I came to realize that in many situations i failed to to get maximum value.
For example this hand I played in a 3$ SNG 9 player, regular.
Blind 75/150: everyone fold, SB (3500 chips) called. I am on BB (3000 chips) with Ad6d. I checked. SB is weak, tend to bluff small and slowed down if called.
Flop: 2d 5d 8d. SB bet 150. I called. Pot:600
Turn: Jd. SB bet 150. I raise to 450. SB called. Pot: 1500
River: 5c. SB bet 1000. Somehow I was stupid enough to just call.
SB showed a tiny flush. I missed out his whole stack here cause he was calling anything.
I am not sure why I was being such a nit. Or maybe I was overly excited to flop such a huge hand at that stage of the SNG. Paired board at this point should not pose a problem.
Any advice to fix this?
Thanks

sounds like you already fixed it

Thanks. i am trying to fix it. wondering whats the thought process behind making the value bet?

For a beginning player, the simplest way to think about river value bets is the bolded. The rest is just details.

1) If I am ahead and I bet and he folds, it doesn't matter, I just get the same money I would get by making the bet.

2) I make or lose money if I bet and he calls. So do I get called by a hand that I beat more often than I get called by a hand that beats me?

3) If I fold when re-raised, by a better hand it's the same as if he had merely called (I lose the bet I put in), but does he have any bluffs I'm also going to be folding to? - in effect they also count as better hands for the purpose of 2).

4) If I am out of position, and the other option is check-calling, it's irrelevant how many of his hands beat us (with the proviso that there are not so many we can just check-fold) as we lose 1 bet to those hands whatever - it's more important whether villains will bet more hands we beat (e.g. bluffs) or will call more hands we beat (e.g. bluff catchers).

Not everyone agrees 4) is properly classed as a value bet - but IMHO it should be because as part of balanced play its balanced by a bluff not a pure value bet.

On earlier streets its similar but there are considerations like semi-bluffing and protection.

Start by assigning him a range on the river. List every hand you think he arrives to the river with and plays that way. When you analyze it on context of earlier streets you'll often be able to remove a lot of hands and that will give you more clarity on what his range looks like and once you have that information your decision becomes pretty easy!

On the end here, sure he has half a handful of full houses, but he's also got a pile of flushes that will never fold. Once you analyze it and see how many possible combos of flushes that he can call with compared to how many full houses he has that beat you it becomes simple.

Assigning ranges is very tricky for an intermediate player to do, but you only improve it by doing it. Keep posting hands and try to be thorough on the ranges you assign your opponents and then forum members and poker buddies can perhaps give you guidance in spots where you're incorrectly assigning ranges. You'll only get better and a whole new world will be opened up to you.

well said

I'm a beginner myself and haven't delved into ranges yet (I mean I do it, but not thoroughly and by writing it down ... I quickly go through a spot in my head and ask myself what hand combinations are more likely than the others given the action so far).

Here I'd say just by the looks of things it's much much more likely that he has a hand which you beat than the other way around. Weak players (often found in micro stakes) like to call to see if their (often times weak) made hand is good or if they will get their weak draw.

If he by some miracle has 22, 88 or (even less likely) 55, so be it. JJ is unlikely unless he was trapping preflop. The other combinations seem so trashy that even a weak player would intuitively know they are trash (is he playing 52, 85 or the like?) and, more often times than not, not play them.

If a weak player sees a monochrome board and holds 1 card of the suit, he is not letting go unless it is like a deuce or something.

I'd say villain here almost always has a diamond in his hand or a piece of the board he can't let go. I'd always raise all in on the river.

Since I've never done this, no matter how flawed/incomplete this "analysis", I think it will help me improve greatly and I would appreciate it if someone just skimmed over it to see that there are no obvious mistakes (using combos in practice is new to me). Hopefully there is some value in this for OP as well.

Anyhow, in my previous post I wrote that I think it's "much much" more likely he has a flush than a full house. I'd just like to briefly list a few hands that beat us and a few that we beat to see if we have a clear call on the river (and back up my claim?). I would do a thorough analysis like sippin_criss said if I knew how but I really don't know where to start and how to develop the whole thought process in a coherent manner from beginning to end.

Anyway, we are faced with a bet on the river. OP has said villain is weak and usually gives up after a bluff attempt on the flop so he surely has a hand he likes a lot (he likes it so much that he would probably call an all in given the action).

Given the board let's list the combinations of hands that beat us:

22 (one deuce is on the board which leaves: ) - 3 combos
55 (two fives are on the board which leaves: ) - 1 combo
JJ (one jack is on the board which leaves: ) - 3 combos
88 (one eight is on the board which leaves: ) - 3 combos
52 - 6 combos
85 - 6 combos
J5 - 6 combos

On the river our hand is beat by 28 combos. Of these let's rule out 52 (utter trash preflop), 88 and JJ (would raise preflop?). That leaves us with 28-12=16 combinations. If villain is a calling station, he could presumably play all of these hands like he did (perhaps he's not letting go of 2 pair on the turn even without a diamond).

However, he would also do this with many hands that we beat. I have no clue how to list them all, but let's just look at a few.

He would bet small on the flop with a 1-card flush draw (perhaps with a pair) and he would call a raise on the turn (I has flush!), then bet the river (I still has flush!) for "value".

There are 7 diamonds left (13 minus 4 on board, 2 in our hand): Kd, Qd, Td, 9d, 7d, 4d, 3d

9d 8x (pair + flush draw) - 3 combos
Td 8x (pair + flush draw) - 3 combos
Qd 8x (pair + flush draw) - 3 combos
Td 9x (overcards + flush draw) - 4 combos
8x 7d (pair + flush draw) - 3 combos

We are already at 16 combos.

Simply by taking a brief look at the combos that would make a flush by the turn, limp in preflop and bet small on the flop (blocker bet) we immediately see there are more combos of those than there are of full houses (not to mention 2 pair type hands or other hands that he could have).

Even if we presume that he would play all of the hands that beat us on the river (limping JJ, 52 ...) there are still more combos of hands that we beat.

To not make this a longer post as it already is ... Is there any value in my post? Is thinking like this a good start for a beginner? Are there any obvious mistakes?

Hope OP doesn't mind the hijack.

That's roughly how to do it. The key question though in deciding whether to value raise is whether all these hands will call a raise. It doesn't help being ahead of 8x7d if he's not calling it.

In the specific hand I'd say he doesn't need a pair on the flop to play like this. If you're "scaling" the FH combos back up to full value (given all hands could have played in all sorts of ways on this board he actually only has a fraction of each combo but it maybe cancels out) the he could have pretty maybe 30 random combos of KdX, the same of QdX etc. Actually I'd say the turn line is weird with a set and you should discount them relative to other combos. You pick this up with experience though.

In terms of approach, really it makes more sense to start the other way round, i.e. start with all combos from preflop and remove combos as they become inconsistent with his actions as it better mirrors the approach you should be following through the streets in game.

I always find it hard in a hand like this as I hardly ever complete from the SB so you need to get into the Villain's head and of course the sheer number of hands he has makes it hard.

keep the ideas flowing in. i don't mind picking ur guys' brain