I see you added 42o/32o in there. sneaky. Im open to discussion on this a bit, but I expect a lot more limp calling with A5o and 65o than i do with 32/42.

we really don't know much about villain. at these stakes i tend to assume players are bad.

i would prolly have bet a bit smaller than $100, maybe $75, but the truth is we crush this board, there are so many undersets we get value from, i'm bet/snapping this river all day and i think any other approach is nitty as fcuk at 1/2 IMHO. for those building ranges, keep in mind this hand was 2nd nuts versus 3rd nuts. if you regularly got away from nut vs nut spots, you'd probably not be playing well.

given no reads or information on villain I also would have snapped his river bet in the QT hand. his line is weird, i'm not folding top two there given action

Koss you played it fine man. IMO good players have to be careful not to play toooo tight in 1/2 and 1/3 type games. for every time an unknown villain shows up with a wheel here, i've seen another 10 show up with everything else, all the way down to shyt you wouldn't imagine anyone would call off with.

Yes lets give him A5o and 56o to fit your narrative but not give him 43o, 42o and 32o.

Either play around with reasonable ranges or don't try to make the argument.

If he's playing suited combos that's all he has, if he's playing 56o then he has all the offsuit two pair combos. And if that's the case we might as well give him J4-J2 which brings us back to 60% under the tightest range.

Saying you're not ahead of 50% of his calling range with top set on this board is GG-level nittery.

+1

I think the takeaway from this hand is that you don’t try going for fat value often enough. Even at 2/5 or 5/10, sometimes you’ll be absolutely stunned by the dumb garbage some people will call huge value bets with. People hate to fold.

Your theory that he’s loose pre and tight post (especially on the river) might be true. But we don’t have any evidence of that. All we know is he did some abomination pre. My default assumption would be that a fish is a payoff wizard, and if you haven’t discovered this, you aren’t getting anywhere close to the amount of value you can at this game.

The only reason to bet small is to b/f the river when very deep (and we aren't close here). V has shown zero indication that he flopped a str8 (raise somewhere, hello???), so you need to be focused on maximizing against the rest of his range (which is much larger than his str8 range regardless of the combinatorics simply because of the way the hand played out).

Bottom line, V made the absolute minimum and played it terribly. You played it optimally with your holding versus his range.

Have to agree with Johnny here. This is a bombs away type spot, I think I like c/jam better than betting 100+ ourselves, but in no way shape or form should we be value betting small. Save that for hands like AJ in this spot.

lol at giving V 42o, 43o and not discounting any of these combos on river given that he didn't raise flop or turn. I suppose we think V has 100% vpip?

We all agree OP is ahead of 50% of his call range, the debate is whether he calls with one pair, which imo is the vast majority of his range by the time he gets to the river like this. I feel like a large bet lets V play perfectly.

Edit: re the 50% of his range part, I think we probably are not ahead of his "call a big bet" range because he has basically no two pair combos and can only call with a set or straight.

Without knowing the results, I would think he would raise any 2 pair or better on the turn. So I think $50-75 on the river for value is what you can expect he'll call with one pair. You're most optimal is that he limped UTG PF with something like AJo or even possibly KJo, floated the flop with two overs and now hit a pair on the turn - this is not uncommon in 1-2 games, especially weak ones.

Somehow in 1-2 and 2-5 games, a 'stack' is the major divider of whether people do or don't call - I think I have to put him on more than 1 pair to call 100+, which nothing suggests at this point.

Lastly, even after seeing the results, I don't think putting your opponent on the exact one or two hands that beat you and then folding is the way to go. Yes, you're gonna be wrong and get a few coolers (set over set, flopped flush vs. flush). Villian's straight on this board is well over 100:1 to hit on flop; slightly easier to 'expect' opponents on Broadway and upper range straights as these cards are played more often, but A-5 and 56 are just too remote.

Checking is just awful - assuming you would then have to open first, if he checks it back he gets a ton info for free from you and he can then quietly muck his hand leaving now having to twice guess his holding (QT hand from before). What makes you believe he's strong/confident enough to bet when he hasn't raised any previous street, and your hand is so much more than a bluff catcher. If your intent is to check raise, then you really have to believe he's more than moderately strong, but obviously not nutted, which again, your info doesn't tell me that's the case. Which makes folding jut about unthinkable, especially if he shoves for his remaining stack - you're calling ~$280 to get $416 with top set an otherwise ragged board.

Also, I think your sample size for your opponent, if you don't know him, isn't enough to warrant not going for moderate river value bet. Normally, the worst that happens is he folds and you get to preserve your image and SB play for future hands in the session. I'll give up $50 (25BBs) now if I think I can get more later with a bigger value bet and/or bluff.

What kind of logic justifies discounting two pair because he hasn’t raised but not a straight by the same idea?

Two pairs can get counterfeited and straights can't. Two pair needs protection and straights don't (at least not on this board). An ace, 5 and a 6 also kill action, can suck out.

Your assumption that villain raises only weaker hands but not stronger ones is pretty strained.

That is not my assumption (your use of the words only and not are not what I was saying) but I do contend that he is more likely to raise two pair than a straight. Doesn't it make sense for him to raise the more vulnerable hand?

Your assumption was that he had “basically no two pair combos.”

I have no idea. Some fish play like that, but how can we know what’s in his mind.

Two pair is pretty far ahead, especially if a guy is blasting AK for two streets.

No, it makes more sense for him to raise the better hand more often

I agree two pair is pretty far ahead. Overpairs have about 21% equity vs two pair, giving more of a reason to raise compared to when V has 100% equity vs a straight.

My original point was some two pair combos should be discounted by the river.

If Hero had more history with Villain and/or was able to give him the impression that he was capable of three-barrel bluffing with Ace-high (or even King-high) then the 8 on the river is actually a good card if Hero can include 68 and 78 in Villain's range.

Villain now has a pair, which is a bluff catcher to Hero's purported barreling. If I'm Hero, I don't want to put too much pressure on Villain to have to make a big 'Hero' call, so I still think $50-75 is correct size, favoring $60 because it matches bet size progression in relation to pot size (less than half-pot).

This is essentially the same perspective if Villain has two pair and puts Hero only one pair - hand is strong although not unbeatable, but certainly worth a lookup on the river.

idk about you but I'd rather slowplay a straight here instead of two pair.

Slowplaying a straight is never a good idea. Seriously. Never.

I like a polarizing large river bet. It gets called very often in live poker. I put the V on a medium pocket pair and I think most villains in live poker call 100$ with these. I think a call by the villain with A5 is pretty bad but highlights the usefulness of going big for value.

Tell that to Johnny Chan

I like a bet of about 1/2 pot on the river. Here’s my reasoning, you have trip Jacks, so Villian having top pair seems less likely. So you have to value target weak pairs and possible two pair hands. Sometimes Villian is going to have A5 or 5/6 for the straight. TBH if you get shoved on on the river this is polarized to 5/6 (the nuts) at 1/2 NL. Almost no one is shoving the river with less at these stakes.

I’m against a full pot bet here, simply because it’s unlikely Villian will have a hand here often enough to call a pot sized river bet you beat. Your only targeting lower sets. I don’t think it’s terrible to bet the pot here, but not optimal.