Live 2/3 in Australia. Game isnt great, I two of the better players on my left, and while Im not getting 3bet mercilessly yet, Im am somewhat fearful of that beginning to occur, so I am tightening up someone in my LP opens from the HJ and the CO.

My image is that of a bit laggy. I showed one 3bet squeeze after a raise and a few callers, and also one hand where I c/r a cbet from the PFR and two callers with a gutshot. I showed one card, but didnt reveal my hand (I had 97s and the board was T6x IIRC...

Anyway, the hand itself. The villian is the villian from the cbet thread, so he dosent cbet 100% of boards, and not necessarily because its 4 ways and he missed. Effective stacks sizes were 600 IIRC.

I have 44 on the button. About 5 limps to me, I call. SB nukes it to 30 preflop. Two callers and I call closing the action...

FLOP (128?): A64r

SB checks, checks to me and I bet 70. SB tanks, looks left and sees no-one looking interested in the pot, so calls. Everyone else folds...

TURN: (268) T completing the rainbow.

He checks, I value check to bet once more on the river to get called, as I believe only AK if anything can call down 3 times. There is a bit of metagame between the two of us, he has bluffed me off the best before and vbet thin, as have I so its not impossible IMO for him to think I am bluffing the flop with two picture cards, and then taking a freecard at a gutterball...

If you are someone that bets, how much is the bet? FWIW I am never folding... So the check isnt ZOMG HE HAZ ACES!!!!111!!!!!

Thoughts appreciated

Ash

Even if he is drawing to make a set, I would make him pay. Bet $150/$200.

Checking your big hands and betting nothing hands is playing backwards.

Yes, that is true, but its a lot easier for him to hero call with QQ on the river then have to call both streets. By checking, I think I can lure him to into making a hero call with a hand that dosent have an ace in it by allowing himself to outlevel himself.

Even AK imo cant call three streets. If the board was 10 high, I would barrel 3 times for sure because I dont think he is folding an overpair to me at any stage... all of whom he would nuke from the SB to not play a multiway pot OOP with...

I appreciate the response though...

This smells of FPS to me. What are you repping with this check, exactly? The pot on the river will be exactly what it is now, so the only calls that you're loosing are the ones that are afraid of doing it again on river. You *may* be setting him up to make a stab at a safe river, but it seems awfully iffy.

I think about a half pot bet here gets called by AK and raised by AT. If he can't beat AQ, I don't think he's calling anything.

If you check here, QQ, KK, AJ and AQ might try a stab at river, but aren't calling your raise, so I doubt you're adding much, as those hands might also call on turn (at least, the ones with aces)

But isnt it so much easier to call once knowing its a showdown then calling the turn. FWIW the preflop nuke means that AT shouldnt be in his range. By only having to call on the river, its easier for him to make hero calls compared to having to call all three streets... The flop got checked to me, I took a stab and got called. The turn I could check back a few hands that picked up draws/pairs that I might take to showdown, and the river looks more sketchy, which means I would get looked up more.

Its a lot easier to make a FML I call move on the river then the turn, so the check is for value on the river I might get froom JJ-KK that wont call the turn for fear of having to call off for stacks on the river. Sure, Im giving him a chance to spike a 2 outer, but its a price Im willing to take to get him to call off say, $180 on the river.

I like betting here again just because he can´t put you on a big ace and sets are hard to flop. His floating range is mostly made hands of some sort, maybe a weak ace which will pay off a bigger turn bet than a big river bet IMO. I would bet about 1/2 pot on the river to get paid here.

Why would he be more likely to call OTT with a weak ace then just the river? And he made in 10x preflop after limpers from the SB. This isnt A5o... Its most likely at the very worst TT+ and AQ.

Again, to re-iterate, this guy is a thinking player, and he isnt going to call the turn to go "oh noez, he bet big on the x river, I must fold...

And he checked the flop, which I doubt he would do with an ace, but then again I doubted he would call the flop with a hand less then an ace as well..

Because your line looks like a pot control line. Unless this is against a very good aggro player that could check raise bluff your river bet I don´t like it. You have already put villian on a made hand charge him. I would take your line with A8-A2 but you are missing out on value the times he does have a strong hand or decides to bluff you on the turn.

Hate it. Firing all streets reps a bluff better.

Also, I'm quite aware "protecting your hand" is very pre 2004, especially when it is from 2 outs. However, there are some situations, especially in live FR where Villains are hardly ever going to put more money into the pot unless they improve enough to beat us. If this hardly ever is a low enough %, the times we lose a big pot by letting Villains get there, instead of winning a medium pot can outweigh the very rare occasions we get an extra street of value. I can't say this is definitely one of those times, but it is worth keeping in mind. Not all poker thinking from before the internet is completely without logic :-)

Maybe "hate" is a bit harsh. I definitely prefer betting though, especially if you ever 3 barrel bluff, which from your posts i suspect you do.

A check is OK here, but you need to make a near PSB on the river to make it worth while.

It looks like I'm in the minority, but I like the check on the turn. It really depends on type of villain. If the villain is:

- calling station: obviously bet/bet/bet

- prone to making hero calls: bet/bet/bet

If not the above, I check turn.

- he will not call 3 bets on worse than top pair. Original poster's read was that he was weak. We seem to be foolish if we think he will somehow call 3 bets with underpair. He may be convinced to call 2 if we check. The turn check may induce a bet on the river if he is floating. Obviously this gives him a free card for his 4% chance to hit his set if he has underpair. I don't have a problem with that tradeoff.

The more important consideration for me anyways though is what would you be doing if you were stealing on the button, bet/bet? Or the check on turn also? You can then consider also doing bet/check/bet to steal also. This last point may not be that relevant at 2/3.

I think the turn check is fine. I definitely don't HATE either turn or the bet - just have a reason to do so. It looks like both the OP and the repliers have their respective reasons.

i think a check is fine
because if villain doesn't have ax type hand he's not calling your turn bet
and if villain has like qq
he might call a river bet after you checked the turn
because it looks like a bluffy line
no way you can get 3 streets of value if villain doesn't have ax

I might make the same play with any two broadway hands provided that I could call with them preflop. I presonally wouldnt, fear of domination etc with hands like KJs and the rest. But if he thinks I could have a hand like that in my range, on the turn I would have 7 outs vs JJ for example. I could check back and take a free card, and a free showdown if I hit a pair. Its not about what I could do with those hands, but more importantly whether HE thinks they are in my range. Having played with him before, I think he thinks they are.

If I was to bluff with these hands, I probably wouldnt fire three barrels because I doubt he calls two then folds say... AQ unless the board got really messy, which it cant really unless it runs out Axx J-T or something like that were all weaker aces got there...

Thats exactly the point I was trying to express, but couldnt find the logical explanation for it. And since I am not going to check the river with a set, and still want 2 streets of value rather then just one (this assuming he isnt paying three, since I think he dosent have Ax based on the preflop raise and the flop check) then checking the turn IMO is optimal.

Just something to add again, if the board ran out 9 high and I flopped a set, then I would have a lot more reason, and 99% of the time would, go for 3 streets hoping to get stacks in either by the turn with a flop raise to his cbet, or 3 streets of probably 70 then 190 then stacks on the river... Simply because he has a lot more hands (TT+ essentially) to call three bets and I have reason for KK to call bets on the turn before an ace drops etc....

But again, thanks for the responses, both good and bad. If I wanted everyone to just smile and agree with me I would talk to myself more...