5/5 NL ~600 effective

Villain - OMC, literally an old man drinking coffee. He's not super duper tight pf, I've only been at the table for about an hour and seen him raise a few times pf. He plays his value hands aggro post flop but seems to be more passive with draws as he had a flush draw in another hand and didn't raise or bluff it when it missed


Villain raises in LJ to 25, I 3bet AcQd to 75 villain calls

Flop Js7s5c

He checks, I bet 75, he thinks for a bit and calls

Turn 3d

He checks, I........?

Thoughts: Villain's pf calling range should be pretty tight here, once he calls the flop I put him on Jx mostly (AJ, KJ, QJ, maybe JT?), he could have a flush draw like Axss. 88-TT possible too. I discount sets b/c I think he would c/r those on flop and it doesn't seem like 2 pair would be in his calling range.

Given the size of the pot ($300) and we have about $400ish behind, seems like my 2 options are check back or shove. Betting anything less than AI seems like poor idea b/c it doesn't maximize the fold equity of villain's range

Flop cbet was quite bad because of stack depth. Either go bigger and play two streets or smaller and play 3, but this is just awkward. AP I wouldn't shove vs unknown, you have very few things going for your hand and there's still a little sdv. Had you gone smaller otf I'd prefer doubleing this and checking back most rivers, you make him fold many better hands and get thin value from passive draws. Now all in folds out every draw and you get called by Jx often. Ofc he might just overfold vs shove and make it very profitable, but I don't like these disrespectful 'I just barrell atc because he will fold to much' plays vs unknown players, it's a big exploit without reads.

There's nothing wrong with just checking flop and trying to show down vs presumably not super aggro old man.

As played, X turn.

Xing flop 100% w/little to no backdoor equity.

Prefer to bet smaller on flop. ~1/2 psb seems a little large HU. Our sizing makes the turn awkward, as others have observed. I don't like checking here, as we are never checking TT/QQ/KK or NFDs here.

Turn: Presumably his check range on turn is now JJ/AK and FDs. He should bet his AA/KK/QQ/TT. We block QQ/AA, so I think he has way more FDs and AK in range.

So it's not obvious that we are even ahead here against his HJ raising range that would get to turn and check. He has a lot of AK too.

We can check/give up because I don't think we have a lot of showdown value here. Or we can jam and pressure his AK and NFDs. I lean toward jamming here. I think he would bet most of his value here on turn.

Leaning jam, but checking could be fine since he plays draws passively so you can win some showdowns unimproved

OTF, I realize my hand has limited showdown value and some limited equity (BD strait and overcards) so I wanted to bet and take it down. I thought checking the flop might put me in a tough situation as he could bet the turn with just about anything and I'll have a hard time calling. I wanted to try to fold him off of hands like AK and other random PPs like 88,99, and TT that might just give up with some agreession playing OOP. I suppose that if I check the flop he probably checks the turn with those mid PPs as well and I can credibly rep AK so I can bet any A, K, or Q. I think you're right about wanting to be able to fire 2 barrels here if I bet as some of the above hands might get a bit sticky and even a hand like AJ isn't loving it after I 3 bet pf, bet flop and turn.

What is your preferred c bet size on the flop or would you check back? A 1/3 PSB ($50) sets up a pot of $250 w/$475 behind so I guess I could fire $200 OTT if it bricks out

I think there are 2 flaws in here.

1) “bet to take it down” is not really a reason to bet in and of itself. If you are not value betting, you are either bluffing and causing a better hand to fold or protecting by denying equity to hands that have a decent amount. The middle pairs you are targeting will likely require barreling to fold them out.

2) “checking the flop may allow him to bluff me off the turn with anything”. Firstly, you don’t have to win every pot. If the board is unfavourable and you have no pair, no draw facing aggression, it’s ok to give up even though you had a strong hand preflop. Secondly, you may be giving OMC (albeit not quintessential OMC) too much credit that he will pounce on weakness and bluff you. Even if he bets turn, he likely has you beat if you don’t improve.

You are spot on in your assessment here. I think the only hand that is ahead of me that I can reasonably expect to fold is AK, no other hand that has significant equity is folding to my flop bet. I need to be thinking about my turn bet on the flop b/c it's going to take that 2nd barrel to fold out those mid PPs or even a weak jack


Agreed.....even after playing this game for a while, it all comes back to fundamentals

I am not 3b pre vs OMC. Check back flop he’s gonna make life easy and get to showdown

Results: I check back the turn, river is a brick it goes check check, he flips over ATss for the missed flush draw and I scoop the pot

The discussion in this thread was really helpful, thanks to everyone who contributed

It looks like I really have 2 options here which both seem pretty good

1) Play passive and check back folding to further aggression from villain. My hand is A high and villain should play pretty strait forward

2) Bet small on the flop with a plan to follow it up with a bigger bet on a safe turn card to fold out his Jx and mid PPs (88-TT) and force him into a mistake with his flush draw

Against this specific opponent (somewhat tight, strait forward passive with draws, and likely has the ability to make a big fold), I think line 2 is probably better b/c it allows him to make a mistake by calling his flush draws on the turn or folding his Jx hands. My 1/2 pot flop bet was just not the right sizing here b/c it doesn't accomplish the right goals. I need to be thinking about how my flop sizing affects the turn action and realize that if I need to fire 2 barrels I should evaluate that against checking instead of just the flop action.

Ed Miller suggests that, if you 3b pre and get called, always make a small continuation bet of 1/3 pot on the flop. The reason is that the 3b bloats the pot, and the call by the v indicates a strong hand. You don't want to bloat the pot further, but you also want to take advantage of the fold equity you get on the flop by having taken the initiative preflop. If you always bet 1/3 pot on the flop following a 3b, you conceal your hand. If you get to raised, you can still fold because you're not pot committed. If the V calls, you know he's on a draw.

Of course, 1/3 pot bet just barely charges the draws, but that deficiency is made up for with to the fold equity and the pressure on V to call incorrectly. Miller suggests that, on the turn, if no flushes or straights are on the board, and V checks, then you should then always bet 2/3 pot. Hero's large flop bet bloated the pot on the turn, putting him in an awkward spot. What I like about this strategy is that the sequence of bets puts pressure on the V to make an error. Remember, most villains play too many hands. They make mistakes by calling with worse, folding scared, or, at higher stakes, betting and raising hero, even though Hero usually has the better hand)

Sorry for being late, I missed the reply. I default to blindly 1/3ing with range on T+ hi flops with no realistic straight possibilities in these spots. People (except the rare young guns with online experience) play like dogshit vs it. They should x/r a lot, but they usually only do that with combo draws and overpair+, so they end up letting you keep the initiative and give you a free river if you decide to take it.

If I played a strategy with checkbacks I'd 100% xb. You have sdv and even if it feels like turning your hand faceup, is an old man literally drinking coffee going to pot turn and shove river with QT to put the pressure on your pathetic xb range? One more good thing about ranging 1/3, it folds out underpairs to the board. People love setmining and it is quite sad when lose to 22 in the xxxxxx line.

It's a bit of nitpicking, but I don't like 200 OTT. I'd go geometric and bet 150, It's what value hands want and it folds out an old mans 88-TT just as much as 200 does.