Not sure if you mean me as V1 or what I would do if I were here.

If you don't have 44

You are underestimating your equity OTT vs. villian's ranges. We are getting 18:1 with a set and usually a 5 and obv. a 4 will scoop. With even 9% equity we have to see the river.

What bother me the most is , if we fold this hand for 1 bet on the turn we simply have no hands to call with for 1 bet back to us.
Every better hand we would of jam the flop...

And saying we draw to 1 out in 18-1 spot is a pretty big assumption imo.
In big pot I see sometime some play that makes no sense .
I mean around 5-7% of the time does not take much to be wrong.

When I'm calling flop, i expected to see something like this happening, if I would fold now for 1 bet , it is pretty clear the flop call was a mistake.

Ps: if we really have 1 out, shouldn't we get some value (beside winning the pot) when we hit the river for tilting your opponents for later hands

You're just wrong about this, if you're meaning if V1 had just called the turn raise. I know because I was V1. I actually had flopped the nut straight, so I reraised, and hero was correct to call. If I had just called the raise, the only thing I could have had would have been 9 combos of bigger sets, and possibly one 2 pair combo, as mentioned earlier. Actually the turn card may have been the 4 of hearts instead, in which case I would not even have had any 2 pair combos, but I made it a diamond here to give hero as many outs as possible, and it still comes up to just 1.1.

My whole point is how the range changes depending on whether I call or reraise. If I reraise I have a straight and hero is very live. If I just call hero almost always has only one out.

I'm not sure why this matters, but I think hero should have lots of medium card flush draws that would not have 3-bet the flop - why would he want to push out the early position players and lower the odds of his draw? The better play would be to call the 2 bets on the flop, and then call any bets on the turn.

V2 can easily have any 8x hand when he raises the turn. It's probably the first hand I'd put him on.

V1 can also easily have the naked 8x when he calls the turn. Why not? Seems like a totally normal way to play, say, 87 or 88 on this texture. A lot of players don't automatically re-raise the turn to charge draws, especially when there is a risk that someone else is freerolling you or a possibility that hero has a made hand that will overcall river UI.

Not sure if you're trying to say you disagree me here or not. I definitely think V2 had 8x. And yes, V2 would 3-bet with 8x, so hero should call. But if V2 does not have 8x, that basically means he has a bigger set, and he will not 3-bet, so hero should fold.

Well, you just changed your post to disagree with me after I replied and quoted your original version. And no, V1 cannot have 8x when he calls the turn. As you said pre-revision, he would raise to charge hero even knowing he was splitting the pot with V2 (and especially if he had a flush draw to go along with it).

You can't have a hand like 87, 86, or 76 here when you flat call the turn raise? Sorry but just b/c you call two bets on the turn doesn't narrow your range to higher sets. Set over set just doesn't happen that often and two pair hands still have enough equity to call the turn raise. Especially given the extra bets they will earn when when they fill up.

Nope, only 76 if I also had a flush draw, or I would have checked the turn, so I gave that one possible combo. I would have definitely 3-bet 87. If I somehow could have had 86 I would have 3-bet that as well, but actually I would have folded it preflop.

Ok that's fine chillrob but a lot of play you advocate seem to concern you as v1.
But even tho you seem to advocate your line of actions as standard, from my pov I might not jam only 1 card straight for example on the turn or with only 2 pair ....

That might explain why we don't see this hand the same way for the person holding 44.

Sure, other people might have played the hand differently than me, but I think most live 20/40 players would 3-bet the turn with any straight and just call the raise with weaker hands. And I described myself as the villain pretty well.

Of course this is a very unusual hand, and an even more unusual turn spot; I'm not saying it will be applicable many times. I just found it interesting because it was unusual. But I do think there is a greater lesson here; even though saving bets seems to be passe in this forum, if you can occasionally put players on a very small range, you can save yourself some bets.

I realized I misread the action. Not trying to be difficult.

I didn't think you were trying to be difficult, but I think you read the situation absolutely right the first time, then realized it didn't support the conclusion you were predisposed to support (ie not folding a good hand for one bet in a big pot).

You dont need stove to figure out this flop is a fold. If UtG opems 2 cold calls amd you have 97o on the button would you say its a fold or you need to stove it?

Once we know villian 1 is an older white guy thats super nitty and playing for a living we dont need stove. He has sets, 88-99 and like Ac9c at worst

I was the hero in this hand and made a marginal flop call. It's probably bad, but I think it's close either way.

I agree with chillrob that the turn is an interesting spot. And because he 3 bet I was able to narrow his range to exactly 3 combos of 89s and V2 to 8x, which made the turn an easy call for me. It also made the river an easy raise when the board paired and I got to win a big pot.

You know what they say, "play bad, get lucky."

It's an oldie but a goodie post. The classic post a hand where me make a mistake followed by the gotcha reveal, we are actually the hero and villain is another 2+2er