Yeah. 3 undercards with a big o pile ah cash in the middle wasn't what we were looking for.

^^ Come on guys I think it was a close call on the flop but opted for a check, but don't throw out straw man arguments. "Their checking range" might be their whole range if they don't donk. "3 undercards" completely undermines their connectivity and middle range. A 247 flop is a bit different from a 567 flop.

While the flop is connected to a straight, the rank and texture is nowhere near flops like JT8ss/T98/987.

If we are afraid to continue after 3-b pre with an over pair that has great spacing on this board, we frankly should have just called pre. Alternatively, we can also table change if these opponents are difficult to play, even when we have position.

Agreed with 1st P. Still no need to provide strawman arguments/mischaracterize opposing views.

Classic straw man argument.

V2's range certainly contains 77/66/55. He may or may not 3! JJ/TT vs. the UTG range. He likely leads 99/88 OTT for equity protection versus AK and to potentially fold out better over pairs that are scared ****less of this flop.

The hands he's least likely to contain are random overcards. So what does that leave him with?

Regardless of the strawman i think he have some good points regarding the flop action. We successfully avoided both a K or an A (flops that we certainly often need to slow down if going 3 ways), and got ourself 3 small cards in a bloated 3 bet pot with a big pocket pair in position. As he points out we hate it alot more if it comes like 7-8-9 or 8-9-10. We should have a good amount of flops we are betting here too (if we start checking back this flop too we are quickly gonna become too passive and check too many boards), and i dont think checking because we might be unlucky that a villain have flopped a set on us is a solid option.

Yes, sure villain 2 can easily have 77/66/55, but he (backpack pro) also have alot more hands as well in his range-its hard to flop sets. Hero didnt 3 bet that big pre,and when asian spazz lady comes along calling heros 3 bet i think he also peels with pretty much his entire calling the first open range.

Regarding the turn i am leaning towards a fold. The sizing seems nutted from backpack grinder, and we have to assume were gonna face a stackoff bet on the river if we station the turnraise. I am not comfortable calling it all off in a spot where our hand is fairly capped/faceup to an overpair at best, where villain really shoudnt have that many bluffs compared to value.

No, I am not, but a pretty good portion of it.

Completely agree with first sentence. 765 is significantly different than T98 when UTG and UTG+1 are in hand.

Maybe a little, but I don't think that's enough of a justification to size down here.

Turn: call. We have underrepped our hand, and our line (check back flop, bet small on turn) looks like a weak/scared AK. We have practically begged V2 to raise here, but would he really have checked the turn with a set or a straight after you checked behind OTF? I don't think so.
Plan to call most rivers.

This was pretty much my thinking exactly. I have definitely under repped my hand. Im much more likely to have AK/AQs type hands with my line than an overpair.

I dont think he has a T. Surely he would lead the turn with a T before I check back again on the turn with my "AK/AQs". I was afraid that he could have 2 pair on the flop though. There are plenty of 2 pair combos he could have and he might check them again to me on the turn hoping I fire a delayed Cbet since hes not too worried about getting outdrawn with 2 pair if I do check it back. But this guy seems aggro and I think he probably leads the turn with 2 pair on that board.

Hero tanks for maybe 45 secs and then calls the $270

Hero has QhQd

River ($880) 7h6c5sTdTh

Villain shoves. Its $520 to me.

As expected of course, villain shoves. When you call the turn you should have seen this coming ( i assume you did also Mike- just pointing it out), so now we have to follow through and call it off on a good rivercard that counterfits flopped 2 pair combos, and makes it less likely he has 10x.

If we dont call it off, calling the turnraise is terrible and burning money.

Also i want to point out the (to me at least) irony regarding us checking the flop to possibly avoid stacking off/pot control/flop is good for our opponents range or whatever arguments we had for doing that. And yet here we are, complete runout is done, equities is realized and were facing a 500+ rivershove with one pair.

This is one of those scenarios i would like to avoid, wich betting the flop right away would have contributed to in a fine way.

Call. 2nd ten was actually a great card for us as he is unlikely to have a single T (T9s, JTs maybe, but initial call preflop would be suspect in early position) and we move above all the 2pair combos. Still lose to the straights, but only needing 37% to call makes it the right decision.

River, I think you're forced to call now.

Just getting to this thread, I would have fired on the flop like ~$200. I think checking it puts you into more difficult spots against these two. The aggro grinder is going to be more willing to make a move once you show weakness and put you on big cards, not an overpair, this gives him a license to try to steal.

But right now you have to call, he could have a set or straight sure, but he could also just have something like 88, 99, or JJ with the c-raise being some sort of value raise/semi-bluff (8s would be open ended, and 99 a gutter). I don't see him showing up here with a T.

This is an interesting point to consider. My initial thought is that if we were the ones helping push the action (to eventually get all in) with a flop bet, we would be up against a narrower, stronger range of hands against V2. But instead, the way we played it by checking flop/betting smaller turn, we should be up against a wider/weaker range of hands as our initially passivity should have served to induce some.

inb4 supposed "pro" is just some random aggro donk clicking buttons with A4s.

His range for calling $35 from the BB is incredibly narrow or he's just not very good.

So he shoves, not a surprise. It does take a couple weak hands that might have raised turn for value out of his range but he could turn those hands into bluffs if he correctly reads hero for the obvious over pair. It's soul read time but really I'm planning to call most bets when I call the turn so I vote call.

The ten is actually a weird card in this situation. Hero now beats a couple more hands by having a higher two pair but potentially some T9/JT type hands are in villain's range also. Overall I think it helps hero more then hurts but it doesn't mean much either way. Hero is mostly losing to sets.

Interesting hand all the way and I enjoyed reading the alternate flop perspectives. Late to the game here, but I would have:

1. 3! more pre, $150+
2. Checked the flop
3. Led more on the turn (pot of ~$450, I lead for $225) and folded to a CR there.

AP, I think Petrucci is right....you have to call now given how we got here because our bet sizing has really under-repped our hand. I would expect to be shown a boat or 98 a good portion of the time though.

A simple hand has been made difficult, so hopefully hero can soul read. Villain should be shoving everything that beats hero, so the question is, will he turn hands like 99 into a bluff here? First he has to be capable of the move, and second, he needs to read hero as being very weak-tight. So, I would let hero image be my guide if I somehow got to this spot.

There are a maximum of six flopped two-pair combos (76, 76, 75, 75, 65, and 65). Those are all pretty weak -EV calls from the BB with the entire table to act in a straddled pot.

If he's got those combos then he also has ATs-T8s of which there are now 12 combos that can be betting for value: AT, KT, QT, JT, T9, T8, AT, KT, QT, JT, T9, T8.

The T objectively favors villain's range rather than helping hero's. And of course he's still got 10 boat/quad combos.

FWIW I think V2 is in UTG+1 (not BB), not that it detracts much from your post.

I read the action as BTN is straddle and therefore SB is UTG, but you're right it doesn't change much.

UTG traditionally means first to act, so UTG+1 could be interpreted to mean the BB here.

Regardless, low suited connectors and especially gappers are pretty bad cold calls here. However, IME the backpackers are generally just very weak “pros” or wannabes and generally play too loose-aggressive. I wouldn’t be suprised by those hands, or a bluff. I’d call off. In theory we should have some hands that call turn and fold river, but in practice villains don’t have balanced give-ups so we should either fold right away or call down.

I would give him 76s before QTs in a 3 bet pot. The 76s is a thin call fishing for a good flop but with a potentially tilted spazz in the game it's possible. QTs is just asking for trouble. It's a great hand to hit one pair and have the second best top pair. JTs and T9s are the only ones as likely as the low ones and they are less likely to raise the turn.

None of the hands you list are entirely discounted without knowing more about villain and all of them are discounted some because they are all thin calls preflop but I still think he shows up with a low two pair more often then TX.

Ah I always thought UTG is one left of BB, but in a technical sense, the way you read it makes sense.