1/2 200 max

V1 history: well known 2/5 player at my local card room. Is very loud an knows everyone. At first glance, he seems like a maniac but he's actually pretty solid. I doubled up off of him In The first 20 mins. I then continued to run good and ran my stack to $550 very quickly. when I was beat, I mucked my hand. My casino lets the dealer flip up hands If mucked at showdown, but only if someone in the hand requests it. This guy got very irritated that I kept mucking my losing hands before someone could ask to flip up my hand at showdown. 10 mins After the double up i pick up .

KK in HJ

Mp raises to 12, which gets two callers inclduing v1. I re raise to 50. Folds around to v1 who insta shoves and I snap. My KK hold up and he shows a9. I say, "that's what I got". I know I know, pretty cocky. He's been making such a big deal about me mucking my hands at show down it was hard to resist.

V2: looks to be a weak passive player but his manureisms suggest he's somewhat competent, and is just card dead. Has lost every hand he has been in an is down to around $70. We haven't played a had together

Onto the hand:

V1: sb $240ish
Hero: utg+2 covers all
V2: HJ $70ish

Limps to hero who picks up a2ss. I also limp. I know, not the best play pre. I had a "lucky" and trappy image at this point as I've been running good, and I wanted to see a cheap flop. 4 callers to v1 (including v2) who min raises to $4. This raise was extremely weird and I wasn't sure what it meant. V1 is competent enough to know that this accomplished little. Calls around.

Flop $11 (-$3 rake)

Jc 8s 7s

V1: bets $15.
Folds to hero who just calls with nf draw. V2 calls from HJ.

Turn $55 (-$1 rake)

7h.

V1 checks to hero. Hero isn't sure if this is a trap, and thinks "small hand small pot" as i really only have a nf draw and was happy to see a free card if possible. V2 checks behind.

River $54 (-$1 rake)

10s

V1: bets $65 an has $150 back.

Hero???

Not the most descriptive post. Nothing to say about how he generally plays postflop. Does big sizing here always polarize him to fh or air? Or can he overvalue hands in this type spot

Sorry about that. Yes the bet polarizes his hand. Although he is generally laggy, he is solid post flop an is able to fire c-bets in good spots and fold to the right
players.

And this is a small detail due to his lol stacksize but how interested did v2 seem on the river?

Lol I hear u man. Hard to gauge him, I feel like he was willing to make call. Obv I didnt realy factor him too much in the hand due to stack size

You see people posting here, and I see quite a few playing in real life, that min-raise small pocket pairs (say 22-99 or so). They call it a pot-builder raise to make sure the pot is a little bigger if they hit a set.

That seems consistent with the Villain's play post-flop -- he flopped a set.

Flop he makes a huge bet with to protect his hand on the draw heavy board.

On the turn, everyone else is drawing dead, so he gives them a chance to catch-up.

On the river he overbets the pot, targeting your exact hand to get paid off.

He's telling a consistent story on all streets. It might be a lie of course, but most Villains seem to play their hands face-up.

If I'm right he should have bet 1/3rd or 1/2 pot on the turn and shoved the river putting you to a real test.

Thanks for yo feed back Au. I have seen the min raise like that. Just very weird like I said in this hand, as it is not characteristic with this villain. If he had a pair like that he would either raise big or just flat. I have seen worse players make that play tho

I will post results later, which I'm sure will spark another discussion.

Looking forward to it.

Reads are the most important part of poker. Sometimes I wish we saw the results from the beginning and all we did was discuss which reads we should have for future play -- rather than 10,000 threads about whether we should raise if we flop a set.

SPOIL

I decide to raise all in. Against this type of player, I feel the nut flush is good against him a large percentage of the time and that this is a profitable play. He calls and flops up 69ss for a straight flush.

SPOIL

it's tough to see that one coming. Just butt hurt that of all people it was to him. And to run salt in my wounds he goes, "that's what I have", just like I did to him.

Grunch...

Um... all-in? What other play is there here?

if you shove, the pot will be:

$54 + $65 + $65 +$150 = $334

It will be $150 more for him to call. This is a super obvious all-in. Not sure what else you are considering.

Edit: Just saw the board is paired... probably still all-in.

This is kind of a cooler if you look at your results but there's important things to consider without results.

Disclaimer: If any of what follows here is obvious to you and it comes off as remedial, don't take it personally, you have very few posts and I have no sense of your knowledge or skill level.

I think your issue is the flop. When you call more than a pot sized bet on the flop, do you...

a) feel that you are beating the majority of V's range?

b) feel that V's hand is strong enough that he will pay off when you hit your obvious NFD?

You do not have express odds to call the flop bet with a naked NFD. Therefore, you must either feel that Ahigh+NFD is ahead of V's range or rely on implied odds.

Implied odds are tricky. Many people think that all implied odds means is "does V have a big enough stack that I might get paid off if I hit?" This is not true.

Implied odds must consider V's stack size, what you believe is the relative strength of V's range, what you know of V's tendencies, and other factors that lead you to calculate that you will win a sizable pot enough times when you hit your hand. If V check/folds every time you turn a flush, you are not making enough money when you hit your flush to pay for all the times you don't.

NFD is a really obvious hand and won't get paid off very often by 1pair type hands but can make money against flopped straights, worse flushes or mid-strong hands with redraw outs, such as sets and 2 pair.

This means that the best way to get paid is if V has a worse flush draw and will pay off a sizable raise when you hit, flopped a straight and will sigh-call when the flush comes in, or a set/2pair and will pay off a big turn bet if you hit to see if he can make a FH on the river.

So, when you called the flop, did you think any of those conditions were true? If not, why not fold or semi-bluff raise? What did you think V had? Or was it just "it's only $15 to see if I hit my draw?"

People can debate or disagree with me all they want about implied odds and I welcome new thinking and discussion.

Poppa, yes I was relying on implied odds. I just call as there was many people in the flop. I could semi bluff raise here, but I wanted to keep as many people in as possible for obvious reasons. Not sure of Vs range, at best I'm thinking a set or possible straight. Either way, he's aggressive enough that if I hit I am confident I can stack him. That plus I the **** talking earlier out him on tilt.

I think I would just call on the river. He made a huge bet on a paired board. If we shove are we really ahead more than 50% of the time when called? I don't think so.

As I said, I don't mind the pf call, it's the flop call when V overbets and everybody folds to you. To call potsize+ here you need some assurance of more people in the pot or implied odds and there's no assurance of the V behind you calling.

I stated my thoughts about implied odds in my previous post. Are there aspects of that post you agree or disagree with?

Edit: I don't mind checking or semi bluffing the turn given how wide V's range is although min-raise/overbet/check is a very unusual line and not indicative of a V getting trappy with a made hand, at least a tilting overaggressive V.

You shoved earlier with a great hand so it's doubtful he calls your shove with even a straight. Just call.

Tilting Vs never level themselves into thinking that hero is trying to run them over this time?

Upon re-read I'm unclear about how many players are behind us on the flop? Both cutoff and button?

Also V is maybe more solid than I thought on initial read through. Still think this is a very unusual line for an experienced player. Overbetting the flop is a defensive act unless V reads that most of the table is thinking of bets in absolute dollars rather than in relationship to the pot size. Then slowing down on the turn when he's made his hand and you appear to be drawing? That seems like a major gear shift. Does V read you as the sort of player that gives up to any bet on the turn of you don't improve?

Poppa, sorry forgot to post but 7 players on the flop. I def agree with your posts on implied odds here. It's funny, everything you are saying are the same questions that ran through my mind. He is definitely more solid than he seems. He makes some aggressive plays that make him look laggy, but he's not incompetent, doesn't get too out of line, and has a br to play at 1/2. Like you said, the line he took was really weird. Otr, wasn't sure if he was trying to rep trips, a boat, a or a straight. I figured his range is wide, and he's tilted, so i would be good over 50% of the time.

Do you think that you are the right player to fold a non-nut flush against if you raise on a paired board?

No problem.

Unfortunately I have seen your results which is why I am sticking to flop play.

My issue is, on the flop you are in pretty rough shape with bad position. You have a V who overbet the pot after sweetening it pre. You say you just called because you want to keep players behind you in the pot. For them to call they either have to be awful at poker or have to have a hand that connects just enough with this board, but not enough to raise for value, against an overbet and a call. What hands do that and limped pre?

A: not many on this board. Top pair, maybe a pair+ gutshot, 65, or another flush draw?

(I know V2 called. Makes no sense given his stack size, probably worse than you given him credit for unless he limped something like 99.)

So you can't count on them calling and if they raise you are OOP with a flush draw against straight/set/2pair type hands, many of which could have been limped pre in position. (Sets are least likely.) Can you call in that situation? Plus if they do call it's entirely likely that they hold some of your outs.

That gets us back to what hands V might have in his range that give you the implied odds to draw, because you're probably playing him heads up. We have to assume that V is too competent to dump $ on this hand if a flush comes in without a strong hand, as I explained earlier. He pretty much has to have a straight, worse flush draw, or set for you to make the money to fulfill the requirements of implied odds.

This is all a range based on what the expectation of getting enough $$$ to call with NFD on the basis of implied odds, and obviously his range without that expectation is much wider.

My point is, implied odds aren't "if I hit I can get his whole stack," they're "if I hit and the conditions are right I can get his whole stack."

I'm not saying that you snap fold the NFD on the flop, I am saying there's a ton of variables that makes your flop play a much tougher decision than it seems.

I see what you are saying poppa, nice insight. In HOC II there was a similar concept that I think relates to what you are saying. Harrington says that sure, say for example if u hold A9 and the board is 678 rainbow, it'll be extremely obvious if you hit the straight and barely anyone will pay you off if any, and it almost becomes a RIO situation. Like you said, the conditions in that hypothetical situation wouldn't be right for stacking people. I feel like you are saying similar concepts apply here. Honestly, in hindsight, I feel like I called because villain was tilting and i'd at least get to make a thin vb

Basically similar concept, yes.

In general, I encounter a fair number of sub-par Vs whose thinking is a simple as "drawing hand + big stack = great implied odds" and I think that's a gross oversimplification. Maybe they equate the IO of a PP stacking an overpair when set-mining with the IO of a flush vs a big pair or maybe they just don't understand. But I've literally heard players say, "I had to call, I had great implied odds!" in spots where they were literally never getting another dime if they made their hand.

Maybe someone can enlighten me or tell me I'm being too nitty, I'd be happy to hear different thinking.

I really can't get the results out of my head on this one, V got exactly what he wanted flopping the OESFD and doubt he's folding to either a raise on the flop or a turn bet, possibly two barrels. Without results his range is so wide that maybe he folds to a raise on the flop but a flat looks crazy strong and I am not sure firing another barrel when the board pairs on the turn is a good idea as we might be drawing dead.