$1-3 NL

UTG (50s WG, new to table -- has short stack of $100) straddles to $6
2 limpers
Hero (super LAGgy image) limps behind on button w/ Qh9h (I want to play this in position, but I've played so many recent pots aggressively, I expect I'll get played back at fairly often if I go for raise here).
SB folds, BB calls, straddler checks.

FLOP ($26): Th9d3d

4 checks to Hero
Hero bets $16, only straddler calls.


TURN ($55): 3c

Straddler Checks, Hero Checks


RIVER ($55): Ts

Straddler Checks, Hero bets $11 (going for value and hopefully confusion calls from 44-88, Axdd, J9, 98, 97, etc.), Straddler looks legitimately confused by the bet sizing, then shoves for $65 more.


Looking for feedback on any and all decision points. Hopefully there's more to say than "fold preflop".

dont love the limp but ok reasoning... flop bet is meh, 2nd pair 5 way, but its vulnerable, and villans have shown weakness... who knows, limped pots are dumb. I guess bet is fine.

obvious river check. Way way better to bet turn if you want value, you couldve even shipped turn as played. as played I guess call, maybe he had hearts and doesnt want to fold to such a timny bet, id be confused too if i was V.

I would fold here he's doing this with A9 at worst

Q9s is a hand to actually keep putting on the pressure, because we can defend against a 3bet, and don't mind getting called. I'd cut down on hands that rely on not getting 3b or isolating if I feel like I'm going to not get credit.

Flop looks like a good spot to check, though betting is "okay". I don't think our hand is vulnerable, that's why I don't bet. If it's vulnerable then betting for protection has merit.

As played turn is standard. River I'd just check back and try win. I don't buy those confusion looks personally.

I’d go $20-25 on the flop and b/f the turn. Most people are leading Tx on the flop and he’s got very few 3x in his range. Tons of draws out there to get value from.

River bet is pointless other than a thin bluffy shove targeting J9/98/97 and worse PP’s.

tricky hand. poking a stick at a short stacked straddler probably makes sense after getting more of a read.

raise/gii pre against the straddler is only gonna be a little -EV, probably depends on how you like/dislike what happens to your image, so limp pre makes some sense.

flop looks good.

stack sizes are tricky on the turn, straddler has such a garbage range here, probably b/f small, but check behind and bluff catch river plan seems good also.

river, straddler has napkins so often, betting to induce probably fps without a better read and hard to do at 1-2 anyway, your hand looks a lot like Tx, b/f interesting but probably too thin.

Both players' lines look full of ****, but I think V's is a little more ****tier. I have trouble seeing a value hand that shoves this river that checks it after your turn check. So, call, I guess?

I check back the river though. Sure he could have J9 or 98, but he could just as easily have A9 or K9.

How is our hand not vulnerable? Do you just mean it's not good enough for us to care if we get blown off of it? Because there are definitely a LOT of turn cards that make our hand have less relative strength, if that's what you mean.

No, he was definitely confused. This was not the typical, "What the hell do you have? Oh well, I'm all-in," move. Not saying that made it a good bet on my part -- I definitely leveled myself. But the confusion was real.


Curious why the bigger sizing here. When I've got a laggier image, I'm more likely to get check-raised or played back at pre- and post-flop, so I like to go for a little bigger than 1/2 pot if I'm going to bet, rather than 3/4. Also, there are some old dudes at table who can definitely check-call w/ a T here. But I'm open to hearing why 3/4 is better.

Also, I don't know that we can take your line against his stack size. He has $94 left on flop, we bet $25 and get called, leaving $69 behind and a pot of $74 after rake. What sizing can we b/f on turn?


My thought was that he could much more easily have J9, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 92, 88, 77, 66, 55, 44, or Axdd than A9 or K9. He straddled, so his preflop range is literally ATC. I thought he check-calls a small bet with any of those hands (maybe not Axdd). I didn't think he checks turn AND river (after I check back turn) with a T or a 3.

River is an easy fold. IMO, this 50's WG has had a lot of practice looking 'legitimately confused.'

This is one of the best 9x hands to check as there really aren't that many turn cards you hate. Non-heart aces are the only three overcards to your pair that don't give you at least a GSSD. Not like we love a non-heart K, but as far as bad turns go, that's pretty decent.

Diamonds knock our relative hand strength down a peg, obviously, but most people bet front-door flush draws in 2017 and it gives us all the more draw+overs/weak pairs type junk to value.

OTR, don't bet 1/5p without knowing what to do in the face of a shove. I think a more reasonable bet gets called by plenty of Ax/PPs/lower 9x stuff to justify it for value. As played, looks a lot like a T, so I'd just fold. If he pulled this off with a whiffed draw, good for him.

Also, pre is a really standard ISO, but I guess mixing in limp is okay due to dynamic and straddler's stack size.

You mind counting out to me some of the MANY turns that kills our hand?

J? wait no that gives us open ender. Q? wait no two pair, K, yeah that's bad, still gutter though. Oh yeah an A, that's bad I guess. 8, oh look gutter, 7, undercard, etc etc etc, T, good for us, 9, even better, 8, meh so-so.

+1

I'd prefer to 3bet to $30 pre, even despite your image.

As played, I'm jamming turn to deny equity from the million str8/flush draws out there.

As played, I actually prefer jamming river. This is a great time to utilise your FoS image and get some thin value. You can easily rep a busted draw after checking back the turn.

As played, river is an easy fold after he's just given you a live tell (confused look prior to raising is almost always a sign of strength).

29 by my count

9 for the flush
3 6’s make 78 OESD
3 7’s make J8 OESD
3 8’s make QJ OESD or 67 gutter
3 J’s make 78 OESD or KQ gutter
2 Q’s make J8 OESD or KJ gutter
3 K’s make QJ OESD or better pair
3 A’s make better pair

Seems fairly reasonable that collectively our 3 opppnents are going to hold a combination of hands that easily outdraw us on the turn (ignoring all the two pair outs they have). Facing three checks this seems like a not-even-that-thin value bet.

Being concerned about the 6h because it gives one hand a straight is profoundly MUBsy. We hold second-pair-third-kicker. By the time ranges get narrow enough that a single hand holds significant sway, we'll be way the **** out the pot anyway. What a card like that would do more than anything is add more pair+draw type hands and increase the relative hand strength of each pair to the point that we're getting much fatter value on the turn.

I agree that betting is for fairly fat value and I don't even ardently disagree with betting. But the idea that our equity is going to crumble with every card that comes is a big misunderstanding of this spot.

That “one hand” is 16 combos. Sol asked for combos so I provided them. Given straddler has ATC he can easily be continuing with 96o.

All I am saying is this is a fat value spot so let’s get some value. I’m not MUBsing it up here but I’d like to clear some ranges out of the way rather than giving 3 people a free card when we likely have the best hand.

... you're actually insane.

Any card can theoretically make someone else the best hand, that doesn't mean it's a bad card.

You look at whether a card is good or bad for you by looking at your equity vs range, and a lot of those cards don't really drop our equity much (obviously betting and winning the hand on flop always secure 100%), but to say a lot of these cards kill our hand is simply ridiculous.

I don’t know what you mean by “killing our hand” but I’m saying I think our equity is at its highest on the flop vs. the collective field and betting seems prudent given population reads.

I'd say we gain about the same or more money by pot controlling the flop, or inducing bluffs/lighter continues/gaining visibility in general checking the flop, than the equity we lose by letting a card come off that may improve villain's hand. We might be against a better hand, but an extra card comes and kills action and saves us money, or give us extra equity, or villain picks up equity and now we have more value.

For instance I think we can all agree that we have more value if a 2 comes on the turn and we bet when if it checks through again, than if we bet flop as it is. This is going to happen a fairly reasonable % of the time. Also others are going to stab draws or 9x if a brick comes off. Another scenario, after it checks through, someone won't be able to wait again and will be forced to bet their value hand, and someone else will call or raise their value hand, and we'll be able to save money*

Also idk what games you play in, but I'm questioning the idea that nobody can have a ten here when it checks through. I guess I should add that if we can really discount Tx heavily in this spot then we do have a fairly standard cbet, since we can almost treat it as top pair (it's not though, because 9x blocks other 9x, and loses to K9 A9, and of course like I said, villain can have Tx.

If you analyse the hand with the assumption that we have the best hand then obviously betting is going to be better because yes, we have some vulnerabilities, we should only be trap checking with nutted hands, but we do not in fact have fat value with this hand, and we're not guaranteed to have the best hand.

All that aside, all I can think is, wtf, llsnl players are afraid of playing turns and rivers or something. How are you going to get better if you just mindlessly bet when you have a +EV bet.

idk if people realise, but a play being +EV doens't make it good, it has to be higher EV than other options. There's this mentality here where everyone just wants to take the pot down unconestested. There's a phobia of losing a pot that they "could have won" if they had bet instead, which is just a silly way of approaching poker. Losing pots is part of poker, get used to it. Having ridiculously high bet% is going to open you up to a world of hurt and is one of the big reasons why lower stakes players never manage to climb.

*in fact I suspect this is the type of spot people are trying to avoid because then they'd have to make decisions on turns, and they'd rather just have bet into 2 players with hands and call it unlucky, instead of having to make a decision once there's a bet and call if they can be bluffing and the other can be calling worse.

Grunch:

It'd be nice to know our and other players' stacks to comment on pre. In a vacuum, I'd rather raise this to isolate IP or take down some sweet dead money. We'd rather the straddler not 3b shove, but it's likely not hugely -EV for us when he does.

Flop bet for value & to fold out some equity seems pretty straightforward.

AP, I'm ok w/ a turn check planning to call a bet on most rivers. His range is just so wide here. Betting again might get him to fold a little bit of equity, but we're getting called/raised by Tx/3x a lot, and any sizing large enough to get OESD/flush draws to fold (or call incorrectly) is likely to commit us against his gii range.

I don't like the tiny river bet at all. Tx & 3x are likely to check this river (our range has lots of whiffed draws). More importantly, how many worse hands w/ SDV does Villain ever have here to call with? It's pretty much only weaker 9x. Barring some weird history where V is likely to call a decent-sized bet with ace high, just check back.

Good thoughts, I hadn't even seriously considered checking the flop. I was discounting Tx fairly heavily. Certainly against a player pool more likely to check Tx, checking behind on the flop makes a lot of sense.

Yeah to reiterate this point, I think betting flop would be fine too, but I think categorising our hand as extremely vulnerable and basically "we'd get f cked over if we check the flop" seems extremely mubsy/risk or decision averse/melodramatic.

Betting is fine, especially as an explo adjustment to weak live players who don't bluff in this spot, and don't check Tx enough, but people tend to just see this spot as a standard no brainer bet, and have no idea where their EV all went when they try to move up against players that are more sophisticated.

See this is a good spot to just plug into pio or flopzilla (or whatever no limit version of oddsoracle people use), and just see how our equity shifts with different turn cards, and how we expect to play against them/what visibility etc. I'm not an online NL reg so I don't do any of that stuff but this is the kind of thing that I complain about people wanting to get better but never actually putting in work.

Even just checking equity vs 4 ranges on various cards on a equity calc is fine, in fact I'll do that right now since I'm procrastinating.

Certainly made me consider this spot deeper than I normally would have. I probably x back a hand like 98 and possibly even J9 but I just feel personally Q9 is high enough up there to value bet.

Would be interested to see what solvers say to do with our high-equity draws and low equity bluffs.