Yeah I guess a blank turn and river is not great for tripling even if you think their range is weak.
So I bet $65. Villain hems and halls, shrugs then called. He had T9o. My assumption that his range was weak was correct. However my assumption that he's a decent TAG grinder which therefore gives me fold equity was horribly incorrect. Just because someone laughs about how "soft" the 2/5 game is at another casino doesn't mean they themselves aren't a fish.
He played the hand better than you did. And like someone else said, you have entitlement issues. I only cbet this flop maybe half the time and only bet on overcard turns and rivers, always checking back undercards on this board texture.
Very good. Bluffs indeed don't have to work that often for them to be profitable. Against scared, level 1 players (in other words pretty much everyone) barreling can be very effective.
In this spot however I'm not betting (I'd have checked flop actually) because I expect to get called almost always on this runout especially after he calls turn. I think cbetting is bad (only fold worse hands), barreling turn is marginally bad (not many weak hands in Vs range - count {88-44} combos vs {9x} - and not even much FE against those weak hands), but betting river would be the worst.
I have to mostly agree with this, double barrelling can fold out some better hands AJ+ and a few under pairs. The problem is the river changes nothin so once he calls turn he should be calling river especially if he gives of the vibe that he is any kind of decent.
And really a half psb doesnt put that much pressure on him. If you wanted to be a sick and shove I feel like it could work but it likely doesn't work often enough. If you had history and knew this villan respects your river bets I can see the value bet bluff working often enough. Problem is in live low stakes people don't like to fold.
I wasn't thinking that. I was thinking hmmm here's a guy who looks like a decent TAG grinder type with a mostly capped range.
OK, that's cool. Clearly, getting a tight player to fold better is a profit opportunity in poker. There are all kinds of tight players though. You have your weak-tight players, your nits, your TAGs. Whatever that means.
There's an alternative to the taxonomic approach, which is to think about where in the hand a character tends to give up.
When I'm in LAG mode, playing a wide range of opening hands from early and mid position, I frequently give up pre (to a 3bet), and that's the best place to attack me. If I'm in nit mode, I frequently give up OTT, which then is the best place to attack me. Among recreational players, some give up on the flop and some give up on the turn. It is really important to figure out which one your opponent is, because against the latter, you want to fire twice more often than not. And against the former, you never want to fire twice with air, ducy?
Following that line of reasoning, a bluff-bluff-bluff line should work best against people who give up on the river. I just don't know that there are that many players out there who do that. There aren't that many people in general, in life, who do anything like that, ever.
Watch this, and ask yourself, "why is this funny?" (Not only does this clip lampoon the bluff-bluff-bluff line, it also has a side commentary on why it would be unwise to check this turn, and bet this river)
I'm done with it when he calls the turn unless river is a,k,q. He's just not folding often enough I don't think. If I was thinking 3 barrel turn would have to be 50 ish not 30.
Double barreling is best when a scare card comes or you pick up additional equity. For example, on that 9 high flop if you had JT you could double barrel half the deck. Not double barreling otherwise will reduce your frequency and make you harder to play against.
