$45 into $170 and villain 1 just calls? If button has a boat, he is certainly putting in a raise of at least $60 more to put UTG all-in.

As played, I would at least raise to $105 and put UTG all-in. I might do $145 because I think I am good in this spot. I just can't see button calling with boat, 4x or 5x, because he's trying to trap you for another $45.

Seems more like C/F than B/F -

I guess were asking ourselves if more people will bluff this board than will call with worse.

Given that the turn got checked through - it seems more likely that either villain will now take an opportunity to bluff.

Sarge

Looks like just a call to me. V1 opens alot from button. You can rule out a 5 for him, but not a 4. V2 could easily have a 4 or a 5.

Obv both are calling a raise with a 4, and would also setup a shove if they have a 5. A raise here only loses you money long term.

Call with the non boat nuts. I don't ever see a fold in this river spot.

I'm snap-calling behind OTR.

This is where player tendency kicks in. Does villain 2 often bet very small with nuts, or near nuts? If he does, then I'll be more inclined to call here. If he bets big with big hands, then I am inclined to raise in this spot.

To play safe, I would probably call here. I just don't see button showing up with better than Ax or overpair.

Ps. Everyone is at least calling in this spot, so to say you'll call is almost moot. It'll be more interesting to debate why raising could be an option.

Would bet small amount on river like 1/3 pot or less and probably fold to shove.

Ok. The whole reason for posting this is that I increasingly feel as if I am playing a different game than the other players at my table.
I was fairly certain that I had Villain 1beat, but it is not so far out in left field for him to be raising a suited gapper on the button. He could have easily had 64s. I figured that is was more likely for him to have an overpair or A high. The idiot was who I was concerned about but in the end, I reminded myself that he was, in fact, an idiot, so I called.
It took me 15 seconds or so to call and no one flipped their cards(God, how this annoys me!), so I flipped mine first. The table was not only shocked but numerous people could not believe that I didnt raise. While I it did cross my mind to raise enough to put the idiot all in, I could not figure how I could get called by a hand that I beat. Yes, he was bad enough to not call getting a trillion to 1.
I did not see the other hands.

I am not advising a min raise here in most tables, but if you think UTG villain is bad enough to lay down a hand, I would min-raise here for thin value. If UTG folds here, I can't see how button could fold. I also can't see how button would put pressure now, when he just called the first bet.

I really like a raise here, even min raise for thin value.

Ps. Villain 1 must be really bad, or the table in general is really bad, to think 45 is enough to take down the 200 pot.

I thought whoever put the last bet/raise in HAS to show his cards first (the dude who gets called). Therefore, in this situation, idiot would have had to show cards and the other two given the option to muck.

Sounds like a B&M forum type of observation. Every room is different, and very unimportant to this discussion.

Nicely played. Agree with your thoughts on only better hands making the call, except rarely a worse flush.

I really can't see the value of a raise in this spot. It seems like raise is only going to lead to two outcomes with this board, folds and shoves.

I don't want to face a shove with this hand, but I guess I'm a nit.

i donk flop 50. I barrel turn, i valuebet river something that 66 could call.

Personally, I c/c flop, lead the turn. We look like trips that are defending against the board from hell and have a ton of equity if we are flatted.

It also makes the river a bit easier to play, since it is easier to eliminate 5x (would have likely raised the turn) and 4x (would likely fold the turn) combos from the villain's range, barring something like 64s.

Can you explain how your getting "thin value" from utg villian if he's "bad enough to fold" If he folds this means he dosn't call which means you gain NOTHING.

There ia absolutely zero hands that call a bb c/r on this board that we beat.

Also villian one didn't bet $45, he CALLED $45.

Villian one would have raised a boat so basicaly w/ a double paired board a flush and striaght possible he is never calling a river c/r. never

w/ v2 the river better, its the samething were either wa/wb I can't see him calling w/ out a full house.

And actually you'll never get called on the river it would be raise or fold in this spot. You can't call a raise so I think calling down is optimal.

Jp nh, I think you played the river perfectly.

An alternate line might have been leading the turn as a 5 would have played flop the same way and trips would now seem likely.

as played, you played river perfect imo.

I struggled a little to understand what you're saying, but I think I have a general idea.

But before I begin, I would like to say that my participation here isn't to suggest what "most" people would do, in fact, AintNoLimit said recently a quote that I remember vividly, that doing something different than most is what big winners strive to do...or something like that (I think I got the big idea and paraphrased it in my head).

My goal is to think if there's something we can do differently.

In this case, button's call to UTG's bet of $45 shows a lot of weakness. It can almost be interpret as "I am calling $45, because the pot is $215 and I do have little bit of SD value with my hand with Ax, overpair, or even Kx."

We have already established that UTG is an idiot, and he could very well fold to a min-raise, but whatever he puts in the middle would be a bonus.

So the value of min-raise isn't on UTG, but rather on the button. Min-raise here would give button at least $345:$45, better than 7.5:1, and if UTG calls, it would be 390:45, almost 9:1. If button called with 215:45, he WILL call 7.5:1 or 9:1 just to see your cards. How many live players you know would lay down that kind of odds? In fact, even the OP called UTG an idiot because OP thinks UTG would lay down a hand with such odds.

So unless we are playing against two idiots, there will be value in min-raise. I think calling is losing a lot of value, and if you think button might re-raise on our min-raise, please offer your explanation on why you would think that.

ps. I also find it interesting that you would 3bet A/8o for thin value, yet you don't find value in this spot, or even consider it.

I get what you are saying here, but an "idiot" will call a min raise with a smaller flush. And the "sheriff" idiot will call with an overpair at least some of the time in order to "keep you honest".

I started out thinking just call, but Poke4fun has a good point about a minraise after 2 very important details are considered:

1. With this action, it looks an awful lot like we have the best hand
2. We are up against an idiot who is going to have a really hard time folding for $45 when he sees $300+ in the pot (depending on which special breed of idiot we are talking here, some simply cannot stand the thought of letting you take this pot without a showdown when they have an overpair and they think you are stealing it)

I'll be honest... if I was playing this hand I would have just called on the river and I don't have any doubt about that. But after reading this thread I think I would be missing out on some value. I love the min-raise idea because it'll drive the idiot crazy to fold. I think we have the best hand often enough here to make a raise +EV.

And this is why I come here. To consider alternate lines and new ways to approach a hand... and ultimately, to make more money, which I think a min raise here would do.

The two spots are completely different but to the point.

I don't ever see a c/r getting called. First thing is your giving a 5/10 player who is playing down today a chance to outplay you.
What hand are you repping when you c/r?
With the line we took to get to the river its a hard sell to say we have 5's full, a straights raising along the way which we didn't, so that dosn't fit. That leaves a rivered flush(mostlikely) or a 4, for 4's full.

Either way the skilled villian isn't gonna pay it off. He's going to simply fold or worse, realise that we can't possiblely have the nuts by the way the hand played out and put in a huge raise.
Like op said, she thought a 4 was well w/in his button range. Now he pops it huge making you fold all your flushes and puts you in a gross spot w/ a 4 having to call and hope for a chop.

This to me dosn't seem like a good spot to c/r based on the way we played the hand to this point and who were playing the hand against.

A skilled villain would not just call on the button with a live player behind, and therefore there is very little chance that he's going to re-raise here.

If he shows up with 4x, so be it...but there's definitely value when he doesn't have 4x. There are a lot more hands in the calling range than 4x.

If you have a convincing argument for why button would call $45 and then raise our min-raise, I would like to hear it. I cannot formulate one, but maybe you have an idea that I overlooked.

Now if it was just the complete idiot in the pot and he bets out on the river then by all means raise away, but w/ the inclusion of a skilled player in the hand, I think the risk -losing the whole pot- vastly out weighs the reward-an extra $45.

again we check/call check check/ minraise this line would just seem a little fishy to the button vill IMO.

What hand are you repping here on the river w/ a min raise?

What hand can villian have that he can just call and expect to be good at showdown after a c/r?

What do you do if button does raise?

Also I disagree that the button wouldn't play a 4 this way.

You're completely missing the point. I have already answered and explained my answers. Do you really want me to repeat my answers?

My question to you is, give me a logical thought process on how button would raise in this spot.

He COULD raise because our line dosn't make much sense. OP is a regular at foxwoods, as is button villian. We can resonably assume that neither considers the other a complete nob.

Because of the above this makes no sense.

Now we, check/called flop checked turn and are now check/minraising river when the board double pairs and puts the flushout there.

Villian knows w/ out a shadow of a doubt that hero isn't playing the nuts this weak. He's going to put us on exactly what we have, a hand the 4 improved, a flush or 4's full.

So his action is either fold as he knows he can't win at showdown or He raises huge knowing we have to fold all flushes and have to make a big call to chop at best. Something no one likes to do ever.

The "logical thought process" is that villian knows exactly where he's at in this spot! He knows his hand has no showdown value anymore and can now simply fold or take advantage of the situation and put us in a bad spot w/ a raise.
He either folds or makes us fold but he's never calling here. (unless were beat)

I can't see a reg 5/10 player flatting a bizarre min c/r on the river w/ A high or a 3 pair hand???
It comes down to hand reading 101, and again a winning 5/10 player is going to play perfecty and/or exploit this kinda play.

Waited 4 hours and this was it?

Forget who villain is, we should only focus on how villain is thinking in this hand.

Like I already said:

I believe button called the $45 in this spot, not because he is confident that he has the best hand, but rather because the pot is too big to lay down a hand with any SD value, such as Ax, over pair, or even Kx.

Let's discuss this aspect of villain's thought process. Do you disagree with my interpretation of villain's call? If so, why do you think he just called in this spot?

Suppose hero min-raises in this spot, and if you're villain on the button, what do you put hero on? Easily 5x or 4x. Why? Hero sees a 2-pair board, doesn't see anyone with a boat nor calling a big bet, so hero thin value raises. Very logical for hero to rep 5x or 4x in this spot.

So why would villain on the button call a CR? The same reason why he called the first $45 bet, the pot is too big to lay down hand with SD value!

There is very little reason for villain to all of sudden to decide to make a huge move, unless there are some physical tells or other factors telling him to. No one just all of sudden have an epiphany and changes his play to something better within 30 seconds of each other.

Please stick to logical reasoning, because I don't think you're following any actual thought process...

Wow. This thread sure got lively. I'm glad. The river was the street that left me confused.

What is logical about saying villian will put hero on a fullhouse and call down w/ A high?
You say I don't use logic? The way you view hands overall is so baseline its frustrating trying to have a disscusion w/ you.

Forget who vill is, just concentrate on how he thinks? This makes no sense to me. They're one in the same! Vill is who he is because he thinks and plays poker a certain way, you can't just throw that out the window.

And yes people do change their play in situations all the time. Here when someone does something odd you have to reevaluate to whats really going on. Being able to process info instantly and adjust or change course on the fly is the hallmark of a good player. Yet you say "no one does this"

Lets try this, basic thought process for anyone that has a clue when it comes to poker,

ok villians thought process while going back over the hand after the river c/r

Hero's a solid taggy reg, she defended from the BB, there's zero chance she has the nuts she wouldn't have played 5's full this weak,
She's acting like she likes the 4, so she's repping a flush or 4's full,
lets see the only hands in her range she defends w/ that include a 4 are 3-4, 4-5, A-4 prob all suited,

4-5 is discounted because of the way the hand played, if she had 3-4 she woulda flopped bottom two pair, w/ a hand that vunerable I'd expect to be c/r on flop or lead turn, after being counterfited on turn she could have checked again but I think I would have heard from two pair prior to the river c/r, that leaves A-4, again mp and gutter, seems like she woulda played that stronger to, hmm i guess 4's full is possible but not likely considering how the hand played out...

That leaves a flush, makes sense by the action, well I can't beat a flush, so I can just muck, or I could raise to $300 and try to take it down, I could easily rep the 4 like shes doing, its beleivable that i just called w/ the small fullhouse because no one showed much intrest, the other vill clearly has no clue, and now I'm coming out of my shell since she reopened the betting and is acting like she has something, she would have to fold all her flushes and in the unlikely chance she has A-4 would have to make a big call for a chop. Her line is just to weak here to show up w/ a full house most of the time. Do I give her the pot or do I steal it? What is she trying to get me to do in this spot?

This small bet dosn't make sense, its not enough to get a fold, she dosn't have the nuts so she prob dosn't want a raise...she's likely trying to get alittle value out of a call... I'm almost positive she can't call a raise here, I'm gonna try to win the pot....


In my opinion based on the line your just giving a solid player a chance to take the pot away from you because your line isn't consistent w/ a fullhouse.

This play would just stick out so much that vill will just fold assuming he's beat or pound on it thinking correctly that you never play a full house like this and thank you very much for giving me the pot.

Look I understand what your trying to say that w/ a $300+ pot he's priced in for $45 w/ ATC, he didn't raise the first time around so he can't have a hand. The problem is how we played the hand and what we are now repping. It dosn't hold water and solid players will exploit this or at best just fold.

I stand by my opinion that villian either folds or raises here.

In poker you decide what your opponent is trying to get you to do and then do the opposite.