5/10 NL at the Bellagio. I have about 280 BBs here and Villain covers.

Villain is a young guy, playing pretty standard poker for the most part, seems like a pretty solid online grinder in town for the WSOP.

Relevant previous hand:

I made a huge hero call in a 3bet pot against another younger, aggressive player and Villain was definitely paying attention.

Young player Iso'd over an EP limper from MP to 50. I 3bet to 125 with KTo with the Kd from LP.

Flop came Qd8d8s. He checks. I bet 1/3 pot he calls. Pot now ~400
Turn came Ts. He led out for ~250 and I called. Pot now ~900 with about 1 PSB behind.
River is a low diamond. Something like 3d. Young player jams and I tank and make the hero call having the Kd blocker. Young player turns over the A9 with the naked Ad.

Hand in question:

Villain opens from EP to 30. I 3bet to 80 with JsJc. A fishy player cold calls out of the SB and villain calls as well.

Pot is 250 at this point. Flop comes 7s6d5d. Checks to me and I check back for pot control.

River is the Jd completing the flush and giving me top set. Checks to me again and I bet 150. Fishy player calls and Villain raises to 550. I call and fishy player folds.

River is Ts. Pot is 1500 at this point and I have ~2200 behind and villain covers. Villain jams. Hero?

Villain's value range is pretty exclusively the nuts here, but feels like another good spot to bluff with the naked Ad. JJ is pretty much the top of my range here so feels like I have to call. On the other hand, maybe better hands to call with are overpairs with a diamond blocker. And maybe since he saw me make a previous hero call, I should just fold knowing that villain knows I'm capable of making big hero calls.

Thoughts?

mostly disagree V is polarized to nuts here, he should have many flushes.

i think 3b sizing is too small pre, lets V continue with a lot of hands that have you beat; stuff like Axss, multi-gap suited cards that usually constitute 4b bluffs now can profitably just flat pre.

as a result I think we should consider a fold OTR

edit: just realized i assigned you the button; we don’t have your position?

well if sb cold calls hes obv ip

¿ranges are v different ep vs ep or ep vs button?

I was in Hijack if I recall correctly

i dont think this is the top of your range - you should have some flush-draw check-backs OTF

Villain knows you never have a big hand here with your line. Given that, he can push with 100% of his range if you aren’t calling. At best, you have QT diamonds ~10% of the time almost never a set and never a straight.

If you aren’t calling here, what do you call with? I mean, the spot is tough but this looks exploitable and this guy fits the description of capable.

I think after your call in the first hand it makes it less likely he is going to try to bluff you here. I think he is definitely going to jam that river with lower sets, straights, and flushes. I think it comes down to this, if you think he expects you to fold aces on the river then you should call.

If he thinks that you would call with aces on the river, which in my opinion is likely what he thinks, then you should probably fold.You'll often only have a naked diamond yourself, meaning he gets the most value from his most of his semi bluffing hands (hands like a pair plus draw) by checking and allowing you to bluff. With his big made hands its definitely best for him to polarize himself by shoving because you've shown you're willing to make big calls.

In response to the first hand, villains lead for $250 is so weird. It seems like each day I see more people leading into the initial raiser. I'm still not used to it at all, and honestly it always confuses me. I need to fix that, if it's going to happen with increasing frequency.

Second hand, grudgingly fold I guess? I'd need to know more about villain. River jam sure does smell like a flush though. Maybe he had 89 and turned it into some kind of ****ed up v-bet/river bluff, since he's a fish? I just don't know what you can beat there, really, which sucks because JJ is the top of your range in that spot.

Top of your range could be a big flush no? This is honestly a real tough fold. I think you were probably beat but probably couldn't get off hand right? I think I probably call but know um beat like a dope.

This would purely be instinctual for me so I can really give you my honest assessment. Some players I snap some I fold some I tank and probably call after a thinking it out. Trip Jacks are toward the top of your range but not the top in my opinion.

I also might raise a little more with jacks with so many players behind me. Thats one thing I may have done differently. Maybe more like 100. Not that's its a huge difference but you may shake out a 7/8 8/9 suited hand (s)

Final thought- you still have 220 BB's left if you fold and can I assume you started with 200? Something that would cross my mind.

Yea really depends on villian. Tough spot. Can you give us any more info, OP?

Very easy fold. Villain never jams 220bbs into a 150bb pot on this board with a set. He's repping exclusively flushes here, and we have no flush blockers.

In addition to that, we have plenty of flushes in our range that check back this flop. We don't usually want to Cbet our flush draws on this board texture. So that means we can call with flushes and fold everything else.

I dont think its a very easy fold. Hes got bluffs in his range. Have to call here occasionally for the long run. This is why I am asking for more details of the player, the night, the track record between the villian and hero, gut feeling etc. I think this is the time when you sniff out a bluff and go for it. I am torn. Not an easy fold I dont think.

call and then put the keys to your car on the table to raise

Like I said, we've got flushes in our range to call with. You never want to call a polarised river bet with a non-nutted hand that unblocks the value hands that he's representing.

And if you don't have flushes in your range, then you need to work on your flop Cbet strategy.

Even expert players have a tendency to bet nutted hands in convenient to call bet sizing amounts, e.g. $75, 100, or in this case exactly $400 more on the turn.

He just saw you make a huge hero call and knows you have a penchant for it. Why would he do this as a a bluff knowing that?

He has a smaller to mid flush and is taking you to max value town. Fold river.

Yes you could conceivably have good flushes in your range but unless he has observed you check back the flop with such draws he won't give you credit for it.

If you are playing optimally you should have enough flushes in this spot to find an easy fold in a 3 way pot

Thats the key- 3 way. That makes me lean toward fold. I dont mind a call if you have a feeling though.

Villain flipped over AQ for the nut flush. I think it’s a fold in hindsight.

If he saw you make a hero call earlier and hes a good player its an easy fold. Its hard to make a call not knowing the table. Its all about the player/history here imo. Tough situation especially deep.

Raising turn + shoving river + previous hand = fold. I know it's tough in the moment, but this is a clear spot to muck imo.

I strongly disagree with ppl saying you have to call, top of your range etc. That's not playing poker and good players will slaughter you if you think that way.

If you never check back any FDs (most of which will be nuttish, in your 3betting range) that would inherently be the first problem. The second problem is that I think you're ignoring concrete information in favor of speculation and wanting to be in control of the hand. 1. If you trusted your read that this was a solid player who had a reasonable level of awareness, that confirms that he has very little incentive to be getting OOL here. He's in a multi-way pot with a perceived fish and a player who has demonstrated that they are capable of making 'big' calls under the right circumstances. Most decent players in this spot are going to be heavily weighted towards value because there is little incentive to be bluffing, and certainly not a spot where V will ever be betting a worse hand this aggressively. I highly disagree with people saying that you are obligated to call, and i'm even in some disagreement with people who think that this has to be a demanding/challenging spot - when, if you are able to be present in the moment, and trust yourself and the information which you have the ability to interpret correctly - this fold becomes quite simple. I think it's quite possible in this spot that you allowed a very subtle but malicious form of tilt to sink in - in which you stop trusting yourself and start rationalizing (i'm top of range, phantom bluffs, etc.) as a means of regaining control.

I don't know how much it's regaining control vs. the simple fact that folding top set sucks, and I try to talk myself into calls in these situations.

There's some great content by Nick Howard and his training site that talks about WHY we rationalize against our instincts - and the conclusion that it often boils down to is our subconscious need to be in control of our situation. When you get into these spots where you're top of your range and expecting to win the hand quite often - and then your opponent goes over the top or exhibits aggression, you are no longer in control of the outcome of the hand - somebody else has decided that for you, all there is to do now is let it go and move onto the next hand. But as a competitive person (which i'm sure you are) we start rationalizing into ways that we can somehow win this hand. You can simplify this down to just needing 'better discipline' or 'willingness to fold to top of range' in the right spots. But if you take it one step further it's about truly being able to trust yourself and not trying to find reasons to fight when you know the hand is lost. I know that this is probably a much more meta/deeper context than what you posted the hand for, if you were just looking for technical analysis of what you should be doing here. I suppose my bottom line is just to explore the possibility that this is in fact a mental game problem and not a technical one. Best of luck to you man!

Great posts, xtian. I totally agree with your whole train of thought here. Well said.