5-5 with BTN straddle

SB folds. BB folds. UTG limps. LAG fish raises to 35. Fish calls. Nit calls. I call CO with KQJ9. BTN and UTG call.

LAG fish is stuck a lot, and he’s raising every hand pre. I bluffed him much earlier and showed. Right now he sees me as pretty tight-solid and doesn’t want to give me action.

220 in the pot

Flop T96o

LAG fish bets 110. Fish calls. I call.

Turn 7dd

LAG fish bets 125. Fish calls. I raise to 700. LAG fish calls. Fish folds.

River 3o

LAG fish checks. I shove for 1100.

I don't understand why you'd want to call the flop, when you have the highest equity with two cards to come and no fd out there and all your outs to the nuts, and then raise the turn which completes a second straight and puts a flush draw out there? You can just take your equity getting almost 7-1 on your ~8 nut outs.

As to the question of the title, sure, lag fish fold sometimes, some of them more than others, you just need to know your audience.

Why did you show him earlier when you bluffed him? If you do that, and you need a good reason to do so, such as a history of him tilting when being shown a bluff, the next time you make such a bet, it really ought to be for value.

Because you're supposed to jam the second nuts here in order to push people off a chop, people are more inclined to call the second nuts here, which is a pretty sizeable portion of his range.

I felt reasonably certain that both their ranges were capped at sets on the turn based on play history and bet sizing. LAG fish could be as weak as two pair or top pair plus a weak draw. That’s why I decided to attack.

I’ve only been playing a few months. I don’t have a full understanding of equities. My fear on the flop was getting re-potted and having to make a close decision between call and fold. The flop was 6-ways, so in my mind at the time, someone must have the nuts.

Now I realize that I’m a favorite on the flop against top set or the nut straight with no redraws. Therefore I should be thrilled to play for stacks on the flop.

(I was a little woozy after the hand. I couldn’t remember if the two diamonds were on the flop or on the turn. I’m not sure if that changes the flop decision.)

No, you're not a favourite against top set, you're like 45% against it, and close enough to 50% against the bare straight.

Though a few sets come as part of a two pair hand, most sets come from hands like 9987 or similar. I.E when either of them have a set, it's very likely they either have the straight too, or a blocker, and/or a draw to the same straight themselves. People don't like folding sets when they come with any extras whatsoever. Moreover, on a board with a straight draw on it, people play their straights more snugly than if there's only 4 outs for it to be beat to a higher straight on the turn, so I don't think you should be capping their ranges at sets at all. Not to mention that people play those paired hands less frequently when they're middling rather than high; though of course this is live and people play wildly loose sometimes, that effect is still in play as people would likely never fold a hand like KQQ9ss or whatever, but some will find a fold with 9985 or something, so sets turn up more frequently the higher the board.

I should probably give this hand a little better context. The LAG fish's $35 raise pre with no 3-bets basically makes this a limped pot in this game.

The LAG fish cold-called a 4-bet pre not long ago with QQ75ddd. In another hand, he also snapped off a $1,500 bet with a 5-high flush on the river against the tightest player at the table in a multi-way dry pot (and lost to the nuts, of course).

I could be totally wrong, but my read was that LAG fish wouldn't bet 125 into 550 on the turn if he had a straight. In his mind, any straight is the nuts. And if someone has J8, he's just going to pay it off.

The other fish (reg) could have the second-nut straight. But I also feel like he (and everyone else) was very aware of the LAG fish's super wide ranges. So he'd raise the LAG fish's micro bet on the turn with the second-nut straight. Again, I could be totally wrong.

If they had both checked the turn, I think I would've checked back and taken the free card. But when the LAG fish bet 125 into 550 and the other fish called, my gut was just screaming at me to attack this bet.

Your gut is not very good at poker. Not to say never pay attention to it, but be wary of what it advises, and pay more attention to the brain.

Pot get it in on the flop, I suck at math but we probably have 50% 3 ways vs anything.

As played;

Think just call the turn bro the hand has gotten away from you but still have plenty of equity and I’ve dug plenty of holes for myself i spots like this with blockers before.

Honestly I don’t think river matters much, give up is all good imho there’s a tiny chance we win at showdown and honestly when he flats turn alarm bells should be going off.

Jam is fine you're repping nuts on turn and nothing changed but I think you get called here a bunch.

So when you add to the Vs history we see multiple calls with weak hands including calling the person you call the tightest at the table. There are LAGs you bluff but this one you don't.

He tanked for five minutes and eventually called with TT72. I almost got away with it!

It sounds like raising the turn is fundamentally very bad. I'd have to be very sure of my read to make raising more profitable than calling.

I ran an $1,800 bluff when I could've just called and seen my equity for $125. That hurts a bit.

I wouldn't focus too much on those last two sentences, it will cause you pain that's only necessary if you can learn from it.

Bluff-raising the turn could still be +ev. But because calling is +++ev, you need far more solid reads and reasons to bluff.

I would think a LAG fish who's raising a lot is probably under folding as well, so really the last person you'd want to bluff. I think under normal circumstances this is not a bad spot given you have equity, but the fact that he called you with TT shows you shouldn't be bluffing a guy like this.

Long term +ev move if you get to play with this guy a lot.

Keep showing him little bluffs and just pot and repot with nuts in spaz situations that make no sense and print.

No, don't show him bluffs unless you know it will tilt him.

Think this should be don't show unless you understand how you will net profit from it. There are players I show the first time when I am not bluffing telling them "good fold", I then show them roughly 1/3rd of the time when not bluffing. Their frequency of calls after a few hours shows they are basing their calling frequency on the belief every no show was a bluff.