in all honesty I might find a min raise just to have some fun and see what villain does so I can commit to a properly sized river bet.

I highly disagree with anyone advocating for a turn shove. You are pushing out hands that you beat and setting yourself up for disaster in case villain is getting tricky and min betting a nutty hand.

As played, bet river and get value from Jx and 9x and 1010. The range in which villain calls river is very wide here. You showed no strength throughout the hand.

Also bet flop bigger. Make it $80 minimum.

I dont care if he folds a hand I beat. The pot is already $225 in a 1/2 game. Im not letting him bet $2 so he can catch a 4th club for nothing. There's not a chance in hell I'm not raising that turn bet. He doesn't have a flush or he would be betting a lot more so hero doesn't catch a 4th club (if he had a big one). Of course there's some minuscule chance he has the nut flush but its highly unlikely. If I was ever going to just call that $2 turn bet it would be when I had the Ac, but even then I would need a serious read to not raise.

You guys are reading way too much into his turn bet. You're better off just pretending that he checked...

With deeper stacks, this would be a hand to bet two streets for value but not three, and betting flop checking turn betting river would be okay.

With only 155 behind on the turn though, you should just shove turn.

It's best to treat small donk bets as a check. Do what you were gonna do if he checked. It's not inducing you to raise if you were going to bet in the 1st place, he may see it like that, but he's also an idiot who just bet less than 1/100th of the pot

Thanks, all. I ended up tank-checking behind and felt super-weak doing it. I feel like I missed an all-in value bet when checked to on the river. At the same time, as mikko mentioned, I really wanted to see his hand to use in future situations and thought there was a good chance villain would instamuck if I bet.

He rolled 62??????!?!?!, and I fastrolled the AA. I guess he's handreading and putting me on the AK/AQ/whiffed overs and me just trying to take it down on the flop with a cbet, calling that ridiculous 2 to try to hit a river. Damn- maybe he could have leveled himself into a call there too since the riv was absolute blank? Hahahaha, wishful thinking .

This table ended up being very profitable--in fact the best table I've ever played. Just playing super slow, getting it in with a couple sets, nut flush and getting paid in full. Those hands played themselves. Is this AA hand the type of spot where money is made in poker?

I don't know what that woman was doing that was open shipping in the dark just HUNDREDS of dollars. She kept saying the same thing: "Well, if you hit, you hit. Good luck..." like a weird challenge or something. Just sipping on a beer, not slamming them down or anything, but slurring a bit. I almost felt bad at times cause she would amass ~800, then punt it off, then rebuy for 400 full; and rinse, repeat. It was so absurd. Her PF 3bet% had to be--~50%--for hours. Once in a long while, in pots, she wouldn't do the open ship and would play some decent poker. She was a pretty good hand reader and sometimes would just give her thought process out loud throughout the hand.

Is this because I've already put in too much to fold? SPR < 1 on turn (by my betting flop) with overpair = never folding?

If he moves in on the turn instead of betting 2, I should be calling, right? Cause of SPR again?

Not necessarily. That's very player dependent.

Another example of how calling ranges on preflop play, and on flop are way wider than perceived.

Which is the biggest flaw with this Forum as a whole.

And has contributed to all my downswings.

Betting for thin value and denying equity is very important at 1/2-1/3, and even @ 2/5.

Even though I advocated shipping turn. With a range as wide as villain had. A small bet is probably the most EV, going $60 and stacking off. Likely more EV than, shoving or checking.

He had a much much weaker hand than I thought obviously, but the fact remains that by just calling the $2, you allowed him pot odds of over 110:1 to hit a 9:1 river....with even higher implied odds if he hit the river. Shame on hero

Not that simple

It really is that simple. The odds of villain having a better hand in this situation is so negligible that you have to raise and the pot is big enough to shove your chips in his face.

Villain couldve easily had a PP with a club and called an all in. Even if he wont call an all in, hero needs to raise to deny villain his equity with one club. Raising to something less than all in is acceptable. Just calling $2 is not.

What if he ships River with 80% of his blocker bet range

I was already all in on the turn.

I read these same replies all the time here. The members of this forum are all pretty decent to very good players/writers. One weakness we all have, myself included, is we WAY overestimate Vil hands. As I read the OP and followup responses, in my head I'm ranging the Vil. Let me be perfectly honest, 6 2 spades was NEVER a consideration. Lols.

The main theme I got from the replies was Vil min bet OTT was to trick you to believe your stack was at risk by an impending 3b shove, or inducing you to shove when Vil has you crushed with the nuts already. In fact, none of that was true.

I LOVED the min raise comment. I LOLd that. I like raising to $50 as it would give you a chance to eval VIL's physical action.

Bottom line is, at this level, you just can't expect perfect Vil play, and have to somehow account for complete lunacy, all the while honing your legit hand reading skills. Don't beat yourself up if you didn't put 6duece in your Vil range.

Glad you had a winning session sir. Good post.��

If he is folding his blocker bet range, to your ship on turn.

But otherwise shipping 80% rivers with it. Obviously more value in checking.

Thats great. Maybe we can ask him mid hand if he will fold his blocker bet range to an all in and whether or not he will ship most rivers if I just call his ridiculous $2 turn bet. Then maybe we can ask him what percentage of the time he will bet less than all in on the river when he rivers a 2 or 6?

Nobody knows how often people do these things so there's no way we can know for sure if we are losing value when we shove the turn and all he has is 62. What I do know is that he is most likely betting the river when he hits his second pair and he since he didnt bet the river when he didnt hit his second pair, I think we can be pretty confidant that raising the turn was the smart move.

+1 to MikeStarr and Ben... ship that turn

Done playing devils advocate. No fun debating **** when results are posted.

But mostly because:

Not betting turn is criminal.

If we bet the turn and he shoves, then we're calling off our stack with a hand that will almost never improve and is usually second best. That's the exact opposite of playing NLH well.

The whole point is to put your money in when YHIG, not when YHISB.

I didn't say anything about bluff catching OTR. Although you do sense some truth about the situation; hero has a one pair hand on the slickest board in history. In fact I said the EXACT OPPOSITE, re-evaluate the situation if you do improve.

We're not a solid favorite to his calling range. It's "indisputable."

We have no idea what his all in calling range is and besides, that's not the only determining factor as to whether we should push or not.

We would rationally assume rationality. I.e. the type of hand a normal opponent would have here, given the prior action, limited to all hands with a 4 flush or 4 str8 or better. There simply aren't enough draws available to compensate for the times he has us beat.

Yes it is. Because we have an infinitesimal amount of fold equity.

It's absolutely shocking how many people are commenting here and suggesting we want worse hands to fold. We don't. We know that all better hands will call when we shove, so we want as many worse hands to call as possible. The problem is there just aren't very many of them that will.

The thought that we are better off collecting the existing pot than collecting additional bets from inferior hands is absolutely absurd and contrary to every sound theory of poker. This could be true in multiway pots, but is almost never true in actual practice. In actual practice, we ALWAYS want to collect additional bets from inferior hands, because it is impossible, in practice, to discern those particular situations where we don't.

It's one of the primary objectives, we want to squeeze value out of our made hands as much as we possibly can.

3 days ago a guy raised to $30. I flatted with KdKc. There was also another caller.
Flop Ks7d3d with a FD. I checked, next guy checked. Preflop raiser bet $60. I check raised all in to $400. One fold and then the preflop raiser instacalled with JJ. Please stop telling me that worse hands wont call. Its the most overused phrase in poker. He thought I had a flush draw and he tried to make a hero call. He even said "oh ****" when the turn was a diamond.

Im never letting a guy bet $2 into a $200+ pot without raising him. Based on stack sizes and pot size, an all in is warranted and some clowns will call even though they have no business calling.

So now you're saying that your experience with a dunce is a basis for how someone else should play in a game that is 100% unrelated to you and that dunce.