1-3, Hero $330, Villain covers.
1 limp, Villain 12 MP, Hero calls in MP, 4 other callers.
Flop ($72) Jh4s2s
3 chks including V, hero 35, only V calls.
Turn ($142) Jh4s2s,7s
V bets $65, what parts of hero's range should continue?

Villain was running over the table with well placed aggression. Occasionally overaggro I thought, but that was buying him meta image. I could tell he was taking notes on players. His high aggression level rare for 1-3. Definitely a winning player.

My image at the time would be tight, thinking player. Probably perceived me as weak tight, although he may see everyone as weak tight.

His line puzzled me because my range is strong here. Sets, flushes, QQ, suited Broadways that flopped top pair.

I habitually overestimate villain strength, so it's always possible that he was spewing but running good. For the sake of argument, I'd prefer feedback assuming we're facing a very good villain here who errs on the side of over aggression. If I call, I believe highly likely he shoves blank rivers.

Would you ever take villain's line? What is your range if you do?

One further note. His cbet % very high, even multiway.

what cards does H have?

To me this looks like a flush draw that decided to check/call flop in a multiway pot then, after getting there on turn, needs to somehow get value when you'll often check the turn with hands that will call at least one bet.

Like you say, you have a strong range here and so I give villain low chances of bluffing. Even if he does bluff, there aren't many hands he could be bluffing here - candidates are A3s, A5s, small PPs (discounted because these should fold flop), overcards with a spade.

Our immediate pot odds are good, but if villain is actually shoving most rivers it gets much worse. I'm probably folding everything worse than sets. Calling river with JJ, 44, 77 if you bet flop with it, flushes.

I intentionally omitted that information for now.

Villain may have put Broadway Jxo in my range, but not in my actual range in this spot.

I'm a LAG. Here's what I'm hand reading you both with:

V raises from EP, but he's LAG so that's going to be good hands with some sort of lighter stuff thrown in. I'm going to say...

99+, ATs+, AJo+, KQ, and whatever he uses for light raises: maybe some other suited broadways, maybe SCs, maybe suited aces, maybe lower pairs.

When you flat, I'm going to put you on mostly pairs, SCs, maybe suited aces, maybe some S1Gs, and some fudge factor. I'm taking KK+ out of your range and discounting QQ.

OTF, he checks it with five V's. I think it's very unlikely he has a big hand here. As a LAG, he'll expect to get called lighter and he's not going to want to give five other people a free card to beat him. I think he'd lead out even with the nuts here. Also, if he's a LAG and he's knows it (clap your hands), he knows he has to slow play less and lead out more. You say he cbets very often, even more indication that he's not strong when he checks.

You make a bet of half the pot. On that bet sizing, I don't think you're strong either. My first thought is whether I can take this away from you with a raise to about 125. Unfortunately, with so many other people it's fairly likely someone has the flush draw and would find a call. I wouldn't reverse float here, so if I'm calling I have something.

OK, V calls, so he has some part of this flop. But he's not strong and there's only one OESD so I'm putting him very likely on the flush draw. I think if he'd had better relative position and had seen everyone fold he might well have put the move on you. I think 2P is roughly impossible and sets are discounted but possible.

I don't think he thinks you have a set (why such a small flop bet?) or an overpair (no RR pre and why such a small flop bet?). You might well have a flush draw, although many people don't bet that. I think your range is strong with jacks that took a stab along with some flush draws that you played aggressively. (Has he seen you do that in the past?) Flush draws with a jack are definitely in my estimate of your range. You might also have something like a PP below jacks that is taking a stab. But overall, you aren't strong except for the combo flush draws.

The flush comes in and he leads out for less than half the pot. Maaaaybe that's a bluff, but a good LAG should know that bluffs work better when they're sized a little larger. Making it too easy to call (unless he thinks your range is strongly polarized) isn't a good strategy. If I were going to bluff this in his shoes (and I would definitely consider it), I'd make it 100. If he knows he's a LAG, he'll expect people to call him light and he's making an easy to call bet. I'm suspicious. Unfortunately, it might could also be a small bluff designed to move you off your jacks. Or a small bet designed to see whether you now have the flush.

There's 200 in the pot and I think his range is polarized. Either he has the flush or he's got not much.

In your shoes, I'd raise him to 165. If we've got nothing, I think there's a decent opportunity to represent the flush. If we have the nut flush, let's trap smaller flushes. If we have a smaller flush, I really don't want to face a sizable river on his polarized range. Raising is going to put the entire middle of his range to a difficult decision. I'd consider the raise a success if he had to tank for a good while before making his mind up (regardless of whether he got he right answer or not).

OK, that's my stab at it. Looking forward to the comedy that will ensue when it turns out how wildly and completely wrong I was about everything.

FWIW, I love this post. Most interesting HH I've seen in a long while. Thank you!

I believe he was capable of calling flop light with a plan of pressuring later streets on certain runnouts. A dry ace of spades would make sense.

And you're going to get near worthless responses until you give us that information.

So let's just say he actually is a "good LAG" vs. the vast majority of loose players that are up because they are running good. He has a lot of information on how you play. Have you been tight passive, loose passive or aggressive? Has he seen you fold which would he would think was TP on a bad board? Or do you call down to the river and muck your cards a lot? Have you had a lot of swings in your stack or have you just won small pots?

These are all things a good player would know and a LAG would have to know to be successful. It is going to determine is air %. Since he's offering over 3:1 to call, I don't think he's hoping to have you fold any made hand at TP or above unless you've shown him you can do it.

My hand is KdJd.

We had played for a few hours. I'd been card dead. His influence in particular has made the table very active. I rarely open limp so I doubt that happened. I'd had no good opportunity to steal limps from button or blinds. I'm pretty sure my only 3bet was before he joined the table.

The hand was yesterday, so I don't have much more for history. I probably had one or two cbet dry flop take it downs, but mostly lots of folding.

A lot to think about here. Thanks. Bottom of my range would be JTs, turning any part of it into a bluff had not occurred to me.

Thanks for your contribution and analysis, as well as insight into the mind of a LAG. From playing with LAGs, as a TAG bordering on Weak Tight, i always assume the LAG basically has no thought process.

My (rudimentary) analysis of the hand is that...he's a LAG, he shows up in this spot with ATC often after floating the flop with intentions on stealing it and is probably thinking something along the lines of "That person isn't winning the pot, I'm winning the pot *BET* RawRRR".

He's got to be light here, and I re-pop with virtually ATC because of his image, assuming he's capable of folding. I shove with a made pair of jacks with a high spade kicker, possibly puss out and flat with pair of jacks/no spade, but may just flip a switch and try to out aggress the aggressor with ATC. He just can't have it every time in this spot, let's put our balls on the line.

65 seems like a small bet, but notice he's got approximately a PSB left on the river. Good LAGs are capable of building pots to steal them later. I'd say if you call, the next bet is likely to be an all-in, and it's going to be up to you to figure out whether he has a flush or A3hh.

I agree with everything Case2 wrote.

I think on the turn he has just the bare ace of spades. You bet less than half pot and it folds back around to him. A good LAG would very likely have either but the nut flush draw himself first or would now turn it into a semibluff and check raise you to fold you off of what looks like top pair or something like 10s. Very good chance he has just the Aces of spades in this spot. Like AQ or AK with the Ace of spades. Maybe even KQ with the king of spades.

huh? it is 6 handed on the flop and the only player that is repping a flush draw is the V.

Flush gets there on the turn and he donks into us. The only hands that I really want to continue on here with are:

A. a made flush
B. nut flush draw
C. a set.

everything else you are just blindly bluff catching with against a player that most likely has some kind of flush, flushcombo hand. It is just too probable for him to have a flush here.

I super disagree that he credibly reps a flush here. What flush draw hands raise in MP and then don't cbet the flop? Probably not the NFD, right? He'd bet. Probably not KQss (double overcard). Nothing with a jack in it, that's a crushing hand. Can't have the 7s in it. I guess T9ss and 98ss? Maybe?

This guy is a LAG. If you just fold to halfpot bets any time a scare card turns, you are going to get absolutely monstered by him.

I think that covers my dilemma well. Jx is the bottom third of my range. But he may think it's a much higher proportion.

Would you argue that I should call with my entire range here, and only fold the river with my actual hand if a spade, ace or queen hit?

I'd call my entire range, you could fold JT if you just want to have some folds in there. I'm generally calling the river too, definitely not folding just because a queen rivers. I'd let it go on an ace or a spade.

The fact that we went 17ways to the flop and we bet it (albeit a small bet) has got to probably worry Villain that we have a strong hand. Even though it's HU on the turn, is he really getting that out-of-line here OOP against what looks like a strong flop range for us?

I would never have an overpair here as with these stacks I could setup a trivial SPR with a 3bet preflop, so I'm ignoring that part of our range. Even being the first to coldcall a raise with a setmining hand is kinda meh unless we know the whole table is coming along, and kinda ditto for suited stuff (i.e. if we didn't know we were going to go multiway, I'm probably folding most everything I can't 3bet preflop).

Anyhoo, I'd continue with the strong part of my range that could suck out against a flush / a better chance of actually being good now, which is 44/22 and flushes. I would release Jx+nodraw/and less (ex. 88 that bet the flop when checked to). I can't have Js cuz I'd have a flush (I would not being playing an offsuit Jx here).

GtightnitG

What information you should pay attention to against a LAG who c-bets almost every flop, what flops does he not c-bet and how did his hand relate to it? Does he flop monsters and check to often? Or does he only check if he whiffed completely? If he hasn't balanced it well enough, that is key information against his style of play.

That being said, 9/10 he will not have the flush here. Probably over cards with a spade, 1010sx etc. Good LAGs with a heavy c-bet % could have a set in this situation but again that's like unlikely.

Against how he views your range, he probably doesn't expect you to bet with just a flush draw. Likely he has narrowed you to an AJ-QJ type hand and if you're capable of making moves, he could add 9s or 10s. The turn bet typically means he either flopped a monster (rare cases he has 7s) or is trying to see if you have any spades in your hand and doesn't expect you to call with most of your range. There's not much middle ground for him on this board.

I get curious when a player does something out of character. The aggro villain checked and that rings giant alarm bells for me. I'd really expect to see a set and villain panicked when a 3rd spade fell on the turn. Without a redraw here I'd fold.

So here's my take. Understanding there are some assumptions made here.

Our range probably looks to him like 6 combos of btm and mid set and a bunch of strongish Jx (depending on ranging assumptions and villain blockers) a very occasional top set but I think v expects us to 3! At least QQ+ most of the time and JJ at least some. If V happens to hold an A,K,Q (or less likely but perhaps more important J) of spade he blocks some of our most likely flush combos or pair+fd combos we and our image would bet flop with. With our image he may expect very few flop semibluffs from us in a very multiway pot. So he shouldn't expect many flushes or overpairs imo.

If I read the OP correctly we went 6 ways to the flop. Yes he's a lag but he's decent and although he's been seen to cbet frequently even in multiway pots I think he certainly has some flush draws in his flop x/c range when facing 5 opponents most with uncapped ranges. So I think v sees his range having more flushes than h.

V may certainly be less likely to x/c with his very strong draws but really vs eleventy-two opponents he should expect little FE and easily could elect to preserve his equity with a passive flop line.

I'm curious what we think the unsuited part of his mp raising range looks like. I'm assuming he at least has some Axo Kxo type stuff. I'd expect the Awheel stuff to be suited but maybe not exclusively.

Since he may view hero as weak/tight obv his best turn semibluffs are those AsXo combos that most importantly block the nuts and heros nfds/AsJx, provide an over card and a draw to the nuts for v.

With our blocker v does have less AsKo AsJo so understanding how much Arag off suit is in his early mp raising range is somewhat important to getting a sense of villains semibluff range IMO.

Now on one hand, since villain had good relative position to hero's flop bet we don't learn as much from his call. If positions were switched we could eliminate floats from his range but with everyone folding in front of him, v could be floating anything with equity vs TP if he plans to also rep spades.

But on the other hand, with v being oop the reverse float is more difficult without the As blocker since there will be rio considerations for him on spade rivers and his turn FE is close to zero when we have the As.

All of this leads me to weight his semibluffs toward AsXo and a few non spade suited wheel draws with less in the way of underpair/overcard hands.

It's hard to see him checking any flopped sets or peeling 77 so his value range Ott should have virtually no sets. So he mostly has some flushes, AsXo semibluffs and a few wheel draws he picked to stab turn with.

I think hero needs to call turn with all his Jx including AsJx.

OTR fold nonflushes to aggression on spade rivers, bluff catch our strongest Jx (say AJ, KJ) and sets on non spade rivers.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks like an easy fold because he checked flop. Probably a very easy lag to play against.

Recheck the action. It checks to v, he checks, hero bets, all fold back to v.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm a bit skeptical of OP saying this guy is a "good LAG" meaning that I can assume he'll be any good at identifying hero's range. After he as the PFR checks, villain probably expects hero to bet any pair because that's what he would do. If I'm villain, when it folds back round to me I am dropping TT like it's made out of white hot metal, but a LAG may not be.

LAGs can often look great when they are in their wheelhouse, which is sniffing out and capitalizing on weakness. When they are called upon to make a correct technical play, they can suddenly fail surprisingly hard. I liked Case's post as an example of LAG thinking:

"Only half pot, guy's hand is probably not very good, can I bully him?". The idea that a typical LAG thinks "well, a good jack is probably bottom of his range here" is just wrong imo. If he were to consider ranges, he absolutely thinks you can have like 66 here, but a lot of LAGs just don't think in those terms at all.