https://www.weaktight.com/h/55f6b118d3904381638b46d7

Villain is unknown fish.
Want to potcontrol the River.
Not sure if he can shove 1/3 bluffs otr like TX.
What you guys think ?

Bet/call the turn. As played, snap call.

An unknown fish probably has the equivalent of 10 combos of worse so you can't fold.

Bet calling turn isn't all that great, I would play the same after raising the flop.

i fold river, you are hopeing for AT and AK only and he is not bluffing them all the time.

also he is not valuebetting worse.

betting the turn is pretty thin, i guess you could do it depending on his small flop bet.

your saying villain is showing up with worse on the river..

+1

You absolutely don`t want to give a freecard on the turn with this hand + there is tons of value vs. many Pair + draw type hands, stubborn AQ, etc.

We have top 2 pair against a fish in a 3b pot. I am fist pumping getting the money in and I don't care that a flush draw got there. You guys think the donk is going to fold KK AA AQ KQ on the turn? This is not how donks play.

Only upside to checking is that you let him bluff his AK AT T9 stuff which is not nearly enough of a reason IMO. But now that you've taken that line you should capture that bluff on a good run out. I wouldn't be shocked to see KK either here at all.

Edit: Biggest reason to just bet the turn BTW is that you don't want to miss value against AQ KK etc when, say, a 4th club rolls off. You also create a situation where he bluffs you with AK no club on a 4 club run out or something like 9T turned into a bluff also. You also let those hands all catch up for free - donk is going to call with so many pair + draws on the turn... relative to a handful of flush combos. It is actually completely bad to check the turn.

Your logic is internally right ofc. But you aren't discounting AA, KK, AQ and KQ, about half of those we can expect to just shove the flop. The problem with your argument is it goes too far imo. Yeah, a fish is going to overcall this turn and spew shove with some hands he shouldn't, but he would have to be calling almost twice the normal number of combos for bet/calling to be clearly viable. Most of the time projections assuming hugely widened calling ranges based on board texture alone don't pan out. It turns out some fish do fold enough of those weaker pair + draw hands that it isn't going to be accurate to say he's calling with 65+ combos imo, which would be right on the borderline to allow us to bet. There are around 30 combos that beat us and much of his calling range that we beat has solid equity, not to mention we are not playing particularly well vs raises.

If he calls 65+ combos its viable. In practice that's probably taking it too far.

Name the 30 combos of hands that beats us. I suspect you got to that number on a bunch of faulty assumptions. I already discounted a lot of the KQ+ combos in my reasoning. The difference is that I didn't come up with anywhere near 30 combos of hands that beat us on the turn.

The donk will often shove the nut flush draw, K high flush draw, flush draw + gutter or open ender, or flush draw + pair a lot on the flop.

Second most villains probably do not 3b nearly as many of the crappy suited club combos as you think.

Third, the donk is almost never going to slow play a very strong hand on this board. IE: I give him no credit for having a set or flopped straight once he just calls the flop.

On the turn I suspect that the donk has a small handful of flushes and that those are the only hands that beat us.

And lastly, the most important point, the donk will often just call the turn with a pair + draw hand. There are just way more hands that we beat and get action from on the turn than there are flushes. This is a *very* clear value bet.... unless you arbitrarily decide to give him most of the possible flushes for some reason.

Its probably fair to say he flops 20 flush draws. Being very liberal we could say he shoves half of them. So he hits maybe 7 flushes, that number is lower than I originally assumed but I don't think its necessarily accurate either.

He has about 5 or so combos of T8 half of which shove, leaving 2.5, 8 combos or so of KT half of which shove, 6.5 straight combos. Then for the rest of his non shoving hands 3 QJ, 1 QQ and JJ, and 1.5 99. So a total of 19 combos that beat us under that assumption. So yeah its a little less than I thought but I also think he is probably showing up with more than 7 flushes too. A standard calling range here should be somewhere on the order of 35 combos. Also I've never seen any evidence of boards where anything near 100% nutted hands get shoved or raised.

Maybe what you're saying is exactly right in this spot, but you're making some very liberal assumptions that don't follow normal play patterns. Usually all or nothing assumptions like "he never has sets" turn out to be innacurate fwiw. I personally just default to conservative play until I have compelling reasons to do something else.

edit: guess we would be half potting so calling range would be close to 40 combos.

That is a lot lower but even still I *really* doubt that most guys just call a straight here against a raise. It is certainly not a play I decide to make often once I get raised on the flop. And this is a donk - donks generally play stuff a lot faster than regs do. To say that a donk slowplays 50% of the time has got to be a huge overestimation - do you *actually* believe that to be true? Give him 25% slow plays instead, which is still probably a huge overestimation.

By giving him 1 of both QQ and JJ you are saying that he always slowplays this hand btw since there is only one combo of each. So that is really 18 combos.

Also where are you getting 8 combos of KT from? This is not a hand that people 3b in general too often. He probably has more like the 4 suited ones and if I am right he slowplays them rarely to the flop raise, giving us just 1 combo maybe instead of the 4 you're giving him. That lowers the number to 15, knock another one off for T8 and thats 14. Take away a combo of 99 and now you're looking at 13.

Not sure why you're even talking about a "standard calling range" here. This is a fish. Fish do not fold a ton of stuff including probably his balonie Q5o that decided to 3b preflop randomly. Fishes are going to call the turn here with a ton of stuff, way more than 35 combos or w/e.

Look at your core assumptions because you actually seem to have a good understanding about how to break down a spot mathematically. You are really failing in this spot to properly add up the combos of hands that a person realistically has, IMO. Another thing you're doing incorrectly imo is just thinking about *a fishes* calling range in being so rigid with regards to our bet size. The donk is going to call his pair + draw if we make this bigger or not. Only will a good reg actually adjust to that in a more reasonable manner.

Also on your assumptions: I think that a guy is way more likely to just call AQ KQ than KK AA and also straights/sets, in general. So by just arbitrarily assigning 50% to all of those hands you're really altering the numbers a lot and skewing how much of a value bet we have here (big difference even between AQ and AA).

I gave him 1 combo of QQ and JJ combined, making it 19. Even if he's calling 40 combos, which is a lot wider than 35 its by no means a fistpump bet/call because ofc thats how often we're ahead, not equity. Since his range that we beat has probably an average of something like 20% equity on this board we need to subract at least 10% to get equity, leaving somewhere around 50%. Ofc if it exceeds that point by much betting may be more attractive due to the protection and next street playing issues when we check, its probably closer than I originally thought.

This has made me look at this spot more closely. One theme that I see though in your response and those of other posters is apparently somewhat misunderstood yet is fundamental to the calculus of hand analysis, namely that standard ranges are the only (non GTO based) valid framework available for conceptualizing and assigning hand distributions. There are in fact standard ranges even for fish, in the roughest outline they are bounded by population stats for a given spot.

A corollary of that is the fact that while ranges do contract and expand due to board texture they do so at frequencies which are strikingly smaller than what many players imagine. The reason I talk about standard ranges vs a fish is because that is the range width which is standard vs fish, regs and everyone else. Without contrary evidence in the form of actual hands played vs the population or vs a well constructed subgroup of players which meets a reasonable standard error requirement, it is wrong to assume for example a 100% expansion in a range because of the presence of draws.

Alright bro well do with my advice what you will. If you think donks are going to slow play the straight here 50% of the time, power to you. And if you think guys 3b KTo even a reasonable amount (they don't without a specific read) that is up to you, too.

i am more likely to call the rivershove against a reg but against a donk.

in my experience donks dont turn hands into bluffs often and are always afraid of the flush themselves.

if he is valuebetting worse (or bluffing) the donk will make a blockerbet.

The Cosmic Donk has spoken and He's commanded donkdom to 3 bet KTo the equivalent of 4 combos. For sloth he says I'm not entitled to know the donkmind R/BC straight holding reflex but that He has commanded his flock to fastplay straights the twofold greater share in similar oop spots.

lol donkdom