Turned nuts faces board-pairing river with around 40% pot behind...

I think open jamming is preferable since it is multi-way and your hand is basically drawing to a river brick. 150 is not good though.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would definitely check raise flop. Jam and winning with ten high seems ok but maybe making it 150 and jamming all turns is better.

Turn donk is interesting. I would like it much more on a 7x. We do have some nutted hands here like QJ and QQ and T9 and I suspect btn is checking back a lot. So the donk is fine but why not all in? That’s what our draws want to do.

River is obvious jam. Easy to get heroed here by all 1 pair hands and sometimes trips.

So you think V 3 betting and then betting 1/3 pot otf (or the check call) is sets only? Meaning youre uh…. “Drawing” to a 36 outer?

This seems like a very MUBSy and scared money thought process to me

V interesting hand and discussion

Preflop - I probably call a lot here, but it's a good point that you're in a much less favourable position when there's a third player as well. T9s is fine to call OOP heads up, at least some of the time.

Flop is a clear check-raise and a bit of a blunder tbh, all that equity and Ten high but you need to start building the pressure now, not slowplaying when you have nothing.

As played, turn donk is interesting and I don't hate it, but there's still room for a check-raise and it's not a complete catastrophe if it does go check-check, you've still got the river to play with. I'd probably roll the dice with a check, but your line is interesting

River feels like a shrug jam

Isnt there something to be said for jamming turn as the board is unpaired

I would raise the flop bigger, say pot sized, so 250, then jam turn for 200 ish.

River seems like an easy jam. I doubt sets bet 1/3 pot on this wet board vs two players or just flat the turn.

Before that, would fold pre 2x, raise flop, and check/raise turn.

Apologies for not responding sooner. It's been busy the last few weeks.

I realized after I posted that, that the logic might seem contradictory. What I didn't say is that in my experience, when someone, especially a rec player, plays a very tight 3B range pre, they also tend to c-bet at a high frequency, and often fairly large. In that scenario, it makes playing hands like T9s more risky. Whereas if they don't have quite as tight a 3B range, they're often c-bet somewhat less frequently, and not for a larger size quite as often.

I may be accused of getting greedy by not check-raising flop. I didn't necessarily want to fold out every hand that was currently ahead but not necessarily an equity favorite against my hand.

I was giving him a range that was mostly over-pairs to the flop, but also included 99-JJ, and a fair number of suited Broadway combos with a Q or J in them that would continue if a Q or 7 came on the turn.

To be fair to docvail...

I'll often check flops when OOP as the pre-flop raiser, then make a delayed c-bet on the turn if the flop checks through. I'll often donk flops with thick value and good draws when multi-way, and occasionally when heads-up. I'll sometimes check-raise in spots like the one in this hand, on the turn, and sometimes donk, both with value and with bluffs, to rep exactly the sort of hand I had, or a hand like QJ (top 2).

If I'm checking a lot of flops as the PFR when OOP, donking some when I'm not the PFR, and check-raising some, and taking similar lines on the turn, I'd think it would be pretty hard for most V's who only play with me occasionally, or who have never played with me, to exploit me by attacking my checking range in a pot like this.

My decision to donk turn came from a combination of factors, which added up to a strong suspicion that the turn would check through, and it would be hard for me to get paid if I donk-jammed river.

A lot of it was the reads - I figured one of my opponents would flat call if I donked, but it was unlikely that the middle player would donk here, and that the main V would call or raise, allowing me to jam. Even if the main V barreled, the MP player wouldn't likely over-call behind me. So it seemed like donking out was the best way to make sure money went in, and to set up a river jam.

Not sure I can effectively explain why, but my read on the situation was that main V would never fold a better hand on the flop, and I didn't want to create a situation where I was pot committed to jamming all turns. Maybe he folds some unpaired over-card combos, but I didn't want to fold out every combo with a Q that would likely pay me off.

Personally I like donking on the Q more than a 7, because as @tomark pointed out, it probably helps V's range more than mine, and makes it less likely he'll fold, possibly more likely he'll raise, and we can just get stacks in on the turn.

I've gone back and forth when it comes to my thinking about the turn bet sizing. I don't think he's calling often enough with his 1P holdings, and I don't think he has many 2P holdings in his 3B range, and so I think the only hands that call a turn jam are sets. Almost everything else in his range folds.

But if he thinks my small donk is a sign of weakness, he may call off wider, or get spicy and put in a raise.

It was a loose / ambitious call pre. I think I felt like I had enough of a skill edge over my opponents to continue. I've been working on playing a more disciplined game pre-flop, and hands like this one are why.

A previous, more aggro version of me would x/r this flop 100% of the time, with this hand, but I've also been working on letting hands develop more, and being less aggro, especially when OOP. I think slow-playing when we have nothing, just a draw, even a massive combo-draw, is okay, when we're playing TAG-fish at 1/3.

can you elaborate on what skill edge means and why it lets you call pre here?

im not trying to be difficult, the hand and the reasoning just seem like loose passive play to be honest. also u ignored my point about donking the turn for smaller if you're going to do this!

Not sure I understand the question, but I'll try...

I know I'm capable of getting away from my hand if I flop some sort of weak value that isn't likely to be good if a lot of money goes in, and capable of extracting max or close to max value when I make a very strong hand - at least against the two V's in this hand.

If I thought the BTN's 3B range pre was super-tight, like only AA/KK, I wouldn't have called, because I'd agree, that's going to lose a lot of money when OOP and possibly multi-way. But I wasn't giving him a super-tight range.

Just based on card removal and the action to that point, on the turn I was weighting his range with a lot of over-pairs to the board, or TPTK. But pre-flop, I was giving him 99+, a fair bit of AX, some Broadway combos, etc.

I realize that T9s doesn't have a ton of equity pre-flop against that sort of range, but his 3B sizing was suspiciously small, laying me a good price, and making me suspect our MP opponent would over-call. And as I said, I figured I'd be able to navigate post-flop better than my two opponents.

Maybe this is textbook results orientation, but I think the action in the hand show I was right. I check-called flop with good equity, against a V with a hand that wasn't going to fold to a check-raise, then I donk-led turn with way the best of it, and got called, setting up a ~45% pot river jam.

Meanwhile, who knows what MP had or what he was doing, but in my opinion, the main V on the BTN mis-played his hand, at least on the flop, when he c-bet so small on this board.

It sucks that the board paired on the river, but I think it would have been very hard for him to fold most of his value range if I jammed a brick. Like, what hands in his range call my turn donk, just to fold to a ~1/2 pot jam?

Agree that this is massive results oriented. ~Half a tight 3bettors range whiffs this flop, let alone a wide 3bettor; getting all those hands to fold to a flop check/raise against our current T high is a massive $$$$-making coup.

GimoG

i wish i could figure out how to post screenshots on here to show you pre. i cannot overstate this, you do not want MP to overcall. whatever you gain in pot odds you are losing much more in terms of realizing your equity, even more so if he's short stacked (its going to create weird sidepot dynamics and he may reopen action at various points in the hand in ways that are not good for you). also you're just going to be dominated often and you're not going to make 2p+ enough of the time where you can get compensated for taking the worst of it in a lot of ways.

the reason im asking the skill edge is what does that mean to you? like you think ok im a better player than these guys. that might be true in some kind of abstract but you can't really fade the math in these low spr situations. all you're setting yourself up to do is make a ton of difficult / low ev decisions and soul read or whatever. that just isn't where the money is coming from. it's great that you can navigate postflop better than them, but both of your opponents have much easier decisions overall than you; the short stack is commited with anything (and gets to see what you do if you face a cbet) and the 3bettor has a bunch of overpairs and a few bluffs, he doesn't have medium stregnth hands / draws he has to worry about facing bets vs a stronger range oop (he also gets somewhat protected vs you bluffing him because of the shortstack). you being a better player (whatever this means) isn't necessarily a reason to be overly loose in spots. there's alot of places i think you can expand your range if you want but rly think pre is a large mistake conceptually here

also button definitely wants to size down to an amount that the shortstack reopens the betting if he xr's and he probably can't go too big in general without being commited / indifferent with like ace high vs the shortstack

Assuming the premise is true, that would mean ~half a tight 3B'ers range does NOT whiff on this flop, and check-raising all those hands is a massive money-losing debacle, unless our x/r bluff gets through. If it doesn't, the pot will be bloated going to the turn, and we'll have less left behind, meaning less fold equity if we jam for less.

I'm surprised that you of all people would be vigorously championing an aggro x/r line on the flop, with my specific hand, in this scenario. I'd have thought you'd be more likely to want to let the hand develop a little more.

Forget about my exact combo here. Any 4, 6, 7, 9, T or Q on the turn completes a potential straight, and any club completes a flush. I think that's as many as 27 cards that we could bet or check-raise on the turn. Even if we take some of the combos that make a straight out of my pre-flop range, like 9c7c, there are still a lot of turns that could make us a sneaky 2P with 98s or JTs.

Why do we need to aggressively bet our combo draw on the flop, particularly THIS flop, where there are no flopped straights, and as the original raiser who called a 3B, we're unlikely to have many 2P combos or sets? Why NOT wait until the turn, when we can expect a good card for our range more than half the time?

The problem with raising the flop is we're only repping 2P or sets for value, when we won't have many, and we'll have even less if V has JJ or 88, as he did here. On Jc8c5d, we'll likely have way more bluffs in our x/r range than value, given the pre-flop action.

If we want to rep J8 or 55, we can still do that on the turn, if it's a brick, or on the river, if the turn checks-through. But if it's a draw-completing card, it just gives us so much more ability to rep a stronger range that includes 2P, sets, and straights or flushes.

I just don't see how x/r'ing the flop is going to be higher EV than making our play on the turn.

i mean you probably have a +ev x/r with 0% fold equity given the size of the pot lol, theres just no way that x/r can be a massive money losing debacle

Consider downloading the free version of Snagit, by TechSmith. I've used it a ton over the past dozen years. It makes screen-grabs super-easy, and it's super-intuitive.

Otherwise, if you know how to print screen, I think you can paste that as an image into most MS doc file formats, then right-click on the image, and just save it as a JPG file.

As for the rest...

I feel like you're beating me up after I already agreed with you:

I get it. I should have folded pre. I'm not arguing that it was a good call. I'm saying I called because his 3B was small, and I thought I could out-play both my opponents post-flop.

But even if I could have, or even if I in fact did, I still ended up losing a huge pot regardless, which goes back to why I should have just folded pre, instead of letting my ego write a check my bankroll wasn't happy to cash.

is all good, i dont mean to beat you up. i found pre unintuitive as well to be honest

anyways have mostly beaten this dead horse into the ground at this point so i probably going to go onto other threads

Because on the times when you do run into top pair or an overpair or whatever, you have a decent chance of winning a massive pot when you do hit - you build the pot up towards the nuts. Meanwhile your hand value is so low now that any fold equity at all is good

Not whiffing doesn't mean smashing. Most of the hands he hasn't whiffed with are just one pear (hands that we have a bunch of equity against and even some FE against); while we want those hands to fold now, we're not devastated if they don't. And heck, some of those hands fold on the turn if we continue with aggression. Meanwhile there are very few hands doing quite well against us (realistically just a handful of set combos)... and even in that worse case scenario we're still sucking up decent hand equity; admittedly no FE against that small range of hands (but very results oriented thinking our flop play was fine cuz we ran into top of his range, imo).

GImean,obviouslycallingbetterthanfolding,butwe'renotexactlyseparatingourselvesfromthefieldbydoingthatG

If we started much deeper, I'd be inclined to agree. Few people on this forum are going to be arguing in favor of the aggressive line as often as I'll be.

But look at the stack depths. We're starting $475 effective with main V. There's $150 in the pot on the flop. He c-bets to $50, and I x/r to...what? $150? $200?

He's only got $375 more behind. What size do I x/r that doesn't force him to fold or jam with most of his range? How insanely strong does his flat-calling range become?

I don't want him to fold any hand that can't jam, and I don't want him to jam any hand that can't fold. I don't want him to only flat call with hands that have me crushed and are going to call off if I jam turn on a brick. I don't mind seeing a turn, getting at least 4:1 pot odds, if not 5:1 if MP over-calls, when main V is only going to have about a pot sized bet left behind.

If we want to x/r, okay, but we'll still have that option on the turn, when we'll have fewer bluffs and more value than we'll have on the flop.

I've been meaning to ask - you've been intentionally mis-spelling "pair" as "pear", correct? Same with "tarp" in place of "trap"? That's something you do deliberately? Sorry, I'm not being snarky. It's an OCD thing maybe.

I get your point. I'm open to the possibility my view of this situation is too black-or-white.

But as I said in my reply above, to Moxterite, if we started deeper, I'd like a x/r on the flop more. At this depth, I didn't want to x/r and get 3B with a hand that had so much equity yet so little showdown value.

Nor did I want to fold out all the un-paired hands in his range, when a lot of those would be willing to pay me off on some run-outs. Nor did I want to bloat the pot to the point that neither of us could fold, and I'd be forced to bluff whether I made my hand or not.

If we started $700 deep or more, for example, I'd feel differently. I could x/r to $200 on the flop, and make his life miserable. He'd have $400 behind if he called, and there'd be $550 in the pot going to the turn. I could jam turn 100% and expect him to fold often enough to make that line more profitable than I think it would have been here.

“Working on letting hands develop and being less aggro” concerns me.

Letting hands develop is great, and the exact opposite of what you did by donking the turn. I find that a lot of reasonably solid players are way too scared of being sucked out and of whiffing on a value opportunity.

Being less aggressive? Hell no, IMO, there are very few players whose major leak in poker is that they are too aggressive. Even maniacs would probably do quite well if they just learned to fold preflop. despite starting off as what felt like a quite aggressive lowstakes/home game player in 2010, i feel like pretty much every time i learn more about poker, and took a step forward as a player, i become even MORE aggressive. Not in all spots/lines mind you, i cbet less often certainly, but almost every passive action ive added to my game is basically with the express porpose of taking an even MORE aggressive action later on. I cbet less often to delayed cbet or raise over a probe bet more, and to be aboe to double and triple barrel after my cbet more often. I check rather than probe bet the turn or river in certain spots so i can check raise more. Etc. if your game is actually becoming more passive, then i got a feeling youve convinced yourself of some lesson or other that hasnt been learned via study, and is almost certainly wrong.

Ive gotten less aggressive once in my career, and it was during the biggest downswing of my life, and its clear as day now that it contributed to/extended the downswing.