This entire discussion has been a textbook example of why SPR's of 10-13 with one pair hands are difficult to play.

Unless you have amazing hand reading skills like me.


I think he'd lead with his busted draws and monster range more than those. Kx is desperate for a showdown I'd think.

Meh, I'm still kind of torn between checking back and betting $50. I always feel like my testicles are too tiny when I check back. But you almost never see a c/r bluff here, so I think I'm leaning toward betting very small to collect money from worse that can't find the fold button.

I think the 95 vs this villain is good because he's going to c/r regardless of the size, and I think you have to follow through with the original plan and call it off, but I don't think there are enough Al Bundy's out there that this is a standard play.

I'm really liking a small value bet. I think I've been missing value in the past.

Great thread.

This utg bet (+133) does not make sense.
99-XX, Kx can be call but not re-raise.
8x is AI OTT
IMO, you must call 133 for 652 (20%)
Call

It's +$228 on top of hero's $95.

WOW !!
Yes, it's 228 more
Thanks Angrist
228 for 842, about 25%
Here, imo there are many bluff cachers, KhXh, K7? and barely trips or FH
CALL

So you are OK with betting the river, not knowing what to do against a raise?

A little late to the party, but I'm going to grunch and then read some replies.

pre: fine

flop: Great board texture to cbet plus we have the added benefit of the info gained which will help define ranges on villain's.

Range on Al after flop call: 77, 87, A7, 6-9, 9T, and some draws like JT. We can discount 8x some (depending on how he plays turn). We also need to discount PPs like 66, 99 and TT (since his profile suggests he might raise pre or lead flop or ch/raise flop with them) at least some percent of the time

Turn: We now have a hand with SDV. We can certainly check back to induce a river lead from villain, so we get two streets of value. If villain checks river, then i'm betting small on blank rivers and calling a raise. Alternatively, we can b/f turn and check back river. I prefer a check on the turn
** I think b/c turn is a bigger mistake than b/f turn
***I think b/c river if we bet turn is a big mistake

Range on villain after turn call: his slow played monsters are still in his range. I would discount 8x even more unless he boated up on the turn. Flush and straight draws are still in his range. I expect very few PPs still left in his range

River: is a check back, imo AINEC. For hero to be putting in a third bet on the river, we are putting villain in "bluff catching" mode. Looking back in his range, there aren't any value hands in his range that are calling a river bet, except KX...Everything else bricked or beats us.

AP: fold. I just don't think villain takes this line with a non-nutted hand. Since hero raised pre, bet flop, bet turn, there is no reason for villain to assume hero won't fire a third bet. So, villain CAN easily check back river going for a check/raise. That's why I think that b/c river (after betting turn) is a big mistake. B/c river after checking turn is BETTER, since the dynamics of the hand changes a lot (i.e. villain's thought process that hero isn't likely betting river after checking turn, so villain isn't checking river with his monsters as often)

I don't understand this? So what hands do you think villain ch/r river with?

i don't agree 100% with the bolded. Villain can make a crying call with Kx. However, once villain ch/raises the river, then the bolded is 100% true, imo.

Checking b/c you may face a tough decision isnt a good enough reason to not take an optimal line.

call now. wp.

I often agree with this statement, but not this time. This is a river scenario where we are playing for stacks if we bet and get raised. The fact that we can make a stack-sized mistake on the river if we are faced with a tough decision cancels out any theoretical reason why betting is "optimal".

Now, if you know you can bet/call, as I saw you advocated in an earlier post, that's different. Then calling the raise is not a tough decision. In that case of course we'd want to bet here. But I saw nothing in the OP's analysis that said anything like that.

Do 2-3 stack sized turn/river raises (no showdown) in under an hour change your mind at all?

Nothing in OPs description suggests this player is capable of getting to the river in this spot with a slow played monster.

Again, its super unlikely he has trips, 77 or 88.

This is why I expect to get c/r pretty rarely here because his range for getting to the river is predominately busted draws and marginal showdown value.

If i do get raised i'm calling it off. He reps pretty much nothing. Like, of course im not fist pump snapping, but I really cant b/f.

You sacrifice the value from Kx of hearts/other mid pairs when we check. Maybe we get owned a super small % of the time vs a monster but taking to account all the variables, this is very unlikely. River is a mandatory value bet.

You say we risk making a large mistake if we make an incorrect decision after he c/r, but if we make the correct decision its just as big of a mistake for him.

It's kinda unlikely V has a monster on the river when checked to us.

Checking to avoid the stack-losing "mistake" of calling off when V has a monster is a large mistake in itself because you miss a whole street of value in a bloated pot.

Some % of the time V will turn up with a monster and stack us on the river. Say V's river c/r are 70% monsters 30% bluffs (probably a lot more than 30% bluffs), we should still bet river and call if he shoves because we're trying to get value from his showdown hands.

I don't think calling the river c/r is a tough decision, as we were completely prepared for it when we bet.

I wouldn't be super surprised to see him turn a SD like a 7 hand into a bluff otr.

This information really should have been in the first post.

is different than

If you think the two statements are identical, I've found a leak in your game.

Disappointed.

Not identical. Just posing the question. What recent history does it take to affect the river call off? We've seen his donkish ways previously if not specifically turn/river shoves.

Sorry for the confusion. Just trying to get an idea of what changes the reads.

the plan that you had and the reads that you had

I really think the most important lessons in this hand are plans. You have to plan on what you do to check/raises first and foremost. Plan what are good rivers for you. And even plan on how to stack villains on future hands. The plan pre is to just flop well and figure it out from there. It's really impossible to plan for flops, so you shouldn't worry about whether or not AK will win post flop. Pre is good sizing, I like the low to high sizing on the turn and your reads and reasons for your actions. The only piece you have left is that your total game plan involved bluff catching, and I think your sizing on the river is very deft because it sort of looks FOS and it prices you in to call at this point.

I don't really know how I'd have played it but this is a cool hand because, like most cash poker, pre and flop basically played itself. You make your money on the turn and river by predicting villains actions and following through with your plans.

What did he show?

ITT people are worried about c-betting the flop but then want 3 streets w/TPTK.

That might make sense for the right Villain (one whose range based on pf is heavily weighted toward low-mid pairs, and is a complete station postflop). But clearly, Al is not that Villain. No ma'am.

my problem w/ betting the river is unless he has Khxh I don't see him calling any bet. Reason being is I absolutely do not see this over agro vill, limping pre and check calling 3 streets w/ 99-QQ. maybe he plays A7 like this some %.

So to me he has monsters and busted draws otr. The fact again that agro guy didn't lead the river w/ his busted draws/bluffs means he gave up or he has a huge hand still trying to trap.

I totally agree once you bet the river calling the raise is mandatory, I just wouldn't put myself in that spot. It takes a special villain at this level to c/r all in w/ air when hero bets 3 streets.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't see really any hands that he calls a river bet w/ that played this way. He's folding or jamming. So if I was betting it would be to induce and I think that's pretty bold.

If we checked back the turn this obviously would all change.

well yeah if you have seen him raise all in on the turn and river 3 times in less than an hour it has to effect the river call. he's repping the nuts in a spot where it's really hard for him to have it, let alone for the 4th time in 60 mins. Really though even if he never raised the river prior, you still have to call here.

it just means you really didn't have a decision once you bet, right?

Ya, I'm just curious how much aggro it takes for people to change their lines.

I had seen no show downs and as Venice pointed out, betting big on turns and rivers is different then CRAI.