So, hero raised to $65, V made it $225, hero???

hero says "would you like to check it down?"

was your raise size small to induce or to give you room to fold? continue with your plan, whichever one it was, I guess.

if his range if flushes,sets,KT it's a fold. You need him to have bare K or QT in his range to continue.

I'm suggesting we get calls from more flush hands than just KcXc fairly often.

I didn't really consider a blocking bet from boat draw, but if those hands are in villain's range to lead the turn, then we have to raise because this is likely our last opportunity to gain value from those (those hands usually play river perfectly). Heck, along that same train of thought, the board is going to pair the river ~25% of the time and we may not be able to gain more value at the river from a lower flush in that case. So, yeah, raise turn for value.

If we're really serious about flatting the nuts on the turn, I'd like to know why. Maybe we could work out a few profiles for villains and hand ranges for each with continuing ranges -- it'll get complex, but that's really how we analyze this.

Not saying you're advocating for a turn raise, but just using your quote as the basis for the following:

Turn is 7c.
V bets 60. Hero raises to 150. V calls.
River is Jh.
V check/folds.


Turn is 7c.
V bets 60. Hero calls.
River is Jh.
V checks. Hero bets 125, V calls.


Turn is 7c.
V bets 60. Hero raises to 125. V calls.
River is 2h.
V bets 225. Is hero good enough to fold?


Turn is 7c
V bets 60. Hero calls
River is 2h
V bets 150. Hero pukecalls.


I think we win more and lose less by calling.

Meh, I think you're neglecting the players in the pool who:

Turn is 7c.
V bets 60. Hero raises to 150. V calls.
River is Jh.
V check/hero bets $xx/V calls cuz he needs to see it.

Must be nice that you can value bet on a one-card flush board against most of V's flush range for 100bb+ on turn and river.

It's indicative of how weak your pool is, and unfortunately, unless I have a really bad table image and had somehow shown a huge bluff on similar board texture, I am getting value from exactly one range of hands: KcXx.

I thought it would be the only reason.

Whether to raise really depends on V's turn sizing.

Flatting if sizing is big because:

1. Even the worst V understands that no one is raising a big bet on turn without Ac.

2. V would also have to check river if H calls a sizable turn bet, and a smallish bet would give us additional value.

Let's face it, if one card flush hits and we're holding Ac, those that would shove big money with hands < Ac had gone broke back in 2010.

If V has a small flush, V isn't calling a big raise, and V is likely going to play very cautiously on river if we call.

So I don't think H's getting much value from V's flush range.

On the other hand, if V has a draw to beat us, we should really charge him for it on turn, especially when we aren't getting much on river.

I'll fold. V can't possibly expect anyone in the pool to fold Ac, and there's no way he's calling turn with intent to bluff paired board on river.

Nope, river is a very ABC street, don't level yourself.

I would assume that V will be AI on 100% of turns.

I will also assume the V has either a [2P,Set,Flush], so in reality, you need at least an A or a flush OTT to be good. That's 11 outs.

So you need to be good 31% of the time ((225-65)/(74+225+225))

If you do call, and V shoves for $355 OTR, you'd need to have 28% equity or more to call and see the river. With 11 outs, you do not have the required equity.

As played, puke fold and hate yourself for getting into this spot.

was referring to calling turn.

You're getting 2:1, and with chips behind, it's 4:1 implied (to see just one card, that is, if you call).

That's not enough against a combination of likely flushes and sets, of course, so fold.

Thinking about it more, it's not clear to me whether flop is a call or a raise. Calling is seemingly more intuitive for a lot of reasons. When I first posted ITT, I was going to advocate a call, but after I thought about it more, I deleted it and said raise.

Raising can accomplish quite a bit and get a big value from a good # of worse hands against which we have very strong equity. Our villain is a below average 1/2 villain - without other reads, I assume he makes more calling mistakes than folding mistakes, doesn't understand stack dynamics well, doesn't understand values well, etc.

I don't expect to be 3-bet often, and yes, we do have to fold. It's not a huge loss, really, and while we are folding away some equity, it's not a lot of equity. When he 3-bets, we're facing a range that is dense with hands against which we just have just 7 outs. Folding away that little equity against a likely made flush isn't a terrible outcome.

I think his range contains say 10-14 flushes and 9 sets. There are so many other hands out there that a below average (or even an average or decent) 1/2 villain can continue with if we raise the flop to a reasonable size (my initial idea of 125 is probably a bit too much; I think OP's sizing of 65 is too small). JcJx, QcQx, KcKx are 9 combos. KcTx and QcTx are another 6. JcTx, KcQx, KcJx are another 11. And there are more including hands that shouldn't continue but will - top pair hands, weaker pair + draws, etc.

We're a 15:1 favorite against an overpair + draw like JcJx.

And for sure, a huge part of this assessment is V's flop donk and sizing on this texture. My read on bets like this on boards like this is that they often mean two things. 1. V wants to stick around - he doesn't want to fold, and 2. V wants to play a small pot because V has a weak / drawing hand. In my mind, that read skews more towards those pair + draw and drawing hands we are destroying than it does made monsters.

By the way, if we had AcKx on the flop, I would definitely call and see no merit in a raise. Again, I don't think V wants to fold the flop, but I do think he often has a pair + draw. There's no point in raising with AcKx because we're not actually getting value vs. worse or getting better to fold. With AcAx, we actually have a made hand on the flop that I think fares well vs. V's small donk and continuing range.

I am aware, but your calculation is clearly based off situations involving river.

If you're getting max value on turn and don't give up any RIO on river...isn't it pretty obvious whatever that decision may be is better?

If 2, then raising is poor. We want to keep him in and encourage him to play his weak/drawing hand because we stronger and have the better draw.


Raising is much better with AcK because we are less likely to have the better hand now and by no means is folding on the flop a huge disaster. It's certainly not ideal, but it's not the end of the world.

Let's hypothetically say Villain has overplayed QcT because he's on a massive heater and has winner's tilt. Our raise/fold is disastrous. However, with AcK it's much less so - we folded a coinflip as compared to folding a massive favorite.

In a sense, raising this flop is basically raising to find out where we're at. And that... yikes.

oh yeah, but i also wanted to avoid any supposition that i'm amazing and fold that river all the time (i'm not, i don't) while giving that same supposition to villain (they aren't, they don't).

How do we play AQ in this spot? How do typical villains think we play that hand?

It's 1 AND 2, not 1 or 2.

And sorry man, the raise with AcK is definitely not better at all.

Raising with AcAx works because worse hands call. JcJx, QcQx, KcTx, etc; raising with AcAx is for value, not to figure out where we are. Also, facing a 3-bet, AcK and AcAx are pretty much the same hand with similar equity. Both are folds.

Suggesting AcK is a better raise than AcAx is to not understand the hands in villains calling range or 3-betting range or how we fare against those ranges. Against his calling range, AcAx is getting strong value. AcK doesn't get value at all. And like I said, against his 3-betting range, AcAx and AcK are about the same.

Flat flop, raise turn.

There is no way I am just calling this flop with the nut flush, especially being so deep. Nothing good can possibly come of it.

Not you, it's what typical villains think of other typical players...

Great question.

I'll just add, your question made me realize that blocking the nuts should make it even less likely we get 3-bet on the flop. Again, I think it's quite unusual that we do get 3-bet at all, but I think it's even less likely when we have the Ac.

I'll add a question, as well.

Ignoring what people think might be the "optimal" line, I'd ask people: Do you think raising the flop is +EV? Given his donk sizing, his range, and what he does with that range in what proportions (call, fold, 3-bet) , I think the answer is a clear "yes." Maybe it's not "optimal," and I think it's an interesting spot, but again, I'm sure it's +EV. If people think otherwise, we do have a different view.

Before you can answer this question, you need to know what his sizing means.

If he came out and bet a more usual amount, say 1/2 pot, then the sizing would be less of a clue (perhaps no clue at all).

But since V decided to go with this tiny sizing... it is critically important to know what is his likely holding when he takes this line. Is he trying to induce? Is he blocking?

Without this knowledge, I agree with THEOSU... we would be raising to find out where we're at, which is bad.

If his range comes down to inducing and blocking, then we should evaluate whether re-opening the betting for $40 more is worth possibly getting raised off the hand.

The issue I have with this analysis is that he should have a lot of hands with zero or two clubs, and against those hands raising is generally not good. Given that the Ac and and the Tc are both blocked, it starts to get hard for him to have reasonable one-club hands that would lead out like this (e.g., I don't think he's betting a naked Kc). Sure, he could have JcJx, but he could also have JhJd, which we probably don't want to raise. He could have KcTh, but he could also have AhTh, which we don't want to raise. Etc., etc.

I agree it's a good idea to see V as either a) "blocking" or b) "inducing." Though it's probably more like a) "blocking" or b) "Strong hand, I bet small!"

Either way, same effect.

So yes, we need to evaluate:

1. Is raising worth possibly getting 3-bet?

And, of course, a big part of that, is:

2. Frequency: What % of the time do we actually get 3-bet?

and

3. Equity vs. a 3-bet: When we are 3-bet, what is our equity on the flop?

as well as

4. Equity vs. a call: What's our equity when V does call a flop raise?

Clearly, I think the answer to #2 is "very infrequently," and there are a few clues. First, I see small bets on this type of texture frequently, and they're generally with hands that are trying to get to the turn cheaply - I think it's weighted to pair + draws and draws. Second, we have the Ac, so we block the nuts, which will materially decrease the % of times we get 3-bet. Third, and this depends on how many random suited hands villain can have, he should not have a ton of KcXc, QxXc second or third nut flushes... and if he does, well OK, but then he can also have a boatload of flush draws.

And in terms of #3, when V 3-bets, I believe we have fairly little equity.

Finally, for #4, I think we can have huge equity when V calls our flop raise. Like I mentioned earlier, we're something like a 15:1 favorite vs. say JcJx.

When I consider (2) the frequency of a 3-bet re: villains whole range and (3) the small amount of equity we abandon when we are 3-bet, I don't believe the threat of a 3-bet should stop us from raising for value, especially when (4) I believe there is an opportunity for fat value vs. many hands.

Like if there's a 5%-10% chance we will abandon 25% equity (and by the way, cards that improve us can kill action), that risk won't dominate my line.

All that said, I think it's a close spot. I'm sure calling and raising are +EV.

I actually think a raise is great against JhJd and even sometimes AhTh.

I really don't expect the average 1/2 villain to fold an overpair to a raise. I also think TPTK will stick around if we think carefully about our sizing.

A turn club or K, Q, etc., will kill action vs. all those hands. A flop call will often win the minimum vs. those hands, though I feel quite good saying V will call a thoughtfully sized flop raise with those hands a high % of the time.

I do think my first idea of 125 is too large; of course 65 is too small.

A smallish raise like 85 might be just about right.