1/3 AK 500 effective

This is tough. The turn check makes it especially difficult, since I would expect sets, and 2p to continue.

I think there's enough busted heart draws that you can weight vs weirdly played value, in there to look him up, but I kinda still hate it.

About the only hands one would play this way are 6h5h/5h4h that hit trips on the river, or 8h6h/6h4h/some other combo draw that he shoved with after he missed. Otherwise, it would mean he check-called the turn with a value hand despite the turn being super wet.

The fact that he jammed quickly would lead me to assume he's bluffing.

I limp cuz that's my style and I despise the preflop result (which is standard).

In general, if I'm betting just one pear into a field and I get raised I pretty much default to folding. If I don't feel comfortable folding then I'd lean to not betting and instead attempt to get to a reasonably priced showdown. Our route currently has us playing a huge pot with an extremely mediocre hand.

With my flop thinking, I lean to checking back the turn and getting to a reasonable showdown.

I don't get myself into this spot by the river, but in general I fold. How often do you see people put in ~4 stacks of reds in on a big street bluff? Is he one of the rare guys who can do it? Especially when we've shown decent strength?

GcluelessNLnoobG

I agree that prima facie these are the only two value hands that make sense given his line, but that would also imply he's a pretty bad player because he called both of these pre out of the SB.

And so then if we do put these in his range, then I think it's fair to assume that he's bad enough for a bunch of value to be in his range that he checked turn with.

He just shoved into a tight player when the board paired, and you are repping pretty strong. Are you tight as in you fold a lot to aggression? Or just tight as in you play strong hands and don't spew?

Either way, this is a tough one. I lean toward fold vs. most players at this level.

Except he's not like most players, since he's "also pretty aggressive for a 1/3 player."

If we are folding AK on the river, what else is left in our range to call with here, aside from AA/77 and maybe 55?

Weird line from V but we beat no value and I tend to be very afraid of aggressive lines when V knows that it’s our board and it’s clear even to fish that we have a range advantage and they don’t care. The “I put you on AK” bluff is only relevant when there is no A or K on board.

Sigh fold.

I guess if he's a bad aggressive player maybe he thinks H will fold AK, but many players don't fold AK here. as fatmanonguitar stated, this is our board and we beat no value.

Our Bayesian Prior though is that 80% of 1-3 players are not agressive and don't make huge river bluffs (btw Ed Miller is excellent on using priors). I'm not sure 1 hour of data moves that probability significantly down, certainly not to 80% likely to be agressive vs. he just got good hands. Now if we've somehow seen him make big bluffs that's different.

I dont like the turn bet much at all it seems like you did it because of the backdoor fd is that the case other than that why would you need to bet at all and on top of this whats so great about a backdoor fd anyway

I'm not sure how reliable this 80% figure is. I haven't read the Ed Miller book but where does this figure come from? Is it based on MDA?

In respect of the hand, for instance, how often do non-aggressive OOP 1/3 players take a XR-XC-B150 line for value? Wouldn't the typical ("prior") line be XR-B-B?

I wouldn't bet the turn after being checkraised on the flop.

Agree. Even picking up NFD.

That being said…. V’s often times over value AX on an A + relatively high card + paired board as they assume they’re chopping against basically all other AX hands and for H to fold that chop is a huge win for an aggressive V. I probably make the call and hate myself for it. But I think H wins at least 40-50% of the time here.

When he checks the turn his hand seems very draw heavy to me

I bet to deny some equity and get called by some occasional Ax

I’m not worried about being unbalanced or anything I just thought at the time I had the best hand and am going for value

I would think an aggressive player would continue to bet a flush draw on the turn. Maybe he doesn't CR a draw given the strength hero has shown so far. If I'm the villain I'm putting hero on AK or AQ after he calls my CR. I think it's very possible one of the cards he didn't want to see the "Q" hit and now he's concerned his A5 or 57 has shrunk.

I would check the turn. I would fold to the jam. This feels like he was hoping for a 7 or 5 and he got his wish. His quick bet does kind of poke a whole in my theory.

So he was nice enough to tell me he had 57

The turn check threw me off for sure

Basically it came down to the bet size…

I rarely see people bluff this much at 1/3

Folding flop is ridiculous

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

Think you can check turn especially with the NFD as you are scared of very few cards now.

As played river is annoying given you block one of the draws. Not sure why he checked turn as his 2p needed protection. Was he scared of aq?

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

At LLSNL, our default play against most opponents should be to fold TP hands to check/raises since most players flop check/raise range is two pear+ or a mega draw.

In this case, a tight opener from UTG cbet a flop into 3 opponents, and got check/raised. Our ~bestest case scenario against most is that we're up against a mega draw like 86hh (which is sucking up huge equity and could put us in gross spots on the turn). Admittedly, this opponent sounds like he might be more aggro than most, but it's still not a great spot.

Gfoldingisahardlyridiculous,imoG

+1... jamming river is a big tell. I was sorta expecting something like 77 or A5 at least but weirdly played with his turn check.

I also like to check turn after his flop c/r

Not folding flop.

Think it's a mistake to bet turn just because V checks. We have showdown value, and the BDFD for additional equity, and want to give V a chance to bluff the river. Betting turn seems like a polarization mistake. Our hand is too strong to turn into a bluff but not strong enough to bet for value.

I think people over-estimate the bluffiness of a snap jam on the river. I'd just fold.

We picked up the flush draw on the turn- does that change anything for those saying to check?
Seems like one of those things that just adds to our implied odds if we hit the flush on the river, so maybe check is good, not sure

In theory, when someone x/r's the flop, they're supposed to have some hands that give up on the turn. Most of those would be bluffs that are just going to fold when we bet, but sometimes it'll be a hand that was strong enough to x/r the flop, but got downgraded on the turn.

Like, to GG's point, V's repping 2P and sets for value on the flop. I'm not folding AKcc because we can make a better 2P, and V might have some draws that give up on the the turn. When V checks the Qc turn, I'm discounting sets, and it may be he's giving up with his draws, but it could also be he's just slowing down with 75 because we could have AQ (which is why I call flop).

The fact that we picked up the BDFD to go with TPTK and V might be scared of AQ doesn't give us the green light to bet small. He's not folding 75 or his better draws if we bet small. If we want to rep AQ to make him fold 75, and deny equity to his draws, we need to bet big.

I think it's fine to just check back with our showdown value when V x/r's the flop. His missed draws will want to bluff the river on a brick. It's also okay to over-bet the turn, to fold out 75, and deny equity from his draws.

Over-betting is awesome when he calls, and we get to size up or down to make him call or fold on the river. But it's higher variance. It's generally just better to check back rather than risk getting check-raised again, and having to fold.

When we raise pre, c-bet, call the x/r (on an ace-high board), and bet the Q turn, but then V snap-donk-over-bet-jams the river, he's not bluffing. We look so strong with our line. Low-stakes recs aren't going to see a 5 dribble off, and instantly think, "Ooh, I can rep trips here, let's jam!"

The "snap jam is always a bluff" heuristic doesn't apply here, because V wasn't the PFR, and didn't barrel the turn. This isn't one last hail-mary attempt to make a sticky opponent fold 1P by triple-barreling. That snap jam is more consistent with a release of tension resulting from a prayer being answered: "Please, God, let me improve to a boat, one time!"

The added value of checking back the turn when we pick up the BDFD comes when we make our flush, and V leads out or check-calls with 2P, because he mistakenly believes we'd bet the turn if we picked up the BDFD.

The most interesting take away from this hand is whether a XR-X-OB line would be XR-X-B or XR-X-XC if V hadn't hit his six outer. If the river is a brick do we bet for value when Villain checks, for instance?

As played the hand is a bit of an outlier because V isn't checking a set on the turn. I'd suggest that XR-X-OB is generally underbluffed.