I think I would mostly just check back the turn.

Our hand has good showdown value, but at the same time we don't want to be building a much bigger pot than this. I think our hand is too good to be turning into a bluff here, but too weak to be wanting to build a pot.

We might have some gross river decisions to make on certain runouts, but Villain isn't guaranteed to bet all runouts either.

Glet'strytogettoshowdown,imoG

Flop:

350 bbs deep this is a great flop for UTG and a terrible flop for BB, because of how dynamic the board is and lack of nutted flop combos (flopped sets) so BBs advantage of overpairs doesn't matter as much. Also it's BB vs UTG so he might only have QQ+ for overpairs.

BB should be checking this board A LOT of the time, and in practice I'd guess there's nothing wrong with checking your whole range as BB, for simplicity at least.

As played I'd call. FWIW this is a flop we can float pretty wide, exploitatively.

Turn:

If you are not underopening/overfolding preflop and not overfolding flop we don't need to turn black QQ into a bluff on this turn and betting is too thin so I'd check.

I agree except I size differently here. I got $145-$155 here, still gives him a bad price but also leaves more behind for the river and we lose less if V decides to CR shove the turn.

NEXT ACTION

Hero opens to $15 with black QQ. Folds to V in BB who raises to $45. Hero calls.

Flop ($90) 9 7 5

V noticeably checks his hole cards, then bets $40. Hero calls.

Turn ($170) 6

V thinks about 10 seconds, then checks. Hero bets $135, V thinks about 10-15 seconds and calls.

River ($440) 10

V checks. Hero?

I probably mostly check back on the river, but maybe I'm missing value, I dunno.

How often is he going to hero call with AK hoping we're going nuts with AQ? My guess it's probably the same amount of times he puts us in a super gross spot by check/raising, so kinda a wash. So now it's about the hands we beat vs lose to that will consider calling, and JJ is about the only hand in the good category (especially since TT/88 now even got there).

My guess a river bet is more a bluff, but I still think our hand is too strong to bluff with.

GcluelessNLnoobG

^ If we're betting river it's not for value

Turn sizing good. Rip now and get sigh called by black KK and take a long drive home. Stop at wendy's only to be told they are out of chocolate frostys, but they can give you vanilla. Scream at the $8.50/hr cashier that vanilla frostys are an abonimation unto the lord. Peel out of the parking lot in an angry rage, get pulled over and get a ticket that doesnt even relate to the traffic laws you violated. Arrive home and take out your anger on your saint-like spouse who takes the verbal abuse in stride and offers you a bj to cheer you up. Refuse bc you are so f*&ing angry that some ******* called you with black kings on a 4 liner 3 diamond board. Swear off poker entirely. Next day go to the job you hate, talk to the people you hate, about topics you hate. Repeat for a few days, then as Friday approaches you start to get the itch again for some cards.

Rinse, repeat.

Actually hit up Wendy's after last night's poker session (no chocolate frosty, just my usual #4 Big Bacon Classic meal).

ETA: For me, most of the hand boils down to betting / building pots with really big hands / perhaps bluffing with really weak hands versus checking and keeping the pot under control with showdownable mediocre hands. I need some pretty good reasons to deviate from that general strategy.

GbutIwouldhavecheckedback,whichleadstoamuchmoreenj oyablelife,imoG

I legit lol'd

I agree that jamming river is +EV but I don't know if it's gonna be more EV than checking back. If he's ever capable of betting flop with AdKx and then x/c turn then I imagine the EV of xb might be higher than jamming.

As played I think it's close between jam and check. Leaning towards jam.

But I don't think turn is that close... pretty easy check imo

Going from 135/170 on the turn to overbet shipping 510/440 on the river just looks really really bluffy to me.

I think it's way more believable we are going for value when we size up the turn to 200-225/170 and then have a fat value bet remaining of 420-445/570-630.

We screwed up the turn then, but not shoving river now doesn't make sense for the hands we're repping.

You always describe your games as "non-payoffy post," so why on earth wouldn't you bluff here? In other posts you clearly don't think that sets+ get paid off much in spots like this. Also, we can not be put in a "gross spot" against a check/raise, because we're never betting less than all-in, and even if we did bet anything less than all-in we're snap folding to a raise.

Our hand is actually extremely weak! It's one of the worst hands in our range at this point. We have a huge nuts advantage on this type of runout as the pre-flop caller, so we can be bluffing pretty aggressively here to balance all our value bets. Also, we actually have very little showdown value after villain check/calls turn.

@shorn, villain should probably call with 100% of his continuing range on this turn. He obviously doesn't want to shove with a hand like AdAx, and even a hand like AdKd probably makes more money by just calling and catching river bluffs/value bets. We can hero fold hands like 8x when we get check/raised here because villain is so nutted raising in a spot where we have a big range advantage.

lol... but perhaps just save the line that wrecks deep 2/5 for deep 2/5.

In a low-limit vacuum Black QQ+this board+3b pot is a 1 street max+lean on position to showdown hand. There is no need to bet turn, bet or call rivers when there are less folds/more showdowns against a range that likely isn't as capped as we normally see in this game/this spot.

You don't really believe that do you?

I mean, if betting turn it's because we are range betting turn and as such would want to size way down with such a ridiculous advantage, and then always rip in some reasonable pot+ amount otr. Fooled Jbuzz, he's paying us off here (and winning this time but who cares).

Correct

Winning quite often as this is a spot that is very easy to over bluff given the lack of perceived value combos.

I don't know how well I would play this spot in real time, but in theory I wouldn't range bet this turn at a small size. Our range polarizes very easily on a turn that completes so many draws that we're much more likely to have than villain. If I'm trying to be balanced I would just bet a polarized range at a bigger size and check hands that are complete give-ups. If I'm trying to exploit a villain who's overfolding I would bet range, but still at a bigger size.

Further, this turn improves so many of our possible holdings that it's probably not even much of a mistake (if it's a mistake at all) to range bet ~pot. Also, shorn's size is not really small, just a tad smaller than how I'd size it. I think it would be a mistake to bet range at half pot or less, if that's what you're thinking when you say "small."

Hopefully I'm not dragging on here, but I see little reason to bet smaller than ~pot. Almost all of our hands fall very clearly into the "bluff" or "value" category (we are polarized). We don't have many/any hands that can not profitably bet large but still benefit from a bet. Villain does have a lot of hands that have significant equity which we wouldn't want to give good odds.

What? Adxd, a bunch of other xdxd, 55-TT, 98s, 87s A8s are all possible for hero have here from villain's perspective, although some of those may be raised on the flop/folded pre. We have TONS of value bets here.

No BS this seems like a leaky thought process.

“In my hypothetical universe I have the perfect number of value combos to bluffs using this wonky turn/river sizing and therefore villain is making a mistake by calling.”

Hard to argue against the king in his own castle.

I just don't get all this polarized range speak. We are just not polarized here and never want to be even from UTG. I mean I peel almost all of it given his laughable 3b sizing this deep.
Rather, we are just so wide-strong on this turn that finding a "bluff", like black QQ, is very often the best hand anyway at the time of betting it. So, as far as sizing goes, when we have every actual and perceived edge there is to be had in poker, why not downbet and induce a calling mistake -> also down-betting QQ might actually avoid value-cutting because maybe worse does call. Then to complete the line you can do whatever you want on the river, but sizing up makes money.

There are a lot of you cant do that spots that I want to put my competent opponents in - calling me down here is one of them. It's not some secret that we're attacking a somewhat capped range, but you will still see good players make calling mistakes here which is why it's so crucial to keep their range in and then punish rivers. Now I'm rambling. And not to contradict myself, I AM calling ONCE in 1/3 and never putting in more money after that, checking turn, mostly folding rivers because I just expect showdowns to happen wayyyy too often.

...I mean, my line here in this 1/3 game is not to play my range edges and just rely on my hand equity because showdowns are just too common. I just so often have it here anyway AND get called down that I can keep it simple and aim for a cheap showdown with bottom-tier stuff like black QQ on this board.

Results:

Hero checked, unsure of whether v would actually fold KK or AA. V tables JxJd and MHIG.

Against his actual hand this may not have been the most difficult spot, but range vs. range I should have played it differently.

NH, overpairs OOP on low boards is something I personally struggle to get 2 good streets of value from.

I tend to get mubsy and check back turn, which induces difficult bets from some Vs.

POTY

I think you played it fine TBH. And while I generally like to go for very thin value OTR, there aren't a lot of hand combos that V holds that (1) we beat and will call or (2) we don't beat but will probably fold (AA/KK/AK,AQ,A:diamon d:J,KQ). So it looks like a WA/WB spot where we value own ourselves well more than 50% of the time so I think the check is good.

I can get behind pot OTT as well. However, my thought was to be enough to charge the single diamond hands while also saving $$ if we have to b/f turn when V shoves.