1-2 NL, 9 handed at MS

The two villains in this hand are relatively average live players, but the UTG+2 guy has some very strange tendencies - I've seen him limp-reraise pocket 2s from early position twice already, and both times he followed up with a big bet on the flop (as long as no high cards came) and announced something about protecting his hand. He also checked back the river on a A 10 2 7 8 three-flush board with A8 after I raised PF, bet flop and turn. Has also called a couple of small ($50-120) all-in bets with very weak, middle-low pair hands, so I don't think he's afraid of putting money in the pot. I don't know if anyone else can put anything together from these two hands, but he is generally a pretty loose player PF, does not have an aversion to big bets, and probably doesn't really have much of a clue about relative hand strengths.

The other villain (UTG) is an average player, no real significant reads on him except that he raises his straddles at least 50% of the time; last time he did he said he had 46o and I believe him.

UTG ($230) straddles to $4.

UTG+2 ($600) calls, a couple other MP players call, and I call $2 more with A7 from the BB and $425.

UTG raises to $15, UTG+2 calls, one MP guy calls, and I call.

Pot is ~$70.

Flop: 3 4 10

I check, UTG checks, UTG+2 leads for $50, MP folds, I call, UTG calls.


Pot is now about $220, I have $360, UTG has $165, and UTG covers.


The turn is the A.

This is where it becomes interesting. I'd usually just check here. But, while I'm deciding what to do, the UTG player checks, and then the UTG+2 checks. I say 'hey guys, I haven't acted yet.' What's my play here?

I'll post the turn action in a bit, I'd really like some input on what anyone else would do here - especially because the out of turn actions are VERY significant...

I don't think they're angling you here so I'd put in a "big" vbet. Kind of weird stack size here I like the range of $140 which would leave $220 for the river shove with one caller would put the pot at about $500.

I think you have good showdown value but you don't do well at all when they call a big bet, so I would recomend checking the turn here.

BUT, as it played out, knowing that they both wanted to check makes it rather unlikely they they have TP beat. And its got the added benefit that it looks like you are trying to make a move based on this information. So I think bet.

Obvious betsize is $165 to put UTG all in. But honestly I think $50 would be hilarious, and actually get you good value from the meat of their range, Tx, JJ, QQ, FD.

You've got a problem. First, they checked which means they can't probably beat an ace. Second, you've all but stood up and shouted, "The turn hit my hand, the turn hit my hand." At MS, most players would just wave it aside and let the river come if they missed, not stop play.

The best play at this point is to say, "well, if you're that weak I'll just take the pot now, " and slide $75 out. If someone was trapping and now shoves over, you're getting odds to call the shove with your FD. You may also get looked up by worse, hoping to get you to lay down your "pair" when the spade comes on the river.

I like that I agree with venice!

I think I check it, because UTG might have been checking so he could raise aggro UTG+2 when he stabbed at the pot. Your hand can't stand a raise, so I'd just go to the River and c/c any non-spade.

I don't see too many live fish slow play sets on this flop so multiway so really the only hands UTG could be c/r with are A4 A3 maaybe AT but I'd think they'd lead or raise flop.

I'd bet flop for the fact that knowing that they're both checking the turn (esp UTG+2) you're likely ahead and would want value from worse flush draws or 3s 4s and weak Ts with what is probably the best hand now and if not - redraw to the nuts.

Thanks for the replies so far, I think that the spot on the turn is very interesting. After I noticed that both guys checked out of turn, I realized that if I were to bet, it would look much more like I was making a move on them - and since we had all been playing pretty big pots with eachother with pretty marginal hands, and we all were kind of 'out to get eachother' - I also decided that if I bet, I couldn't fold to a raise. Is this reasonable?

I just thought that when these guys showed that they were ok with checking it through, it reaallllly lowered the chance that either of these guys has a set or 2 pair. The board is just too draw-heavy.

So I decided to lead out for $100. The UTG guy thought and thought and finally just called after about 40 seconds of deliberation. When it got to the UTG+2 guy, he didn't think too long before announcing that he was all in.

I was pretty shocked at this- what kind of hands do you think he'd do this with?

If you bet, you can't really fold since you've essentially pot committed yourself. You bet $100 into $220 with a caller and a shove. That's $680 in the pot to you to call for $260 which is about 2.6:1. Flush hitting is almost giving expressed enough but add the times you're already ahead and it's a clear call.

Given the action I can really see no way you're behind here. Especially UGT+2's shove?? It makes no sense to check this turn IP with a made hand. It looks so much like he decided "I think the first bettor is FOS, and UTG tanked so if I shove, they'll both fold". I'd call

Agreed. Would be really shocked if your behind. I would be calling here

Yeah, seems like way too much money in the pot to fold now for sure. But I also have no idea what he could be doing this with.

They may just be idiots.

They may be colluding.

They may both be slowplaying big hands.

Got to call. I'll be interested to see the results.

Getting 3.25:1 you have to call here.

But I would definitely check this turn. You are almost always ahead, AND you have the nut draw.

There is no reason to bluff or protect your hand. If this get's checked through then you will almost always get value from live players on the river, and if it get's bet it is an easy easy easy call on the turn.

$50-$75 on the turn is good (so long as ur never folding) but I kinda prefer a 'disgusted' check. God only knows what these jokers have... J5 or Q2 (suited or not) sounds about right lol (maybe 22 or 55?)

lol live cash makes me weep at the terrible plays.

ya my inclination before reading the turn action was still to check because it's unlikely you're getting a crapload of money from a worse hand and most worse hands dont have that many outs to beat you.

FYP.

I think OP's bet size on the turn is about optimal for this situation. We have to think we'rea head right now (given out of turn checks) and we want to bet enough so that you can shove allin on the river if you think you're ahead when ypu get there but you're also wanting to bet small enough so that UTG+2 might call with a weaker flush draw.

UTG+2 seems like he is spazzing out with KT or a flush draw. UTG now seems either pretty strong (2 pair or better or something like QJ) or he is a complete idiot. In any case, OP now has to call because we're almost getting the right expressed odds to call and sometimes we will actually be ahead.

Nothing much OP could have done here. Even preflop and flop plays were standard vs these opponents.

Weird, a couple people at the table were convinced that these two players were colluding - they had apparently swapped 50% in a tournament earlier that day, and were again going to make a similiar deal in this cash game. Not sure if that is relevant - because I think that they are 'just idiots.'

If they actually carefully orchestrated their out-of-turn-checking in order to get me to value bet a weak ace, then have the UTG guy call to give me the correct odds to call a push from the UTG+2, then...well, good game guys, you pulled off one of the best 1-2NL heists ever...

I called, I think UTG may have actually mucked to the remaining bet (which is even fishier...) and UTG+2 tabled a red AQ.

Another brilliant contribution. Good thing that the open minded mods are on top of random assaults on live players that don't contribute to threads.

If live play is so terrible, why weep at the level of play? Go dominate people in hands like this when they occur. I'd think this would be something you'd welcome, not sneer at.
As far as the "terrible play" here, do tell us what would be different online. Preflop is a bit quetionable but understandable from OP's perspective because he's deep with a couple of potential bad opponents, and he has a "nuts" hand. You can't check online accidentally when you're not first to act, so that's not really relevant. Which aspect of this hand exactly gets played differently online? The one where you urinate into the water jug next to the printer?

Then you hit your 7 on the river FTW!

At least, that's what should have happened.

UTG+2's flop bet then out of turn check was just bizarre.

Well played by OP.

If they were colluding, I wonder if they have a signal for letting the other player know they have TPTK. It would be handy to know that.

BAM deuce of diamonds on the river, ship the $1100 pot to the top pair, pretty decent kicker guy...

I thought a lot about this hand on the ride home, because - assuming that the UTG+2 player is playing normally, and not colluding - he is going to have a reaaaly small number of hands that he would take this line with (check the turn if its checked to him, but raise a $100 bet / call all-in).

If it were me at least, I think I might do this with a hand like 109, 10J,:10Q, 10K, or maybe even KQ or QJ. I guess with a random AK or AQ I might do it too, but it's just seems so much less likely that he gets to that point in the hand with AK or AQ - he limped in PF, just called a PF raise from the straddle, and then finally bet out on a 10-high board.

IMO I'm going to see all those pair+FD / straight draw+FD hands - hands which I'm a huge favorite against - way more often than I'm going to see AK/AQ. And, i'm also fairly confident that 2 pair or a set isn't checking back the turn, if its checked to him...