Lots of people who aren't tools ITT.

Standard up to the turn. I agree with tim that the choice between b/c and c/c will depend on the opponent, but I'm b/f a smallish amount >95% of the time probably, for the reasons he mentioned : getting heroed often enough by Ax or some PP and avoid a check behind from most of the valuetownable part of his range.

Once you check and he pots, I fold and I don't even feel dirty or used. This is Kx so often and most likely KhXh which makes perfect sense. At some point in my life I thought I about writing one hundred times on a poster :

LARGE RIVER AGGRESSION FROM RANDOMS IS STRONG

... and sticking it on the wall above my monitor.
I learned that by spewing away in these kinds of spots countless times and by reading your posts sippin I am actually surprised you are not folding the river.

And why anyone would want to b/c (unless he's the wildest ****** ever) is kinda beyond me.

Sigh thread seems like a bit of a train wreck atm. But cool hand to discuss Sipp, thanks for posting it.

^^^That

I think b/c may be our worst option, and b/f clearly our best. Now that we're here I'm alright with hero calling due to spazz factor with parts of his range that would normally check back....but that's the crux of it. Sooo much of his range checks back, but all of those hands are calling bets a lot of the time. If I thought he was smart enough to get leveled (paradox?), maybe I'd bet big, but vs most randos here I'm probably betting 1/2 pottish? maybe a bit more, but not particularly big, and expect him to call a bunch of Ax/pps/whatever and fold sometimes, and raise me very rarely with pure bluffs that aren't a big part of his range, or with some Kx hand that is also presumably not a huge part of his range at the point that we lead the river.

do you really think villain is calling that much? I feel like almost if we bet villain isn't calling with much at all that we beat. I don't think Ax certainly, and low pps are folding out when we bet.

Ok. If anyone cares my quick thoughts

C/C > B/F > C/F > B/C

Up to the river, Villain's line includes non K flush draws, pocket pairs and A2 far far more often than any K-X combo. Sure stuff like KJ flush draw fit but so does missed flush draw. I see pot sized bluffs just as often as value size bluffs. Honestly your line contains a lot of non 2 or K hands so when u check the river it could inspire villain to bluff. He's a random so he could hust be clicking pot to bluff

Also when it is this close its a hell of lot more interesting to call so u can see the result.

check call yeah looks good.

when he flips better pat ur back while realizing ur hand looks like busted flush n u got coolered when he has k.

Been thinking about this a bit and changed my view on these spots. The reason what that i was thinking these c/c and b/f threads always get so many comments, usually:
- someone says b/f (to get value from pps, middle pairs) someone always argues "but yeh then we dont get value from his bluffs (missed draws)"
- someone says c/c (to get value from missed draws, bluffs) someone always argues "but yeh then we dont get value from his med hands (pps, middle pairs) that he checks back.

So let assume that these value arguments cancel each other. That is, whatever line we take we gain and lose value from a portion of villains range. So in terms of value it doesnt matter which line we take. So how do we then decide between c/c and b/f? Well I think this particular hand demonstrates why b/f is probably better in that we get to set the price. The fact that some people are arguing to ch/f the hand in question, clearly demonstrats the problem of not setting our own price - basically we can get put in awkward spots (he pots, overbets pot etc) where we might have to make a puke fold. Therefore I am now thinking b/f is clearly the best line in this spot.

Well one problem u have with B/F over C/C is that you stand a small chance of being bluffed off the hand when you B/F especially if you set the price too low and make your hand look weak. Does that make it even again in your mind again?

Thats why so many of us said its very close between those 2.

That is a good point, but I have an argument against it:

If villain bets a smaller amount, lets say half pot, there is no one folding. So by checking we get additional information, which in this case is that he is more likely to have us beat.

So basically you can do the same as you did above, just this time with "additional info" vs "setting your own price".

I think sippins description of the villain makes it pretty clear he is not capable of thinking on this level.


Yeh good point, however i could counter that by saying that both b/f and c/c give us information. B/F gives us the information that his hand is so strong he is willing to put in another bet... c/c only gives us what information the villain chooses to give us, in which case we are sometimes given information that makes it look like our hand is beat when it isnt - we cant just assume he will bet 1/2 pot with a bluff everytime right? Basically what i am trying to say is i think the information we get when villain raises our bet is better than the information we get by checking and trying to read into his bet sizing. It also makes the river decision a lot easier which is important generally speaking and when u r playing a lot of tables...

I think i would fire potsized barrels both on flop and turn, i feel randoms call them just as wide.

Like b/f this horrid river more then c/c. As played i would fold to this bet, randoms either bluff their missed draws small or shove them if the pot is large enough.

Definitely bet folding here, he's calling every single pp from 33-AA.

When the river comes up Id probably also think of c/c but can we even say this? so when hed would just overpush the pot we had an easy fold and I think this bet size also indicates alot of strength and we could just fold having invested ~200 chips leaving us with ~1100. calling and loosing would leave us with ~700 which is an really anoying stacksize imo when the blind raise to 25/50 because when we dont get anything at this blindlevel we are going to be down at about 500-600 at 50/100 which is quite anoying because we ll have to double up several times. thoughts?

Yupp, line and check-call is fine, but not this size, he surely sent OP to value town. Bet-folding seems awful to me, bc im basically set myself up to get bluffed.

Generally i tend to also check-call in those spots, but almost pot on river from a random is in my experience a pretty good hand.

Interesting hand

I think leading the river for about 200-220 is the best option. I think leading the river is better because you get value from his PP's, and 5's, you chop with any 2's in his range, and he doesn't have a K very often if you break down his range. Even the times he does have a King, you have an easier river decision because he will obv re-raise and you will know where you are in the hand.

If you check and he barrels the river, it puts you in an awkward spot. He can be bluffing with his missed heart draws, or he can have a boat. He will check back all his medium strength hands which you didn't get a chance to get any value from. When you lead the river, its unlikely he will be bluff re-raising with his heart draws now, he will either be re-raising you back with his higher boats, or he will be calling with his medium strength hands which is good for us.

As played I dont think you can just call the river with your stack size because you will be crippled if you are wrong, I would either be folding or jamming for value.

Well written. Except I can't see ever advocating jamming for value. Nobody is calling a 3bet river check/raised jam with a worse hand unless they hit the wrong key

I think they are at least somewhat likely to call reasonably sized bets, simply assuming that they chop a lot with ace high here or cause "zomg 66 just has to be good!" Even if they aren't they are surely more likely to call than to bet when you check. Don't think they have to be calling bets all that often to make leading the best line. If you're comfortable with your ability to appropriately estimate a good bet size I think betting will be best. (ie sure if youre going to try to over bet bomb it here with no good reason you're going to run into some problems, but I'm operating under the assumption that ppl aren't jumping to these conclusions when reading the above posts).