This whole thread has made me to throw-up in my mouth!

Ok have cleaned up a bit, and the piece of info that intrigues me the most is that he knows that you don't have a flush here so therefore he either is bluffing the flopped flush or did indeed flop it.
Given his image and that fact that he is such a siko and could easily make this play I'd call if bankrolled as TC is, but spew everywhere if he had just outed me on the River!
(I think it's very rare he has a straight here unless he R'vd it)

KK with K clubs impossible?

I shove turn and fold river. I think he has QcJx. I also raise flop...

ding ding

with the pot being 25k on the river and eff stacks being 33k, how much are we betting on the river if somehow krantz checks? (i assume we're betting)

haha ec10 is growing on me.

dean, your man crush is weird.

eff stacks are 23k on river

solid slams all around.

Dirty hand, I like the flop raise or/and a turn shove....unless you're calling the turn with the intention of calling the river. I mean there are a lot of scare cards that come off on the turn and to me (from krantz's eyes) it would seem to me that you have almost a drawing hand rather than a made hand (as a made hand would want to protect itself, yes?).

So, sending the signal that you are weaker than you actually are, I prob call, but would def HATE to see a QJc type of hand. That's what I'm afraid of.

I disagree. I think this turn is much more profitable vs a player like Krantz than 95% of hsnlers. However, I think TC severely misplayed the turn. I suspect Krantz has QcJx and is semibluffing with 15 outs in a spot where he could only get reraised by the very top part of TC's range (which he happened to have but failed to make the right play). I really think that if a complete brick hit the river Krantz would be very inclined to check fold making the call/call play pretty awful.

I know who you are so this is not really suggesting you are wrong just probing for info

He is OOP, and KRANTZ if he has KcXc more often than not with a PSB Taylor is folding right behind him, unless he has a pretty nice hand. Being that he 3 Bet PF (has been doing it liberally) and taylor just calls, if he flops the nuts this is a good bluff inducing and drawable bet imo.

both good points. i could definitely bet small on the flop to try to induce some things but being this deep and considering we don't have much history in rred pots i would be betting bigger a vast majority of the time. i likely was just clicking the slider to a random bet between 2/3 and 3/4 pot and not paying much attention on the flop. and if i wasn't paying much attention on the flop then i didn't flop a flush or set. it's interesting to see that in hindsight but unfortunately for tay when the hand is happening it's hard to process that quickly.

BUT all that doesn't rule out the possibility that I could have turned or rivered a set or straight.

Raise flop or raise turn.

As played call river.

And I think there are hands that he valuebets on river worse then a set of tens.

You think he check raises the turn with those hands?

bluffs semibluffs two pair sets straights flushes

having ak here wouldnt be unreasonable

But a player like me or Krantz is gonna have a much less polarized range then 95% of the players.

hate c/ring a hand like AK or bottom 2 on turn this deep. not sure why it would be good in any circumstance really.

Lets not pretend you are ever check raising AxKc on the turn, or 777 for that matter.

i have a suggestion: set up a 500BB deep HU match vs bld. then get back to us with all the crazy stuff he did you wouldn't have expected.

don't be calling out Daniel Alaei Ariel.. can't everyone get along for once?

part that confuses me is statements like:

I mean, surely he's smart enough to know that's how his opponent could interpret his bet size and purposely make that bet size to get more action from hands he wouldn't otherwise? If he knows making that size bet would imply he never has a big hand why can't he just sacrifice some value on the flop to get more action on later streets.

Similar to that was:

If krantz thinks like you do then he'd also agree with you that once TC calls the turn he HAS to call a river bet as well so why would he continue a bluff if he knows his opponent knows he has to call? I don't do HSNL but alot of the time it just seems to me like a guessing game of which level is your opponent on.

For example if you assume Krantz knows TC knows he has to call river all in once calling turn then he could chose not to bluff since he's expecting to get called. But then on that same token, if he knows that TC knows he's expected to call, he could shove all in hoping TC thinks "well krantz knows i have to call here and is still shoving so i'm probably beat and i'll fold". Both plays seem plausible and chosing between the two just seems like guessing to me.

pretty sure bld and krantz are both v capable of this

Then maybe I should accept that 500bb "challenge" lol.

i think krantz could have something like AxKc and be value shoving river...
either that or something like a set of As, Ks, or flush (not as likely)...
or he could be bluffing some hand like AxQc or even like QxQc...

overall, i think a turn push is good and river call is in order

Huh? These are essentially the same hand on the turn so we would expect some sort of divergence in lines when AK hits top2 on the river and AQ still has 1 pr...

FWIW if there's significant doubt about snapcalling the river then I don't really like the flop/turn line, though some people who are familiar w/ Krantz's game seem to think his range is wide enough to call river which would make the turn nice.

However, if that is not the case, then checking the turn (and sitting out next hand maybe, hah!) is fine IMO since you still have lots of options on the river.

Surf