NL 2-5, 9 handed

Villan (~700): 20s grinder type. No significant reads yet (table just started about 30 minutes ago and he hasn't been to showdown yet). Haven't seen him do anything that could potentially be out of line, appears to be playing pretty standard TAGgy (but who really knows with so few hands in the books).

Hero (covers): Known LAG but hasn't done anything out of line in the first couple orbits or even been terribly active. No previous history of any kind with Villain so he easily may not know me or anything about my usual style. If it makes a difference for his general stereotyping of me (since he's unlikely to have any play based reads yet), he's playing against a preppy looking late 20s/early 30s white male.

Random recreational looking player limps in EP, folds to Villain in HJ who raises to $25, folds to Hero in the BB who calls with 97hh, EP calls.

Flop ($77): AhKhJc

Hero checks, EP checks, Villain bets $45, Hero calls, EP folds.

Turn ($167): Td

Hero checks, Villain bets $85, Hero raises to $225, Villain thinks awhile and reluctantly calls.

River ($617): 7c

Hero shoves.

Thoughts on all streets more than welcome (including the assortment of "fold pre"'s that I'm sure are lurking out there).

If I were to call the raise pre, then I like the line. KQ, AQ and QJ are all within your range calling 5bb in blinds, and I assume villain being a grinder is not calling this spot thin.

Obviously Qx would snap here, but I think it's a good line to get a fold out of everything else.

If villain was a weekend drunk, then I would say this is a horrible line.

I dont think he is ever folding river after he b/c's turn

It might be a stubborn two pairs or set for calling turn.

Nh, wp if Villain doesnt have a Q here I dont see him calling you if he fits your descrip

One continual leak I see on this forum is that people are trying to run bluffs on people without any strong reads. For all you know, he's got no clue what you're trying to represent and is thinking, "Can't fold TP with A2o."

As played, you're repping you had Qx and caught your 4 outer. Be hard to believe you have a set of jacks or you slow played 2 pair on this board. I'm not sure I'd buy what you're selling. Obviously, the villain didn't.

Let's look at the pot odds even though the chances are the villain didn't. On the turn, he's got to be right about 23% of the time that you're bluffing. Therefore, your bluff makes little sense because you should be trying to protect against a FD or FH. You didn't.

River is much of the same thing. Once he calls the turn, he has committed 42% of his stack. The card was a blank. Even if he's never heard of Ed Miller, donks instinctively know when they've gotten themselves committed and have to call. The only thing that folds is a higher FD.

Therefore, I don't like your line at all. If you're going to do this with an unknown, you should have shoved the turn. You had outs against a set or straight and he wouldn't be getting odds to call with a set if he thought you had the straight. Personally, he's letting you see cards at a reasonable price and you can get enough from a suck bet on the river to get paid off, so I'd just call it down.

Hate.

3-bet pre if you want to play LAG; you seem like a pretty sharp player so I'm surprised that you just called because it seems against an unk, raising>folding>calling (per you playing LAG).

Villain hitting the turn after betting the flop makes me think he has showdown value, so why we're trying to bluff and/or set up another one on the riv escapes me.

You've got to shove on the river though so wp on that one.

I think it's probably fold>call>raise pre, but I'm not attched to it. Regardless I'm aware that the call pre isn't optimal because we're out of position, but I expect to be able to navigate through the hand reasobably easily against a straightforward TAG type (assuming I've pigeon holed Villain accurately, which is of course an entirely different can of worms). I think raising is probably going to lead to a lot of unnecessary low equity barreling.

Agreed that Villain probably has shodown value on the turn, but I don't expect it to involve a Q very often (pretty much only AQ), and I think my line looks pretty consistent with a hand that involves a Q and like pretty much nothing else for value so basically it's a question of how many (if any bluffs) Villain expects me to have here (pretty hard to have many that make sense imo since most hands I could have played should have connected well enough with this board to make turning them into a bluff a little crazy).

My intention is obviously to fold out everything that isn't a Q. I expected Villain not to go anywhere with sets or top 2 on the turn (but not to shove those hands either because of the four straight and the turn c/r). I probably should have sized the turn raise more but I wanted to maximize my fe on the river with more ammo since I expected basically to get all the folds I was ever going to get here on the river (i.e. never on the turn).

On the turn and river I'm pretty clearly repping a Q or nothing to Villain. Given that I haven't been out of line, do people really expect Villain to call it off here when the board doesn't pair on the river?

Fwiw, somebody said Villain could fold nothing but a "better flush draw" which is pretty ridiculous since there's all of 1 he could have that doesn't have a Q in it. Also never or even implied Villain was donk or a station or something (if anything my belief was the opposite). I expected Villain's range on the river to be sets and 2pr pretty much exclusively.

nh

I know you had your reasons for flatting pre, but I have a rule, and it's don't play suited connectors OOP ever. Every time I think about it, I yell at myself to prevent myself from playing that pretty 56 from the SB. I think it's -EV. You get yourself into too many marginal spots post-flop. If I'm going to play it, I'm going to 3bet, but to me it's a fold pre here.

As played, thinking villains probably know the only non-nut queen you continued with on such a scary flop is AQ or maybe QhJh. Your turn raise is also suspiciously small to thinking villains. If you're really a lag, 30 minutes should be enough time for a competent villain to see that, and also to know that you probably 3b AQ pre and possibly QhJh too. If you flopped the straight, you'd have raised the flop for sure since it hits villain's range so hard.

That's kind of a word salad, but basically. If you flopped the straight, you would've raised flop for sure unless you had exactly QhTh. If you turned the straight, the only hand you would've feasibly continued with is AQ, which you would've 3bet pre. Therefore, the only feasible hand you're repping on the turn and the river is QhTh.

For whatever it's worth, I'd definitely never c/f KQ or QJ on this flop where I've got a fair amount of ways to improve plus the possibility of repping a flush if it comes in. You're right though that I'd never show up with QT as played (probably not even with the flopped redraw) but it's mostly because hearts kill my action. I'd assume I was still good (with a straight) even if a heart fell, since the A and K were both hearts and there just aren't a lot of heart combos Villain can have.

Also, 30 minutes is what.... 15 hands-ish? I'm not a maniac, and I'd probaby played say 4 or 5 hands, but none of them got particularly confrontational. As I said in the OP, Villain has no reason to believe I'm on the looser/more aggressive side for these games (and for example can't really have AQ here).

Agree again that my sizing on the turn c/r probably could have been say $50ish more for maximum believability (probably what i'd really raise to with a Q if I'm being honest with myself), but it's not far off imo. Even if I raise enough to give Villain the wrong immediate odds to peel with a set (hoping to boat up), I suspect Villain is never going to think I'm just c/fing broadway if the board pairs and will justify anything close on the turn by assuming he has implied odds if he improves.

This works much better in position. If you were IP for this hand, you'd basically know for sure whether or not villain has a queen. He'd probably shove w/ a queen. As played, I think its still an alright bluff, he'd shove turn if he had a queen probably.

improving with KQ or QJ without hitting a straight means you're hitting two pair which is going to put you in a tough spot since it also means a 4 straight and villain could easily have aces up. You're really only drawing to 4 outs with those 2 hands.

I always make it a point to observe new villains closely for a couple rounds. Did you come in with a raise on all 4 or 5 hands? Did you 3bet at least once? I obviously don't know what happened, but I think observant villains can get a good read in that much time.

Similarly, the lack of information villain has on you is proportional to the lack of information you have on villain. There are some really bad players at these stakes, and this villain could be terrible. He might spite call you with whatever he has, not even seeing that there's 4 to a straight out there. In general, I think we need more information on villain to be comfortable bluffing in this spot.

As per my personal motto, don't make high variance plays without "all" the stars lining up right, so not doing this usually ends in disaster OR we get lucky and win the pot but was -EV overall on paper.

3 betting pre not so hot, but flatting with your intentions was spot on. 3 betting with 8 high or so vs a player who most likely will flat every time to see the flop is not fantastic. We have initiative yes, but unless we plan to cbet huge, then it is far too easy for villain to call ~light on the flop. (As calling too much being one of the major live player leaks)

Once the turn hits though it basically crushes right into his range. So he either has 2 pair, set or straight. When that is the case, I rarely attempt to fold out players who A. will call turn to fill, then B. call river because they have already unloaded a ton into the hand already and C. We have no real assurance he is the type to fold any big 2 pair ever.

So decent thinking IMO, but should have shut down on turn since now the tide has turned against us too terribly IMO.

I don't really agree with the first part about KQ or QJ and as I said... I wouldn't be playing them for pure hand value anyway (since when I'm not actually drawing to the flush I can always decide to bluff those cards).

I do absolutely agree about the fact that my information on Villain is equally lacking and that I'm basically relying on sterotyping him correctly (i.e that he could find a fold here with some really good hands) without any real information to support that belief.

I don't believe I had 3bet yet. I assume I had opened most/all of the pots I'd played or at least raised after limper(s). I'm not 100% sure though tbh. I certainly hadn't done anything like c/r the turn on a 4 straight all broadway board and then shoved the river yet, so I'm sure this came as quite a surprise.