Hand 1. 4man final table. Villain seemed an okay player. Loose on the btn, tight oop (VPIP 34%, 3bet 12%). He has played fairly straightforward postflop so far and been on a passive side, although we're still early in the game.

So when he c/r on the flop, I flatted because I wanted to keep his bluff, FD and 6x in the range that might continue on turn - maybe smallish 3bet was better?

Turn is not the card I really wanted to see, but it gets interesting when he checks to us. Still, I thought betting this turn was a bit thin, since I might be getting value only from Ax and FD, which might fold anyway a decent amount of time.

River is.. well, what would you do here? His line makes sense for a flush or 6x, even Jx. I just couldn't see many hands I beat that take this line.. is this an easy fold, or would you sometimes call here?



Hand 2. Villain is a winning (but very leaky) reg at $30 reg speed. He's opening wide on the button (VPIP 88%, limp 9%) and a bit loose oop too (VPIP 56%, 3bet 26%), spewing monkey 3-betting from time to time. I've been 3-betting him quite a bit in this match (but much less in previous matches), and expect his 3-bet calling range to be reasonably tight.

The question here boils down to river decision. Flush draw missed, AQ and Q9 got there on turn (although I'm sure his 4-betting AQ all day), not much change for (most) Kx and now I'm beating KT, Jx now became trips.

Obviously my plan on flop and turn was to shove on river (slightly less than psb), but on that specific river I thought about checking too and kind of hesitated between these two options. The reason why I considered checking was that the only hands that might call are Kx, namely KQ, KT and maybe K9. Jx and better are obv never folding, and busted FD *might* be shoving when checked to.

I talked about this hand with many people and their opinions kinda diverged, although I was surprised to see that many of them were advocating c/c or even c/f on the river for the reasons mentioned above. I'm still thinking that might be too nitty, but am not quite sure about it.

Any thoughts and inputs are much appreciated.

Hand 1:

Raise 2.5x or 3x pre, as played call river. You are probably be but villain can also show up with Ax and Tx combos as well as 77 - JJ.

Hand 2:

I am shoving because the only hands that beat you are Jx, TT, 33, AQ, Q9. The way its played I could see villain having something like KT or Kxhh.

hand 1:
call river

hand 2:
given limited info on villian
c/call or b/call

wtf. why do people always give advice on preflop sizings. obviously we want to raise a different sizing than usual so that villain will play more cautiously and call with a lot less hands.

At the current blind level 2.5x or 3x is a good play. I am not saying just on this hand. I mean on this blind level. ldo we want villain to call wide and play like a ****ing fish.

Snapping the river in hand 1. Shoving hand 2 on river.

Bet sizing pre is definetly fine. 2xing is standard on that blind level

@ up

lol no, we're so effin deep that a minraise is almost never optimal.
However, given this opponent is v tight OOP it's kinda standard.

as played i really dont see why you guys want to call the river in hand 1.
Usually if he wanted to bluff, he'd bet the turn to take down the pot. We're almost always beat here.

Clear shove river hand 2

This doesn't make sense ,it doesnt make sense at all to give that advice, and tbh it is quite useless advice in these hands.

Obviously not, DUCY?

Hand 1 is debatable I think. Hand 2 = ezshove

Wouldn't they mostly raise the flop?
The only hand we beat that makes really sense here imo, is KQ.

Uhh if villain is playing tight OOP its better to mr to get max value out of his fold equity. If they are loose you mr because they can 3b a high % and if that flat tons, you play lots of small pots, all this 2.5x 3x **** is a ******ed debate.

lol @ hand2 ezshove. Might be a shove, but it's def at least close, especially if the only Kx in his flatting range is K9-KQ and a ton of that raises flop or turn when turn gets drawier.

LOLWAT?

1) Fold
2) Jam

Oh ****, I didn't notice it was a deepstack sng. Definitely 3xing here as standard.

Now that I see it's a deepstack sng I feel it's more like a snappitysnap call on the river though. I can't explain why, so i'm probably wrong. Just don't like his line at all.
I have seen people show up with the strangest of hands too many times when i've been checkraised on this kind of flop to give him credit on the river when played like this.

the sarcasm, do you not see?

rofl

Thanks for all advice guys. It's always nice to see much more replies than expected

As for hand #1, I don't see a lot of difference in 2x'ing and 3x'ing preflop against this type of player. Since he has been rather tight OOP, I thought I could just switch to min raise, and frankly this was not the key point of this thread.

To those who say call on the river, what hands are you putting him on? He could have some pocket pairs in his range, but most of them (99+, maybe 88+) goes to 3-betting range imo, plus I am not quite sure if he will play those like this when I could easily have those hands beat. I don't know, his line didn't make much sense as a bluff and I sigh folded in game, but once again I don't have much experience in these spots and would like to hear more from you guys.

On the other hand, hand #2 looks a LOT closer than I first thought it is. I'm still thinking there are a bit more Kx in his range, partly because that the running jacks make it less likely for him to have Jx. Realistically, we're only beating KQ and K9 (26 combos in total) though because AK would most likely 4-bet pre, KJ beats us and KT would often raise on flop. And we're losing to all Jx, namely AJ, KJ, QJ and JT plus *some* J9 (about 24 combos, if we assume JT is raising on turn a reasonable amount). Of course there are more hands that we beat (air, FD, AT, etc.) or beat us (AQ, Q9, set, etc.) but they should pretty much even out I think?

More inputs please!