Bottom set facing a turn check-raise

I'd bet alil more otf to 15, then like 30 into 50 ott and 3bet jam over his raise. AK is unlikely, and if he has A8 or a l/rr attempt with AA it's just a cooler. Stacks are too shallow to do anything besides try to gii at some point (we started the hand with 70 bb's eff).

I like a turn 3b a lot more than I like bet/call on the river.

Admittedly it's a bit results oriented when I see villains c/r otr, but all of the turn two pair are now either ahead or counterfeit, andi don't know if this villain is going to c/r turn with AQ/AJ

I bet bigger on flop for value -- if he's calling $8, he's calling more $12 - $16).

Turn is good, but he likes his hand, so make him pay now. As played, crying call.

Of course it's AK. Unless it's AA/KK/A8/A3, because those are the only 5 hands I see a loose-passive taking with this line of betting.

Shitty river card, and betting is just rubbing your shoes in it.

Must fold now, Hulk sad.

Yea it could be, but it could also be someone with a big ace, there's just as many of those types of players in low stakes games as there are players who limp with AK otb hoping to hit a flop.

Maybe AsQs/AsJs. I just don't see some loose-passive rando taking this line with AQo, or with a worse AsXs.

i mean you never win river now but id jam the first time if you decide not to raise turn

is weird bc i have no idea what he has but i dont really think theres anything that calls 140 that doesnt call 260. dont think x river makes much sense though given u start hand 70bb and who knows maybe he got axss or something

edit: actually, didnt see its limped. weird ***** hand now that i look at it. i think you want to bet bigger otf, other than that idk what's going on in this. still think you never win the river vs the strongest line ever but idk what size even makes sense to bet. have no real input now, can certainly see spiting it in getting 6:1 w fh bc why not. would think u can do better bet sizing wise though, am torn between 1/4 and all in targetting i guess K8 / k3 / random hands he started clicking with. i guess i could be convinced to check looking at the turn action but would never expect to actually see c/c x/r x/r in practice. i will say from the outside it looks alot like exactly AA (having seen him x minraise the river)

re bet sizing though i think Ax will call anything otf along with potentially 8x and some gutters, whereas when you start bombing this particular turn they end up mixing quickly. (i think this is actually the best path to win exactly 1.6 bb from something like a6 or a9 which is a disaster for you, note i dont think he always folds those hands)

pre prob not great from mp if i had to guess too

I too, am confused. Why are we limping behind UTG and letting the blinds in? Then when we get our set, we go 40% on the flop?

This is much easier if we simply open, and then make a normal cbet with the ace. (Then we get coolered! Lol.)

AP, why aren't we ripping it over the raise on the turn?

Sucks we lost to a limped AK.

This is AA or KK way more than ak. Either way you're toast.

I do not like set mining in an unraised pot, you typically win small pots and lose big ones. If you are not comfortable raising 33 preflop, just fold it.

AP, can't fold for 120 more, crying call, but these hands are why I don't like set mining in an unraised pot....

I'm going to channel the spirit of Garick and say you'd have been better ending your description of the action after UTG's river check, because now it's pretty blinding obvious that you're up against AA/KK/AK (or some other thick value), but that wasn't obvious from the river check (in other words: you were correct to bet river)

It's a limped pot so we've simply no way of knowing if UTG has a limp-calls hand or a limp-reraise hand. Flop/turn/river action points to a limp-reraise hand being more likely.

Submersible suggestion that either 3bet stuffing turn or stuffing river when checked to may be better plays.

Fold now; you're not winning anything close to 1/7.

V raised turn from $36 to $80. We have been told he is passive. Players described as passive are normally doing this on 2p or better He called UTG pre flop so even described as loose I see A8 as his worst possible hand. The river A makes every reasonable hand V should have given the description better than our hand. He gave us ample warning to avoid a river bet.

Shove turn. Check back river, what are we trying to get called by? Do we think he check raised turn tiny with nfd so we can smash it in his face?

As played I probably find the hero fold, again, we’re hoping he has AQss?

think everyone is being ultra results oriented about checking back the river. i know everyone is going to be like zomg loose passive check raised the turn but when is the last time you've seen someone start the hand with 70 bb and try to x/r both the turn and then go for it again on the river at spr 1.3?

think for sure if you posted the hand cut off when we're facing river x the responses would be different

What did the c/r on the turn mean to you when done by a passive player? Now gii on turn would be reasonable; we are not always ahead but are likely ahead often enough to make it a good bet. With the A on the river what hand do you put a passive player taking a c/r line on the turn has that we beat? I'm not being results oriented I am being read oriented and looking at what range a passive player likely has with the initial UTG open, call on flop, and c/r on turn as opposed to an aggressive player where there would be many more bluffs in the range.

Preflop: do not overlimp, iso-raise or fold.

Flop: I think you can go much bigger, like close to pot; you are 4ways and nobody is folding an ace on this board.

Turn: you 2nd barrell full pot and a passive rec c/r you ... this should be very worrying. On the other hand, you started the hand with ~70bb and hold bottom set , so gii cannot be terrible, hoping that V has 2p and not a bigger set ...

River sucks: now most of 2p hands filled up. In game, I am betting nonetheless, although probably a bit smaller; however, when V check/shoves river, after c/r turn, it's a pretty clear exploitative fold, despite the ridiculous pot odds. This assuming your reads are correct.

Grunch: even against a loose passive rec, I'm probably just going broke here, 100%. Just not giving him credit for 88 or any AX that boats up. This looks like weakish AX to me.

As for your sizing, the 40% pot bet on flop looks okay. I could see arguments for going smaller (multi-way theory) or bigger (limped pot with rec-fish, size up to get paid).

PSB on turn looks fine. I don't know what worse hands call, other than AX, when the K rolls off. Seems like all the other 1P hands that floated flop are folding now. So we're just targeting his AX, which will call off a big bet. So all good there.

Really interesting spot on the river. Really looks like V has AX and is going for the rare double check raise. Never been in this spot before, at least not that I can remember, so I'm not sure what size to bet when he checks.

Definitely not jamming, on the off chance he's capable of finding a hero fold. My gut says fake-tank for 10 seconds, then bet small to induce the raise, or get a crying call. The sarcastic a-hole in me wants to bet $80, same size as his turn raise, just to needle.

Obviously never folding to his jam. If he's somehow boated up, nice hand, good game.

ETA - just read through the rest of thread. Surprised everyone thinks this is a fold, in a limped pot. As for pre, I don't hate over-limping here as much as I usually do, if we've seen enough of the table's play to think we're not going to get squeezed. Raising pre also seems fine.

Nice hand. Well played.

The river bet was stupid if the read given in the OP was even remotely accurate.

If the read was accurate, the opponent was clicking buttons. Are you the button clicker whisperer?

yes. how else to beat live poker?

im convinced that 90% of this forum thinks they are playing vs GTO bots

the issue is thats not really the case. if it was, while misguided in alot of spots at least it would be based on something. what i find ends up happening, that makes discussion really frustrating, is people think that they are up against deliberately poorly coded bots whos entire strategy can be deciphered from fairly useless villain descriptions. i think most people just don't have any real process / heuristics to evaluate hands, so if its not something obvious like aggro fish that overbluffs or loose passive who always have value when he takes a line!, the process short circuits.

is not everyone that this applies to but yeah