing here would obviously be extremely risking and I think therefore extremely unlikely.

He can be doing this with a naked ten. But I think he basically always has a straight. The question then is the ratio between Tx and QT. And whether we chop the pot often enough to make this a profitable jam (assuming he calls a shove with Tx). Obviously if we are very rarely winning its hard to justify putting another 3k into the pot.

I don't think V sees a set as a bluff. In fact, and I know this is a bold assumption, I believe a hefty sum of Vs believe they are value betting a set because they are level 1 or level 2 thinkers. Sometimes our opponent is going to be a high skill player who thinks appropriately about situations like this, but so many players are lolbad and punt off huge stacks without the nuts. Maybe my local game is softer than others (I'm not complaining), but V sees Hero's hand as an overvalued QQ+ that is willing to go broke. What is hero 3-betting pre? Everyone in this thread thinks TT is a flat pre, so it's pretty likely that V is discounting most or all combos of TT. I'm not saying I'm right 100% of the time (I'm not), but we've all seen some trigger happy donkey lose his mind when he has a huge stack and pay the price for it.

Hero's edge in this pot is knowing and understanding his opponent.

I'll be the first to admit that I level myself from time to time, but does anyone agree that because TT is the only combo we ever have that makes a straight, and TT is one of our least likely 3-betting hands this deep, that we should almost never have a straight? If this is true, and V thinks at all, then V can reasonably believe any of his sets are in the lead. He likely also believes that any non J broadway card on the river kills his hand. Any T puts a straight on the board, and any Q+ makes a better set for Hero. So V raises the turn, planning to call a shove from Hero on either the turn or the river. If I'm V with top set, I hate flatting the turn and I really hate folding at any point.

So if we are V and we have a set, should we just call turn and call river unimproved? Am I leveling myself? I'm really curious about this spot because I probably make some mistakes here.

If we're V with a set, I'm raising the flop.

If we're V with a set and got to this situation on the turn, I'd call and re-evaluate the turn. It's $500 to win $1,340. You've got 10 outs to improve and calling down OTR isn't out of the question since OP shouldn't have a T here and should have an overly aggressive overpair. Kind of depends on which set you have though.

I agree that V should raise the flop with any set. And, looking back, I think Hero should find a fold in this spot. We are risking a whole lot without getting much in return.

Okay, one more hypothetical question: Let's say we are V and we have AdQd... How should we play the flop? Turn? And can we profitably turn the busted nut flush draw into a bluff on the river? On any street?

V has two things going for him... He has position, and he knows Hero is almost never putting his whole stack in without the nuts this deep.

When OP bombs over pot OTF, it's a pretty dicey proposition to continue with a hand like AQ. For starters, you're not getting proper odds to draw. Second, you're draws are are all incredibly obvious = if you hit them, you're unlikely to realize much of the implied odds you're getting because OP is deep. If you were to call the flop (which I think would be a mistake - It's a raise/fold spot IMO), I think the turn is a fold.

The problem with calling the flop and/or turn is that you're turning your draw face up and it will be difficult to get paid. If you call flop and turn and a diamond hits the river, do you think OP is going to fire again? Same thing if a T comes in. OP pretty effectively slams the door OTF for calling IMO. I think raising would be interesting because we're so deep, but calling is tough IMO.