This is truly terrible...part of what makes LAGs tough (this guy doesn't sound liek a good LAG) is that people just refuse to believe that they ever have a real hand. c/r this board is possibly the worst line you could take in this spot. If you want to do it with some dumb hand that has no equity then sure go ahead I guess, but I would offer that this "pro" probably offers you sooooo many opportunities to induce, etc. that you could literally print money of him. But c/r him here is not one of those opportunities.

I think standard c-betting is fine, but once he puts another dollar into the pot you need to be done with the hand. I'm not bluff catching him for my 175bb stack with an underpair to two cards on the board.

OP, I'm going to say this as nicely as possible, but you need to stop with the "soul reads." Thoughts like "I know immediately he has a flush draw," or "I'm confident he will bluff raise if I bet" are just bad.

You need to learn about ranges and stop thinking that your psychic. If you bet on this board and he raises in a three-bet pot, he is only ever bluffing if you are incredibly weak-tight.

That said, I wouldn't bet this board against most V's, as it smacks the hell out of their R/C PF range, and most of them aren't good enough to laydown TP when you're repping top-two+. I would c/f 100% and not even think twice about it.

If he's a good hand reader, bluffs too much, and calls with incorrect odds then b/3b flop.

He should be folding Ax, bluffs and gii with FDs. Though I have a feeling your reads on him aren't as good as you think they are.

No worries. Please feel free to be very critical. I'm here to get better at poker just like everyone else.

Reads are a everything in this game. You have to make your plays based on them. I think that whether my reads are right or wrong, the question is what should I do based on them, not whether my reads are correct or not.

I think c/f is completely standard here vs most thinking players. But this guy is not most players. Against a very passive player, I would b/f because they will fold Kx and only continue with Ax, and don't have flush draws in their pf range. So even this hand the best play has to be based on your reads.

My read is that this guy will bet if I check to him every time and raise if I bet, and that his range is wide pre-flop. So against this guy, bet/gii is probably the best play, bet/fold is awful, and c/f is the lesser of two evils. I wish I was baller enough to actually have done that. It's pretty clear I'm going to have to showdown very light against him, and this is one of those hands. Would have been sweet because even if I lose I'm sure he backs off me a bit if he knows I'm capable of showing down this light

In the other hand, I said I know he's on a flush draw because that's part of the math. It's easier to do the math when you can flip one of the hands over. I didn't mean to suggest I was psychic, I wanted to know what to do if he actually had a flush draw 100%

OK, but that's not the same as "he will bluff raise if I bet." Many of those raises are value raises (at least against your actual holding), based on his raise/call PF range, which, as wide as it may be, has a boatload of As and Ks in it.

Realistic ranging is everything. Reads that "he is 100% bluffing," or "100% on a flush draw" aren't realistic. You may be able to weight his range a long way in a certain direction, but you can't "flip one of the hands over."

I don't think that the OP is looking at it objectively. If the Villain was a bad player (someone who you make your living by playing) he wouldn't be talking about how much he hates him.

You should love players that constantly over bet bluff and you should not wait to flop the nuts to win money from them.

I would be careful about assuming the guy is such a bad player. To be perfectly honest, from your description, it sounds like he is outplaying you and you are getting frustrated. Change seats, change tables, don't try to outplay him. Anytime you say "I'm just waiting for a big hand to trap him" about a player you think is paying too aggressively, you are probably playing against someone who is better than you are.

IF you want to try to adjust to him, this probably isn't the spot. As people have mentioned, he probably has too many Ax/Kx hands in his range to really want to get much money in here.

This is 100% correct. But doesn't answer the question of whether this is a spot we should want to put money into the pot against him.

I tend to think the answer is no. But you have to do better analytically than "you should not wait to flop the nuts" in terms of determining when the correct time to put money in against this guy is.

OP certainly doesn't need to wait for the nuts to make a stand against this guy, but this is certainly NOT the time to do it.

FWIW, I would try to "prove your point" earlier in a game when stacks are shorter. If he is a better player - and it seems he is - you run the risk of being much more over your head as stacks get deeper.

Correct. Thin spots like TPNK, 2ndPTK, and big aces are great bluff catchers. 3rd pair where he has more bluffs that beat us? Not so much.

It also helps to pay attention to how often he is air balling vs bluffing with decent equity.

Umm.. i wasnt commenting on the hand itself, more op's backwards thought process.

As for the hand... fold... for reasons already posted.

Never said or implied he was a bad player. He's a pro who is always at the casino and always has a big stack in front of him. He just doesn't need the math as much as I do. And yes, he was outplaying me, that's why this is a thread on an advice forum

I agree and I think that this is one of the spots I should be looking to stack him

But we can only really guess at this and if you are a math player like me, him having a flush draw 90% or whatever is the same as 100%.

Regardless of who you are up against, you need reads to know how to play this. This just happens to be a player where b/c is the best line, but the best line vs one player might be c/c and another b/f and even another c/f.

For example, a "standard" TAG player might never get to the flop with AQ/AK (4bets pre always), and might always bet when checked to. Vs that player c/c is the right line. If he flats AQ/AK 10% of the time pre, you still need to play it as if he never flats. changing the set up to usually 4bets AK/AQ pre and usually bets when checked to does not change best decision

Also, I'm thinking about this hand more and when people raise this flop, they are "usually" either bluffing or semi-bluffing. I'm not sure that c/f is the best play in a vacuum. If they have Kx or Ax, then they usually are not raising. If they have a flush draw, they are. So even without reads, the best play may be bet/3b if raised, bet/shutdown UI when called.

If this player makes your life terrible then change tables. Stop letting this guy mentally own you by his play. Read books on mental game and make adjustments. You should like having this guy on your right as opposed to your left.

If you know what was best, you don't need advice. Given the below, however...

If you are a math player, then you know how utterly rediculous this statement is.

It seems that you've decended to the point of max defensiveness and are unlikely to to be helped by further comments. I wish you GL at the tables, and should you like help in the future, please let us know when you're ready to listen.

I'm very skeptical of this. This guy is a pro and he is THAT clueless about the game? I don't really see much in your post that shows this guy is clueless. I'm sure you're being honest about how he plays, but I seriously wonder if you're underestimating this opponent. Sometimes an opponent might be much better than we think he is.

A lot of regulars will make the same types of comments. They will think they are facing a clueless aggressive player. They will wait for the nuts and then try to stack the aggressive player. But sometimes they will be facing a very good LAG player and it won't be that easy to stack him.

Also, 2x pot bets are not always incorrect and that doesn't show that he is bad at math. I'm reading a book by Owen Gaines and very recently saw an example where he recommends betting $100 into a $34 pot because in that situation, the nit will certainly fold and wait for the nuts next time.

I'm not trying to be harsh. I just don't know much about this villain from your description, and it's not uncommon for people to underestimate a decent LAG so I can't help but wonder if that's what you're doing. Some questions you might ask are: How many hands is he playing? Does he back down when someone makes a big move against him? Does he tighten up when out of position? How aggressive is he after the flop? How aggressive is he on the turn and river? Etc.

If this guy has any clue at all, I think that letting yourself get bluffed out of smaller pots is going to raise some huge alarm bells when you finally do get the nuts, and call/raise this guy.

Of course, maybe you are right and this guy is a bad LAG. I'd just want to know more before I assume that.


Not trying to be harsh, but when I notice something like this I have to say something (because we're all trying to help obviously and we sometimes have to say what we think). These statements look inconsistent to me. If he is that clueless, then wouldn't he be much worse at reading people? Maybe you know something I don't though, because I haven't played with this guy.

To reiterate, I believe a solid c-bet is fine and so is a c/f line, but when this V puts another chip in the pot, you need to be done. Continuing here for big money is just lighting it on fire.

If you have some specific read/dynamic that b/3b is anything other than massive spew, so be it, but that dynamic is a) rare and b) unlikely to be transmitted to a forum properly.

The bigger issue to me here than the particular hand in question is your mental approach to this villain. You played this hand fine pre and got a terrible flop. It happens...I'm probably just shutting down here or c-betting about 2/3 pot to protect myself from getting bluffed off the best hand on the turn and then shutting down if called.

You say you let him bluff you off marginal hands and you haven't been able to hit the nuts against this opponent. Thats the problem a lot of amatuers have against maniacs...they wait for the nuts. The way to combat this guy is to hit reasonably strong hands and hang in there against him. Start calling him down light and let him bluff his money off to you. Once you beat him enough times not only will you be getting his money but hes not gonna be going after you as much.

hope this helps

I c/f $75 on the flop

Against people like this your best bet is to play normal. Size your bets smaller early, bomb the river whether you hit OTF OTT or OTR, but not sooner.

I didn't read every post in this thread, but enough to believe that nobody considered the following:

Why not flat the button raise from our villainhang himself. oop from the sb? If we are sure he is going to spew, we can check call/call most flops and turns and let him hang himself. If an A or K flop, we can proceed with caution. Our hand strength is well disguised. By 3 betting, we are allowing him more information enabling him to play better against us.

There may be some"pros" hanging around the slots in vegas but afaik there aint no pros at 1/3...

I think there are at least a couple people here who make (most) of their income from 1/3. It sounds horrible to me, but there are a reasonable number of people that do so.