77 IP vs station

There's an argument to 4b/fold against V as described. He can be wide from straddle and he knows your style. I don't love capping ourselves pre, even in position, at pretty low IO.

Flop is standard.

Turn: he shouldn't bet our range card. We have the JTs and T9s and 66. He should be x'g a lot here. It's an odd line.

River: Baluga theorem call. But if we lose, it's a cooler because he should really make a value bet with TT, AA, AT or JTs. He would block too much of our value to blast off.

Maybe he goes polar trying to get us off JT when he has something like T9. Or it's just spazz because he figures you would have 4b a lot of your Ax pre and all the logical draws/gutshots have bricked.

It's an easy call but he will have us beat every so often.

Turn seems like a dubious call given reads. What do you think he's betting that we are in front of?
Maybe 98 that didn't want to cbet flop?

River seems dicey without reads that he can decide KT is the stone nuts (assumed your read was that he'd call off everything with medium strength hands, and not 1.5x pot river), or is sometimes doing this with J9 or whatever.

I def. don't snap call ... I might even shove if he bet 150, but 300 straight seems meh. I probably tank and sigh call praying for 98, and berate myself for the turn call when we lose.

It all seems pretty standard. Never folding when we get to the river this way. Might fold turn, but might not.

Assuming we lost to AA, TT, or AT.

The more I think about this line... 3bet pre.; check A high flop; 40% turn; 150% river ... the more I think V's range on the river is super nutted.

All the big values hands can reasonably 3bet more often than 98s or KTs preflop, and it's much more likely that AA or even AT checks the flop as a x/r or slow play than KTs or 98s (or any pure bluffs like KQs).
It seems like hopium, but maybe V would slow play AK on the flop and overplay the river?

I would rather bet this flop than call this turn, and I'd rather do neither.

Why are we calling a "very loose passive" who has just now decided to 3! H OOP, and not even 3x'ing it? Aren't 77 way behind most of V's range? Yeah, IP, but 35 more to call, only 345 back if H does...I'm just not feeling it. 4!/f feels like setting $ on fire vs Never-Fold Guy.

It does feel like a really nutted line by V. Honestly expecting AA here, and not much else. I think V just calls AT/TT pf as described.

Hope your underboat was good, Banana.

It looks nutted because we're here discussing it, knowing Banana's tendency to give reads that justify his play but don't always align with the result. In the real world, when we check back flop, I could see V showing up with Tx, AX, or even some JJ-KK. But knowing OP, my guess is he put V on AX because his read is that V is stacking off with any AX.

I don't see how we can ever fold river, so assuming we lost, the question is where the off-ramp was. Seems like it would have been the turn, but that would have been a pretty disciplined fold.

I would just limp in.

Calling the 3bet at this stack size is a little meh. We're only getting about 11.5 to setmine, but I guess it can't be horrible in position with a guy who is never folding TP+.

I also check back the flop. We're either being tarped or we're up against a pot controlling KK/QQ/JJ/etc. (another reason our IO preflop are very meh in that he doesn't always stack off postflop with these hands).

I don't understand our turn thinking at all. Are we calling becasue we think we might be ahead of a passive player's 3bet range preflop on this board? Cuz otherwise the only reason we should ever be calling here is because we plan to take it away on the river (which is a very dicey plan given monsters are still in his range plus he's sticky). Preflop also becomes even worse if we're planning on sticking in lottsa chips postflop when we don't bink.

Lol @ river card. I mean, I guess we have to call now and just hope we're up against an overplayed AK?

GcluelessNLnoobG

Yeah, is everyone missing this read, especially the "passive" part?

GorIguessIdon'tunderstandwhat"passive"means?G

Yeh, it's always difficult in posts to remain objective when you know there's "a reason" the post exists ... but I'm trying to think of the times V's have 3bet me and then checked A high flops, and just that one piece of info. heavily leans towards a range of nuts and pot control ... maybe AK/AQ, if people decide I'm bad and I will just fire at any flop when checked to.
I'm trying to think of hands where someone checked air on the flop, when a bluff is so good for our range, and then later decided "you know what'd be a great idea, 40% turn and then if called shove river for 1.5x pot"

JTs/T9s kind of make sense, if those are ever 3bet pre, although I would expect them to bet less on the river.

On the other side H has some of the one combo of TT, and likely nothing better so we are at the top of our range.

Putting ourselves in V's position with JJ-KK, and a lot of AX, I could see checking flop to see what hero does, then deciding hero doesn't have any really strong hands when he checks back, so V makes a delayed c-bet, then doesn't know what to do on the river, so he jams what should otherwise be a brick.

Calling the 3-bet preflop seems pretty bad, especially against someone who doesn't like to fold post-flop.

Somewhat surprised how negative the tone is regarding OP's line here.

Yes, V is described as "loose passive", but that's just OP's description, and (no offense, Banana) his reads are frequently a bit disconnected from the reveal. Hero has a PP, and V's 3B is less than 3x from OOP. We're just barely deep enough to call and set-mine IP, so pre seems like a pretty standard call vs pretty nitty fold.

The flop check is obviously standard. The turn is the real decision point here. If we think V is going to c-bet all his AX on the flop, and he isn't likely to be 3B'ing any Tx pre, then the turn call when V bets less than 1/2 pot seems okay, or at the absolute worst just a tad too optimistic.

If V submitted this hand, and told us he had AK/AQ/AJ, and the reveal was he ran into 77 on the river, at least some would say he played it fine and it's just a cooler. If V had JJ-KK, and decided to turn his hand into a bluff on the turn when the flop checks through, a lot of us would probably hate it, but we'd at least understand it, because we'd think hero is going to bet flop with his AX at least some of the time, and he'd raise turn with Tx at least some of the time.

I won't be shocked if Banana tells us V had AA, TT, or AT, but it also wouldn't shock me if 77 is the best hand, the way this was played, and I don't think he played it badly.

Banana's getting about 11:1 to call the 3-bet. I'd want more than that with a PP as low as 77, especially against an opponent against whom Banana thinks he'll never have fold equity.

Yeah, I get it, if anyone looks at this and says it's just a fold pre. I'm just saying I don't think calling pre is terrible. We have position, reasonable implied odds, and the read that V can't fold top pair, making it more likely we'll get paid if we flop a set.

Banana didn't give us any info on V's bluffing propensity, but if V is capable of finding some bluffs post-flop, and / or has the potential for entitlement tilt with JJ-KK, or is capable of over-playing AK/AQ/AJ, I don't think we should be beating him up for going broke with 77 when he gets to the river the way he does.

If V checks range from OOP when HU as the PFR, and will make a delayed c-bet with thin value when hero checks back, he could have a lot of hands we beat here.

I should add this guy gives me absolutely no credit and has seen me bluff many times. I felt the turn call was bad afterwards. But I talked myself into calling, there might have been a BDFD out there I dont remember.

Result:

I agree. It's probably not terrible...more like "meh."

It happens. You didn't do anything egregiously wrong. If you call the turn, thinking he could have some bluffs, you certainly can't fold when you boat up on the river. He could have worse for value and play it the same way.

ETA - if you know he gives you no credit, and thinks you'll bluff if he checks river, then the river gets a little more dicey when he over-bet jams rather than checking to let you stab at it. Not to say that he always and only has thick value when he takes this line, just to say that he probably doesn't take this line with quite as many worse hands after you call the turn.

Turn looks to be setting money on fire against someone labelled a passive opponent, imo.

GcluelesssettingmoneyonfirenoobG

Depends on what exactly is meant by "passive", and how passive he really is.

It's a 3B pot, and V is the pre-flop 3B'er. When he checks the A-high flop, he's going to have some AX, but also some worse hands that will start betting turn when the flop checks through. Even passive players will start to bet the turn with JJ-KK in a 3B pot, if only because they'll level themselves into believing they have the best hand, or out of entitlement tilt.

I will acknowledge that the turn call is optimistic if OP isn't planning to attempt a bluff if V checks the river and OP doesn't improve, if only because V's likely to be making his delayed c-bet on the turn with hands that have 77 beat, like JJ-KK. The only way to win this pot with 77 unimproved is to bet huge on the river if V slows down and checks JJ-KK after OP calls again.

I think turn is bad, even if V has bluffs (or worse value) here. We should get bluffed sometimes!

Saying that, the given label is obviously bad/wrong ... given that V 3bet the combo. they had (I guess 0.02% chance or so that they misread their hand and thought they had AA).

Yeah!

I mean, seriously, how passive is V if he's 3B'ing ATo pre, and over-bet jamming the river with the...*checks hand rankings*...third nuts?

If he has ATo in his range, he could have other / better AX combos (better pre, like AJ-AK), and conceivably play them this way when the flop checks through and the middle card pairs on the turn.

The problem with the turn call isn't that V looks nutted, it's that V's bluffs are mostly hands that still beat 77, meaning we're counting on A) boating up on the river, or B) V not barreling off, so we can bluff when he checks, and in that scenario C) folding JJ-KK (or some AX?) because he believes we have Ax or Tx or something that beats whatever V has when he goes check-bet-check.