KK

I don't have any advice for these stakes, but I was curious it looks like the kill does not get to act last in your games? Double punishment for a kill if he has to act in turn as normal. Yikes.

At my place the kill gets to act last unless there is a raise then its in turn.

Gross turn, we are definitely running out of value here. I don’t mind checking back because I don’t want to pay 3 BB to show down.

Yeah most people don’t understand how bad the kill is for them, so I feel you. I just think the “last action” isn’t really that much of a help. I’d rather be able to 3bet in turn or raise in turn than be forced to act last. Also there’s just something aesthetically unpleasing about it.

Killer raising UTG and folding is not good.

I’d check the turn and pretty much call all rivers. Betting the turn and getting check raised is gross.

Yeah kill acts in turn here. I’ve seen it both ways

This is good. I’d bet pretty much any river (maybe not an 8) if he checks again.

Ideally, you should always bet the turn whenever you'll have a profitable value bet on a blank river after the villain just calls the turn. Checking the turn to play it safe in those admittingly marginal spots will cost you money in the long run.

Of course reality and the ideal are two different things. In this spot you wanna bet the turn for reasons above--extract that margin value--but if you're always calling down UI after a villain turn check-raise, that marginal value you're chasing becomes an illusion. To echo checkraisedraw, if you're always paying 3 BBs when behind you'll destroy any potential profitability of betting the turn+value betting a blank river.

There's only two viable solutions to this problem:

1) Bet the turn with the intention of value betting a blank river if villain just calls. If villain check-raises turn, call the turn but fold UI.

2) Check turn, call river UI.

I think we should want to do 1) but only if we have a good read that villain will never check-raise the turn with worse. If we can't trust the villain for whatever reason then 2) wins out. Online I don't **** around in this spot. I'm taking line 2) unless I have a super strong read not to. I don't like taking non-show down lines HU online. When playing 4-8 live poker I'm much more likely to take line 1).

where do you play LHE online? ignition?

Haven't played online in almost 10 years. Just assuming it plays roughly the same today as then in this respect.

We just have a really good hand to bet turn with. We block the nuts really well, we have ok equity when we are behind anything except AK, and villain still has plenty of worse hands that have to call us. Seems like a turn check here is just being overly paranoid to me

sir this is a yes limit game

I love this check. Ranges are unusually narrow for a lhe hand and it feels like an Omaha hand with respect to a dynamic river forthcoming, meaning your equity position can change dramatically based on the river card that appears.

Part of the problem with betting is you can't fold to a raise and will cry call the river, so have bad reverse implied odds on the bet.

Checking recognizes that you're not doing that great against his tight pre flop range and you aren't relinquishing much equity if he has 77/88. One hand you lose significant value from is AQ. A tight player, in my view, will not 3 bet an utg raiser with KQ or AJ. You will also lose value against 99 that will get to see a free river with 6 outs if I'm counting correctly. But there are only 12 combos of AQ and 6 combos of 99 while there are 17 combos of TT/JJ/QQ/AK if I counted right, plus the reverse implied odds I mentioned to tip the balance.

Maybe we should reduce the 17 to 13 figuring he check raises flop with sets 2/3 of the time. Reverse implied odds still support a check as we'll be putting in 2 extra big bets with only 20 percent equity at best. And no extra implied odds on our own 20 percent because he's unlikely to bet into a 4-straight on the river with a set. You can add AJs and KQs to villain pre flop range and it's still a check.

He could also have AA sometimes although also I expect this to mostly check raise flop.

Seems to me that the folks advocating for a check are overthinking this spot. We have a very good hand and villain has not given us any indication we are behind. If we are behind and lose an extra bet on the turn, so be it.

The only read we have is this guy is tight. We don't know how he plays post flop. We don't know if he is weak or if he likes to slow play or if he is bluffy. What do we know about the Killer. Might the 3 better be targeting him. In the absence of more information I would just check the turn. Paying 3 more bets is no good. Getting raised on the turn and folding the river seems scary not knowing this guy. Sometimes our check may induce a bad bluff.

If we are determined for two more bets to go in I don't mind checking the turn and raise/folding the river. Is a tight guy gonna turn his hand into a 3 bet bluff on the river?

This. Guys, its a significant mistake to check turn here, if you think otherwise you have a huge leak in your game, this is a really simple hand. Villain's range is pretty strong but guess what, our range is INSANELY strong too, and the pot is huge. Y'all are way way too worried about losing one extra bet (not 3 btw)

Shouldn’t be 2 bet ?
unless you advocate (which I think is very interesting play) this :

Why exactly does it matter how strong our range is?

Isn't this hand the absolute bottom of our range here? It usually would be for me.

is the idea behind check turn, r/f river is we always want 2 bets going in on turn+River here but not one or three?