PokerStars, Hold'em No Limit - $0.01/$0.02 - 5 players
Replay this hand on Upswing Poker

UTG: $2.09 (105 bb)
CO (Hero): $4.51 (226 bb)
BU: $1.95 (98 bb) (35/21/0 67 hands)
SB: $2.00 (100 bb)
BB: $1.06 (53 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.03) Hero is CO with J♣ J♠
1 fold, Hero raises to $0.05, BTN calls $0.05, 1 fold, BB calls $0.03

Flop: ($0.16) T♠ T♦ 7♥ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.10, BTN calls $0.10, BB folds

Turn: ($0.36) 4♥ (2 players)
Hero bets $0.12, BTN raises to $0.24, Hero calls $0.12

River: ($0.84) 6♠ (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets $0.40, Hero calls $0.40

I don't understand your bet sizes. I would bet smaller on the flop and bigger on the turn rather than vice-versa. I would also probably fold river, even though I'm worried that your sizing scheme may have induced some silliness.

Yeah, bet 1/2 OTF and 3/4 OTT looks better.

Calling 1/2 pot on the river against a fish is fine I think.

Would probably x turn, then, if BU:

• bet small - i'd raise, or
• bet big - x/c

and probably x/calling most not scary rivers. Certainly for that size. If they have a T it's a cooler and we played as tightly as we could while maximising against weaker hands

Don't like checking turn against a likely fish; they don't have many floats here when they all with BB still to act behind you, and if they'll often check behind with a straight draw or 7x. Against these guys default should be b/f barring specific reason to do otherwise (if his turn raise was bigger I'd just fold there as he's giving u the baluga, which is also why I don't want to pay him off on river)

Agree turn raise is strong and we could be dead. BU has somewhat uncapped strength here is a concern. i can see the logic in reaping against worse (88,99,66 etc) but as I understand even fish will take the betting lead more often than they should with draws and worse/vulnerable value when we b/x oop, and I think he has plenty of A7, 56, 98, 86, all those weak pairs, + weird FD floats that all need protection and will probably bet enough. not sure we lose much EV to worse value that does x compared to all the hands that are incentivised to try and knock us out

In that vein, I prefer to check flop too. Unless I'm IP or ultra exploiting a fishy situation I don't like to take betting leads multiway. And certainly not on low boards with marginal OPs. As the money goes in on later streets we're almost cert fcuked

Interesting, I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum here. I think the average fish calls lighter than they bluff, and certainly doesn't raise enough, so barring more specific reads than "fish" the exploit is to c-bet more and fold more, but bluff less in spots where both players' ranges are strong and as such bluffs are designed to fold out high absolute hand strength hands like TP+. If I know both players are fish I'd range c-bet pretty much any paired board, certainly this one, because they'll both fold a decent amount and will rarely raise you off your overcard equity. Then ott certainly betting this hand because I see guys check behind the hands you describe all the time. I guess this is more a question of player pool behavior than anything else, but the fish in my games are definitely on the passive side such that b/f way overperforms both in general and in this spot.

BU is not super huge fish at least according to the stats.

Flop cbet is too big. Turn bet is fine, bigger bet or XR is overplayg given that we started MW otf. River is fine.

The turn raise is pretty strong. I think checking flop is probably better than betting

I prefer X Turn