With you 100% here.

Flop min-raise could mean anything from competent aggro opponent. Turn bet could also include a slim number of bluffs/plays with (77-QQ). River bet puts it at virtually 0% that he's bluffing, which makes it a really hard call as I'm not beating anything betting for value outside of KQ or KJ.

But if he shows up with one of these hands or AK 20% of the time, I have to call, making it a pretty tough fold with no reads and 22/AA/6x being so unlikely as hand was played preflop and on flop. Tough spot.

Yes, average fish can make bizarre nonsense bluffs. Do they do it often enough to rely on that in a vacuum -- not even close.

The most likely line for the average fish here is to be fit/fold. He's just not going to raise the flop enough without a set or 2p (K6s or K2s) for us to want to call thinking he could be bluffing.

Alternatively, an aggressive player is way more likely to raise the flop with K-weak or 6x or 77-99 because he expects Hero to cbet his entire range. So against Hero's A-big or 77-QQ, he can put in a raise here and get value or get a fold.

I just don't get the theory that we're viewing an aggressive line from an average fish as bluffy -- without history.

It looks to me like we have agreed to rule out the possibility that V is bluffing. The two issues are:

1. Should we have folded to the flop raise? (Probably, but calling was not a big mistake.)
2. As played, should we fold to the river bet? (Probably not, but expect to lose more often than we win.)

It's a good hand to discuss because it's a pretty common situation and not at all clear what is the best line. The only conclusive answer is...it depends (on what we think of the V, in this case).

(Now I expect dgi or Aesah or some other grand wizard to come in and show us that we are all wrong.)

LOL... uh... no.

Why would the Villain be min-raise bluffing on the flop -- to force the fish to fold?

You keep giving advice like the pot was heads-up -- It's NOT.

It's an easy fold in the flop.

Then I am missing something in the thread. Who is arguing that V's line looks like a bluff? Do any of us expect him to turn over A-high if we call? What missed draw could he have? He could well be value cutting himself with Kx or a pocket pair but that's not bluffing.

I am fine if someone wants to make that argument. I just didn't think anyone was arguing to call the river because V's line looks like a bluff.

Where did anyone agree that V cannot be bluffing?

And after the flop, we are HU.

I think he is referring to my last post, in which I said by the river I'm putting him at close to 0% bluffing, It wasn't a universal truth or unanimous agreement, just what he and I were saying.

I don't hate folding the flop, but disagree with those saying this is an "easy" fold. Isn't folding to minraise w/ TPTK to any opponent (including aggro ones) pretty damn exploitable?

I mean, your flop plan and stack sizes dictate the play here.

You "induced" a raise on the flop, which was your intention. I don't love that plan, and to be honest I think it's quite bad. Villain is going to play a lot more straightforward in a multi-way pot. Villain is going to play a lot more straightforward with a fish left to act behind. It's not really a great spot to induce, though it's very dry.

Inducing this flop really doesn't work, but now that you have a raise and call, you put ~$150 in the middle, or > 20% of stacks. Don't do that without thinking about the plan for the hand. If the plan is to induce a raise and then call down because you think villain is very aggressive and bluffy, then call down.

Honestly, stack sizes are magnifying a lack of consistency in your reasoning here. Like you want villain to raise the flop... he does and you call... and now you have a large % of stacks in the middle... and you reach the turn with damn close to a pot sized bet left.

You leave yourself with very little latitude to play post-flop poker. You have to call this turn given your flop plan (unless you realize he's a nit and what a big mistake you made, oops), right? Folding after inducing a flop click-back would be super duper bizarre. And I mean, the river just becomes a trivial call imo facing an aggressive opponent who we intended to induce who is now laying us nearly 4:1 on a call.

I think Venice made a really good post here - the flop raise probably is quite strong. But since you bet small to induce, you have no idea, and you're basically committing to stack off here. I think you're leveling yourself a bit with the idea you're going to induce a lot here. Just bet the flop like $80-$90 for value, and very possibly fold to a raise and feel good about it.

Oh yeah, and like, maybe he's a nice well spoken guy or something, but he's not a solid reg. He called QT from SB facing a huge limp 3-bet for a large % of effective stacks from BTN.

That's horrible, pure spew, win his chips.

Of course it's exploitable, but that's irrelevant in this spot because a) they don't know we have TPTK, and b) we probably don't play with these people often enough for them to see our frequency of folding to minraises after cbetting. That is, yes it's exploitable, but it's rarely if ever actually going to get exploited.

I still maintain this is not a typical "cbet TPTK get minraised" spot due to the cbet being tiny and the Villain being aggro; he has Kx more often here than usual. I'm not saying we WANT to call down, I'm just saying this makes the decision less snap-foldy.

This is all very reasonable. To clarify, I was trying to induce the fish who straddled to make a move, not villain. While this highlights your point that I should have a plan (I was going to snap-shove over fish, but didn't plan at all for aggro villain's involvement), it doesn't point to a lack of consistency in my logic. My logic (foolishly) wasn't worried about him until his minraise, because I felt that it was very likely that he missed this flop completely.

Great point on not worrying about being exploitable.

Your second point is exactly what I was saying. While I'm folding to a flop min-raise PLENTY, this doesn't feel like a "good spot" to do so.

This. You induced and got what you asked for... Now get the money in. (Don't like this line, but that's what you set up)

Doing a 3/4 PSB b/f on flop makes this hand 10x more straightforward.

Cool, I understand the clarification - different villain.