Playing in a £5-£10 game that. A few decent players, a few not-so-good ones. So the game is running for a few hours, and we dwindle from 8 players down to 5. Players are getting tired, and the game is loosening up a bit.

There is a straddle of £20 and I am on the Button with a stack of £3,000.

One player limps and I look down at J T

Both blinds look disinterested and ready to fold. Limper is a pretty tight player, has done this a few times - just limp and hope to see flop cheap, but then fold if someone raises it somewhere.

Straddler is very different, playing a wide range of hands and playing quite loosely. He's a decent player but not TOO decent - I certainly don't mind playing hands against him, but I know he could make it very uncomfortable for me if I play too many hands OOP. His stack is about £5,000.

I limp.
Both blinds fold.
Straddler makes it £60 more.
Limper folds.
I call.

POT: £155
FLOP: 9 9 K

Villain bets out £110.
I call.

POT: £375
TURN: 7

Villain checks.

Having floated with an inside straight, this has now become a two-way draw AND I have a J-high flush draw. Villain may have already given up; but even if he hasn't there's still a good chance I have outs. Also, I figure betting here will give more weight to a possible bluff on the river if I miss.

I bet £200.
Villain calls.

POT: £775
RIVER: K

Villain checks.
I bet £350
He raises it to £1,200.

As the title of the post suggests, I felt this raise came out of nowhere. Before I bet, I'd even thought that I was most likely win if I checked, but decided to bet just to try to make him fold out any hands that were beating me.

Can anyone put him on a range here, or a specific hand?

Any thoughts on the rest of the hand?

I think villain may have a full house here. Kings full of Nines to be specific.

I raise pre-flop myself.

As played, I think I just check back river. AK and KQ make sense, maybe some other K's.

As played, fold.

Looks like KXo/KXs. He C/C turn when potential flush hit, then C/R river counting on you betting the flush.

I'd have raised pre, having the BTN. I'm ok with betting both turn and river.

I check back river, and as played I fold. He's raising on a paired board with a three-card flush. Just not worth it with J high.

I don't mind the bet on the turn and think it gets him to fold a lot, but with my extra outs, I might have checked behind.

I would have raise pre.

You should probably fold and this is probably only posted because V showed a pocket pair that got counterfeited and turned into a bluff

The fact that you think that are winning on the river scares me.

As played, before I bet the river - you don't think there's any chance Jack-high will turn out to be the best hand?

Let's say Villain has Kx here.

He bets the flop. I call. makes sense.

Turn brings a 3rd spade. If Villain's X is a spade, I think he probably bets again - especially if it's As or Qs.

If he doesn't have a spade, that 7 has him worried (but not ready to give up yet). So he check-calls. Let's see a river. Ok, I get it.

River brings him the full house on a double-paired board. Quite easy to spot, however tired I am. so if Villain thinks I have the flush, why oh why does he check-raise? Is that not just throwing away a ton of value?

turn : check back because you picked up equity or bet more for FE

river : AP u think u might win with J high before his X/R then check back : ok that you know.
I do not think he is bluffing - if he already decided to give up the pot why he raise back? except if he spotted a tell from you since your river bet?
that says betting himself 1k would look strong as well - he could not expect you to bet 100% without a K there... that said, I know ppls capable of this play with a 9 "not putting u on K"

well done from him if he had 55/66, but why doesnt he keep putting pressure on ott then? give his spewy image the 9x could be in his range as well?

Well, the thought process I'm hearing is: betting chiefly because you think he has a better hand, then when he raises considering calling because you think he has a worse hand. This doesn't seem like we're using the given information, but rather choosing the most optimistic beliefs.

I'd bet a little more on the turn if betting at all.

On the river, the real problem with calling is that he could be bluffing with the best hand. V's line is strange no matter what, but if I had to put him on a bluff it would be Asx, where x isn't a K or a 9.

So for instance he has AsTc. Raises his straddle pre, which makes sense as he has a nice hand in a limped pot. C-bets when he whiffs flop. OTT, he calls with the NFD. On the river, he checks because he has some showdown value with AKK99, and doesn't feel the need to bluff. Once you bet river, he realizes he has almost no showdown value, but thinks he can scare you off a flush with a bet on the double-paired board.

The problem with calling here is that it's hard to see a hand that calls your turn bet that you're ahead of now. Would he really call with a pocket pair worse than 9 (other than 77)? If so he's a station as that's a very weak hand once you call his c-bet and the principal draw hits on the turn. Don't think low pocket pairs are very consistent with his small raise pre either. He has no reason to believe you'll fold in position to a $4\60 raise pre in a straddled pot with deep stacks, think most Vs check their option with a low pocket pair. Really 8s8x is the only hand you beat that makes much sense here.

Also, flop is a fold for me unless I have a read that V is c-betting a ton and then giving up on most turns. A gut shot without overcards on a paired board against a V who could have trips or even a full house already with deep stacks is not a good spot. If you hit your gutter and stacks get in you're probably losing.

Ah, snap fold.

He has a million Kings in his range. Is awful spot to bluff, so he is even more likely nutted.

Raising river is suicide. Calling is terrible. Only option is fold.

Don't like river barrel.

Firstly, thanks for responses everyone.

I will go through them one at a time. I don't agree with everything everyone has said, but please don't think this is a brag post or a scenario where I'm just trying to justify certain actions. I posted because this was a complicated and fun hand and, as far as I was concerned, what happened DID NOT MAKE ANY SENSE. I do not in any way believe I played this hand perfectly, and I've thought A LOT about this hand since I played it.

One of the hardest things when posting on here is explaining about the Villain. "Tight reg" or "loose maniac" are just far too generic to put across the ranges of the opponent, their personality, subtle tells, table/game history, how they're feeling exactly at that time, or whatever it is that makes something feel hinky about the way a hand was played.

In this exact scenario, something just didn't seem right. I spent a long long time in a dwell-bubble (if it had been at a casino I'd have had clock called most likely) and I was trying to piece it all together.

It had not occurred to me that he had spotted a tell. Interesting thought. I hope not.

I don't think he can expect me to bet hardly at all. Maybe if I have a 9 - but can he just assume that's what I have and check?

This is one of my thoughts at the time - if he has a King why is he check-raising? Even if I have a hand im going to bet, why not bet out and hope I call?

This guy has an image where he gets paid a lot when he has hands, and he knows it.

A counterfeited pocket pair definitely occurred to me - but I thought he would bet the turn with this, see if I was really sure I wanted to play on.

No. This is not the thinking.

I feel there's a decent chance the Jack will win this pot - however he can easily have A/Q high. I bet the river to fold out those hands (or even splits).

The raise comes as a complete surprise - at first because I think I've read the whole hand/opponent wrong; then secondly because when I try to piece together what has happened, I still cannot figure out what hand he can possibly have.

This occurs to me. If he's gonna bluff, he cannot have picked a worse spot. Although clearly he's picked the one correct time,

I dismiss 99 because clearly he would shove with Quads on the river (not to mention the strange bet-check/call-check/raise line). KK the same - why check/call when there's a possibility I've hit the draw on the turn?!

Kx is far-and-away his most likely holding here. I'm not sure why you're discounting these hands based only on the fact that he checked the river.

If he believed that you had a significant number of bluffs in your range, he would check the river to give you the opportunity to bluff, with the intention of raising to try to get additional value from 9x and flushes. I'm not saying this is necessarily the best line to take with Kx, but it's certainly not unreasonable.

The river is an easy fold.

It is not the river check alone that makes me think this.

It is the fact that he check-raises this spot PLUS the fact that he has checked the turn. I really don't think he checks the turn if he has the King. I don't think he checks the river often with the FH.

Doesn't seem that unusual to check a king on the turn.

Your most likely hands when you flat the flop are 9x, flush draw, and Kx. Sure, there are others like pocket pairs and gutshots, but against those he's giving you a chance to make a mistake by checking to induce a bluff.

So you called and he turned over a pocket pair that got counterfeited.

This is the best response I have had so far. Thank you. Yes: this is what the real problem is.

I am not saying there's NO way he can have the King - in my experience, people turn up with all sorts of weird hands, especially in live games.

I still do not think he can check to me if he thinks I have the flush: he should bet out on this river if he thinks I have the flush.

Indeed. If he has a low PP, he checks preflop almost always. Even with 88, I am pretty sure he bets the turn and tries to pressure me into folding/charge me for any draw.

Disagree here. I call mainly because I think he is C-betting and will check-fold the turn. I think I win this pot enough to make the flop call profitable. Hitting the straight is there in case he DOES have a hand, though yes I would have to tread somewhat carefully so I don't end up stacked.

But my point is that he wouldn't then check the river if this was the case. Perhaps this is player specific, but I don't think so.

When he calls the turn, it is likely he has a draw.

I do not think he has a King and I'm CERTAIN he doesn't have Kx with a Spade, because he will nearly always bet the turn with top pair + big spade draw.


So now, if I think he's bluffing, there are several possibilities:

1) He has a pocket pair that got counterfeited. (As described above, I think this is unlikely).

2) He thinks I have a flush and he's trying to push me off a flush - with, for example, A in his hand. But I still think it's unlikely he can think I have a flush here.

3) He is a far better player than I have given him credit for, and has played the hand this way in order to totally befuddle me and perhaps cause me to do something stupid.

4) He thinks there's a good chance I'm stealing the pot, but doesn't have a good enough hand to call - i.e. he does not have Ace high.


Considering I thought he had a draw on the turn, and I'm now discounting the idea that it is the Ace-flush, he was chasing, I have to determine exactly which spade he holds. Q is obviously likely, and there's a whole bunch of cards that include that. T is also likely... 8 - well as we go down the suits, it becomes less and less likely that he called the turn with a low draw in mind. All the way down to the 2, which is extremely unlikely.

If I could be COMPLETELY CERTAIN that he was bluffing and doesn't have Ace-high, what kind of probability do we have that we might actually be winning? And if we factor in draws such as T-8 and 8-6?

Additional comment: re-bluffing here is, I think, totally out of the question. I spent so long dwelling that by the time I came to the conclusion that he was bluffing, he would never fold out his winning bluffs. (well it felt like it anyway - either way, take it out of the calculations as a factor).

It makes total sense for him to check the turn with a king, especially if he has a weak kicker. From his perspective it looks like you probably have a king, a nine, a flush, a weak pocket pair, or some sort of weak draw like a gutshot. He's likely way ahead or way behind, and the hands he has beat are unlikely to pay off three streets of value. So checking the turn keeps him out of ugly spots when he gets raised, limits the size of the pot when he's beat, underreps his hand to make it more likely you call a river bet with a hand that has weakish showdown value, allows you to bluff with your weak draws that might fold to a bet, etc.

I agree it's more likely he bets the turn with strong kings, but there's still some merit to checking, depending on what type of range he puts you on and how he expects you to play different types of hands.

If he did have a king he totally maximized his value against your particular hand.

Here's how I read the river. On the river, he doesn't really know you have a flush yet, and he could have the best hand with ace-high so doesn't need to bluff here. He would also have a hard time betting you off of a flush if he just leads. He'll get hero-called a lot by a flush if he just leads, so he checks hoping you check behind and he gets to recognize his SDV.

Once you bet, he has to believe that ace-high is no good. However, while you could pretty easily hero-call him with a flush if he just lead river, check-raising the river is a much stronger move. River raises on paired boards, let alone double-paired boards, are just super nutted and almost always full houses. So, while you may not lay down your flush if he leads, you can lay it down to the check-raise.

The real baller move here if you're reasonably confident that he doesn't have a king here is to shove. He basically has to fold everything but Kx or 99. I'd still fold in all honesty, but I like shoving better than calling because at least then it doesn't matter that we're behind his bluffing range.