early in one table sng so everyone has big stacks. UTG min raises. middle position calls I call with 3d 4d on button. both blinds fold. FLOP:


3s 5d 9d

UTG min bets, middle position calls, I min raise to 2 bb's - both call. TURN:

Ac

both check to me, I bet 2 bb's. UTG calls - middle position folds. RIVER:

Jd

UTG checks, I check. I win with Flush.

Now it gets interesting. Someone said that I should have value betted the river. Someone else chimes in that I played the whole hand badly and left a lot of value on the table; and definitely should have value bet the river. Everyone pretty much agrees that I should have value bet the river. UTG refuses to say what he had or how he would have responded to a bet. I explained my thinking at each street: I raised on the flop because I might have the best hand but mostly to get a free card on the turn. I had UTG on 2 over cards or a middle pair and thought either one of them might have a bigger flush draw. When the Ac came on the turn I decided to bet on the turn to find out where I was but mostly because I decided that if I checked as planned and show weakness I might end up laying down the best hand on the river to a big over bet. On the river I figured I had 3 choices:

A. big bet

B. small to medium bet

C. check


on A. I figured I'd only get called by a better hand

on B. I thought I might have to lay down the best hand if he check raised over the top (I still had him on a bigger flush)


or C. which I chose


Looking back I don't have a problem with my logic on any street but everyone disagrees with me?

I have a lot of disagreements! If you do decide to play speculative hands, then you have to get value when you make your hand. Other than that I probably play every street differently!

If he was UTG and you were BTN how didn't you get to see his cards?

Your post has met with some disagreement don't let it deter you from posting!

Street by street:

- probably fold preflop but call isn't terrible if you're going to extract value when you hit

- you flop bottom pair with flush draw and backdoor straight draw and face a tiny bet and a call on a board that shouldn't do that much for UTG in particular. Whilst you may sometimes have the best hand it is bottom pair no kicker and the value of your hand comes from the draws you hold. When you improve you're frequently going to have the best hand but if all the chips go in you're probably beat. A diamond, 2, 6, 3, 4 and to some extent 7 and ace on the turn would give you some equity so taking the very cheap price offered and trying to hit your draw makes most sense to me here, plus we are in early stages of an STT and shouldn't want to build a big pot in this spot

I don't think there is a strong case for raising here, and if there were I'm confident it would need to be for a larger sizing than the min-raise used. The min raise here reopens the betting and gives the villains the chance to deny you seeing the next card and also slightly bloats the pot - both outcomes which are undesirable for us. Your raise here doesn't serve well as a value bet, bluff or for protection which indicates it is not a good bet

- on the turn much of the flop logic applies but the Ace may have helped one of the villains and your pair of 3s is now worth even less - even after the action checks to you. Your plan on the flop was to get a free card and the opportunity is now there so take it and try to hit your draw

- the river gives you a very good but not unbeatable hand when the most obvious draw gets there. When villain checks to you you have to bet it for value. Villain has shown little strength but still continued thus far amongst these small bets and whilst he can have some flushes (all of which beat yours) he often will raise the best of these and you can pretty comfortably fold if he does. I don't think many players are check-raising with a bluff very often here so wouldn't be too worried about that possibility. He will also have many marginal hands that he may call a bet with (rightly or wrongly), often a weak Ace, 9, J or similar. There are enough of these hands to justify a bet - so it's about picking the right size. If you started with 75bb effective then the pot is about 17.5bb and there is about 69bb effective. A shove is a massive overbet and would probably only be called by better so is not suitable. *All* of those hands may call a minbet but that doesn't make it the right size either. Without further reads on the player I would bet about 33%-40% pot, figuring that this villain has a marginal hand like those listed above but has displayed weak and passive tendencies during the hand that could compel him to pay it off. I think even weak players may start to fold more as the sizing ramps up beyond that point. Of course if he has a weak flush (which he should rarely have from UTG but it isn't inconceivable) he will often just call. To be a profitable value bet it needs at least half of the calls to come from worse hands - and I think with the villain's range and the suggested sizing this will comfortably be the case

I think failing to bet the river at all when you finally made the hand was the biggest mistake here. Next time I'd just fold it pre

Short on time yesterday. Above post pretty much says it all... very good advice. My main criticism is you took a high implied odds hand (which likes high stack to pot ratios) and reduced your spr. Your thought process is on the right track. I don’t agree with raise flop (would be good for you to consider why!) but at least your reason on buying a cheap turn is a consideration. When this actually happened, stick to your plan. Take the free turn. I don’t think you have any higher fold equity so you just build the pot for no reason.

If you are unable to bet flushes for value, then we definitely need to be folding pre flop. The value in playing these hands comes from flushes and straights, you hit your flush and check because its too vulnerable. So perhaps we fold hands that we're not comfortable playing post flop.