Hero - button - nit - 150bb
Villain1 - sb - first hand on the table - 100bb
Villain2 - mp2 - lag - 200bb

Preflop
2 limps, hero raised 12$, 1 fold, mp2 called, sb called
Flop($38) Js 9d 7h
sb, mp2 checked, Hero bet $25, both villains called
Turn($88) 5s
sb, mp2 checked, Hero bet $66, sb called, mp2 folded
River($220) 4c
sb went all in for $95
Hero?

Call, you're good enough from random last-effort bluffs and pairs that don't know what to do.

This is such a ******ed bluff if it is a bluff, and such a ******ed way to play a big hand.

Just call and make notes.

Yeah, his line isn't making much sense. You are getting greater than 3-1 so I think a call is fine.

****ty spot. Seems like he has to have >KK, but it also seems strange for him to slow play a flopped big hand, only to donk the river.

Also, the pot sizes don't make sense. Pot is $38 on the flop, $75 goes in on the flop and you have the pot on the turn as $88? Shouldn't it be $113? Then the $132 that goes in on the turn would make the river $245.

I'd bet closer to $30 on the flop as well. It's pretty wet, lots of pair+draws will call and it's connected enough you can can b/f with out sweating it too much. I would have also bet the turn bigger (unless the pot is actually only $88 some how), which would have made this a trivial call. As played, I call because top pair on the flop is still top pair, all pair+draws missed. If he slow played something, so be it.

edit: looking back at the action slow playing and donking the river makes some sense if he was trying to keep MP in the hand. Then, once MP folds the turn he doesn't want to risk the flop being checked back. Tough spot. has to be pretty close imo.

Preflop and flop look fine, IMO.

Once we're called in two spots on the flop, I think we have to tread more carefully on the turn, especially considering a largish bet might start bringing pot commitment into play. I probably check behind on the turn.

As played, I think we have to call the river bet cuz we're getting over 3:1, the river is a complete blank, and villain didn't check/raise the turn (which he probably woulda done with a decent made hand in order to protect against the draws).

GcluelessNLnoobG

Seems like I've made some mistakes calculating the pot sizes. But the general idea is there, and rest assured all my bets ranged from 3/5-2/3 of the pot each time.

I ended up calling with villain showing AJh for tptk. But I was still somewhat baffled and not sure if I made the right choice.

And also, villain looked to be 40 something clean cut working class asian guy. Doesn't look like a card shark to me. Hence I put his river shove as a desperate attempt to buy the pot. Had I been playing with someone who looks tricky, I might have folded this hand. Not sure if this is a valid strategy to make a decision like this, please advise.

I bet the turn because mp2 has shown history of stealing with air when he sensed weakness from his opponent. I just wanted to be in control of the pot at this point and would be willing to play my stack in case mp2 raised my turn bet because he bluffed with air or weak hands far too often.

If mp2 was somewhat taggish, I would had checked this turn hoping to see a cheap river and sd.

If mp2 is aggro like this, then I like a turn check behind even better. One, it doesn't set us up for sucky spots where we are check/raised on the turn holding a hand as small as one pair. Two, it lets mp2 bet his air on the river where we then get to snap call (whereas he might fold his air on the turn to a bet).

The more aggro the villain, the more we should be checking behind on the turn, IMO (even though I realize we're up against two villains here).

Without read, I think you're beat in this spot.

Personally I would bet smaller on turn to give myself the option to fold on river.

Is this a hand, in the interest of pot control - we check the turn through, with the intention of calling a river bet?

Sarge

Call, he may make a desperation bluff by not knowing what to do. Some dudes feel that they are entitle to win a pot after they got deep into the hand. So, you call based on the remaining stacks.

You guys wanting to check the turn see the board texture right? You see all the pair + darws that will call a tonne of turn bets but not the river and have enough SD value that they don't bluff a lot?

We also are very rarely get raised by worse when bet, and have little equity if behind, so we shouldn't be scared of getiing raised imo.

I think its entirely possible that he has TP or an OP and he thinks he's betting for value, so I'd call. It's scary because of all the possible straights and two-pairs, but your pot odds are better than 3-1.

*GRUNCH*

I probably bet a little less on the turn, but I still bet. Betting less will keep your KJ-type hands in play, but still charge draws. I also find turn check-raises to be pretty straight forward, and would feel okay about folding if he check/shoves the turn.

The line taken here is kind of strange. Villain could have been trappy, but I find these river shoves to be top pair kind of hands who don't really know how to act on the river. If the shove was bigger, I might go looking for a fold, but here I like the price to call and will feel pretty good about it most of the time.
You will find QQ showing up here from time to time, along with AJ/KJ and J-10 who decides to bluff after not hitting their gutty.

You have to call the river due to the pot size and the amount you've already invested, but expect to be beat a lot. Most people don't bluff in this fashion, and most people wouldn't call two streets and then shove the river with a one pair hand unimproved. You see what he had, or something similar to that, often enough to make this a close call either way.

I struggle with this, but what's worse: letting villains draw to their upwards of 9 outs (pair + gutshot, for example, which is only going to come in < 20%), or getting our 100 BB stack committed with one pair (which a turn bet just did here)? I think the latter is the worse result, but maybe I'm wrong.

Also, one of the villain's is described as aggressive, so methinks we get bluffed at on the river quite a lot after showing weakness on the turn. And if they have a showdownable hand, they might pay off a reasonable bet on the river after we've checked the turn (or even make that bet themselves).

This forum seems to be all about commitment. I'm about EV because it's a representation of how much money we make.

I don't not bet because SPR says I'm committed. I don't bet if it's not the most +EV play, or -EV imo.

SPR can tell you are committed, when you really shouldn't be because of ranges and equity.

I don't subscribe to cliches like "don't play big pots with one pair hands". I think they are silly, and are not valid when discussing a hand.

I agree about sometimes there is too much focus on commitment/SPR. If their range smashes you, fold, SPR or no. I also agree with the bolded, situation dependent (although I do admit I was getting way too deep in hands with one pair during a downswing, and I am now better at choosing my situations when I do so).

Now, as I posted earlier, I would bet a little less on the turn than the OP, as I do protect against the turn c/r which tends to rarely be a bluff, and also to keep those weaker TP type hands or pair/gutter ball hands in but still at the wrong price.

After my *grunch*, I read the results, and I wasn't surprised to see the villain roll over AJ. I do not understand the thinking behind this line, but I see it all of the time.

But earlier you described the river as a crappy spot; aren't we in this crappy spot cuz we bet the turn? I actually don't find the river that difficult here; the bet is for << 1/2 PSB and we've got an overpair on a board where no draws came in; we can't possibly fold this, right? I mean, I don't see how we're not possibly committed on a blank river here.

I'll admit that I'm usually not a bet/bet/bet guy with an overpair in most cases (except vs the callingnest of calling stations), so maybe I'm missing out on a lot of value.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Against an unknown I usually call here and end up hating myself when he turns over the nuts and didn't want to lose one of his multiway customers by playing fast before the river. Zero to rep on river and leveling is a 50/50 guess since he is an unkown. 3-1 so shrug call and expect it to be very slightly +ev.

no, we are in a crappy spot because the villain took the unexpected action of donking the river.

So many people advise pot controlling turn, and calling every time they bet the river when is so many scenarios villains turn calling range >> river betting range.

Even if villains calling range >> betting range on the river (once we show weakness on the turn), does that really change things all that much? With no draws coming in, villain can easily lead river with TP or even busted draws, which we can easily insta-call. And if he checks, we can then bet and get value from his wider calling range, many of which (such as 2nd/3rd pair type hands with no draw) wouldn't have called the turn (for fear of having to face another bet on the river and not wanting to commit to that).

I guess I'm just saying that I don't think it's a slam dunk as to what is more EV on the turn when you take everything into consideration.

requires river hero calls rather than turn speculative calls on this board.

J975.

JT, T9, 98, 87, 76, 85 are all hands that are going to have a very difficult time putting any money on on rivers they miss. Whereas AJ, KJ, maybe KJ might have a difficult decision on the turn? Sure, solid players are going to fold almost all those hands mentioned above to a good sized turn barrel, but we aren't playing versus solid players. We are playing against guys who main goal is to win pots and they can't if they fold.

I'd fold this hand. Here's why:
1. Villain's first hand at the table, so we're completely readless
2. The notion that he has top pair here and shoving for value is almost not possible. At a 1/2 game, the typical player is never shoving here for value after calling down 2 streets. They will be checking again to call another bet on the river.
3. A bluff is less likely here because the only conceivable draw that misses is QT (sure, there are the gutshots, but we'll assume that's a very small part of his range)
4. Because he's unknown and this is 1/2, and the fact that this may be his first hand of the night, we've got to assume that he's just not bluffing there often, even if we're facing 3:1 odds.

If we had a better read, it could be a call. Given it's an unknown and the board texture, I'm folding this.

And fwiw, this thread should not even be talking about the turn bet size. That's hindsight talking. Of course you want to get as much value from lesser hands and draws. If villain had QJ for example here and the river went check call, I don't think anyone would be criticizing the turn bet.