River decision against competent player with bottom boat

Since you're in a raked game and you'd have to fold to a BB 3-bet, I really don't like the call PF. But I'm guessing you were probably bored and realized you didn't want to squeeze with 55.

I'd just jam river. It's not even a psb. Anyone calling 1/2 psb will call for all of it.

If you look in a solver it's probably going to say check call since you're 200bb deep but I think all options are good besides fold. At low stakes people over value over-pairs, trips, etc. on this board so you can still check jam for value. To answer your 2nd question, flopped top set plays for stacks, either raising flop or turn and getting it all in on the river.

Just checking - do you mean flop or river here?

Check call river. I like the flop raise.

Thanks for clarifying it. I am also interested in what Solver would suggest to do on the river, if any 2+2er has it and happen to have the interest.

I think with a competent villain, my hand is pretty faced-up from the flop. CR the flop, check-call the turn. If I was V with straight, and got checked to on the river, I would certainly check back, because any betting would just be called by better or a chop.

When he bets the turn after you x/r the flop, it looks like he has a straight. I would shove the river. He isn't likely to bluff or value bet worse.

If he has a straight, you have him beat on the river. Your line looks like a set or two pair that would fill up on the river. So it seems unlikely he will bet, so you need to.

I always call pre vs "competent" btn and with fish in bb, flop I raise to 80.

As played I wouldn't shove the river vs a kinda competent reg, with your line you obv have a 2pair/set which rivered fh, especially because average 1/2 reg will "never" bluffshove the river in this spot.

I would either bet/call something like $55 (an amount where he would feel stupid to fold, and maybe trigger him to shove), or check and hope that he can't resist betting himself

Btw not so sure about the flop c/r, he has the nutadvantage and if money goes in on flop for 200bb you're pretty much crushed, also you probably wouldn't bluffraise much with fish behind which would make villains 3bet range on flop even stronger.

I probably prefer call with bottom set in this spot, and hope for the fish to join and add some dead money.

pre isn't really one of those things that can get shrugged off. its 6x as high rake not closing the action vs someone described as competent reg

but seeing the flop i think lead has to be better than xr, esp this size x/r. presumably a large part of the reason you're calling pre is to play with the rec and you're shutting out large parts of his range via x/r. its also not a board you should expect someone competent to cbet super wide into 2 esp vs a sb flatter

the size if you're going to bet is all in, and it mostly looks like its better to bet than check w ur hand. i think conceivably u could have something like idk t9, 98 or i guess optimistically qt, j9 type hands as bluffs

idk what to say if the argument is he don't ever call 2/3 psb w 6x. i guess bet less but i wouldn't make that decision for him. think 55 and 88 will more or less play similarly here from our perspective. checking relies on him value jamming jt, and bluffing it off sometimes w 9x/tx type hands both of which i dunno seem unlikely to me even if just from the standpoint flop was 3 ways. that said you're xr is very small so maybe he floats random stuff more often than normal. would still just rip it in and glare at him

think u guys worry too much about image too much tbh

yes, just lead the flop, didn't thought about it, but it's clearly the best line in this spot.

Without changing the board, If we led the flop, and button flat called. We then check-called the turn, we would have more room to play on the river. I would favour a cr on the river coz our hand would be way more disguised. The problem in this scenario would be the turn move because v would be so wide, we didn't know whether to check call or check raise.

Without changing the flop actions, if the turn and river card bricks out, we can get the max money for charging 6x draws.

It's quite annoying whatever option we chose, the runout later on would have suggested the alternative option would have been better for the board.

With the fish in the BB, I like the flat call pre.

Likewise, with the fish in the BB, I think we make more money just donking the flop for 1/3 to half pot. We push the fish out when we go for the check raise.

Interesting check on the turn. Were you concerned V improved to a better hand? Seems unlikely, and I'd probably just barrel here. But as played, I would love to see a double check raise.

As played, I think we should bet small on the river, like $75, to induce him to raise. Hope it looks like we flopped a straight with 64 and aren't happy with the runout. Pray he has JT or wants to rep a better hand.

Don't think I'd play 88 differently than 77, 55, or 87 here. Playing almost all my flopped sets and 2P with the same line. I'd only be more cautious with 75, which I'd probably play as a check-call on flop and turn, but donk big on the river.

I have another more straight forward question that I am now super curious:

If you are V on the button with A6s and has got to the river this way, and the sb (no hand history before, just changed seat and did not VPIP for half an hour, female in 30's) check raised the flop, check called the turn, and now jams the river, how many of you are calling?

That line is pretty nutted, so I'd almost certainly fold A6. But with A6, I'd have over-bet the turn, so I wouldn't expect to be in this hypothetical position.

I think check-raising flops with sets and 2P is a bit too "industry standard", and leads every opponent to assume 2P/sets when facing a flop check-raise, unless the opponent has proven themselves capable of check-raising with other parts of their range.

I think the flop donk lead is under-utilized, and often misinterpreted, and thus leads opponents to make mistakes when deciding how to respond.

The check-raise flop, check-call turn line is unusual, in that most flop check-raises are followed by turn barrels or check-folds. The flop check-raise, turn check-call, is going to look strong enough, but also a bit face-up on this sort of run-out. It looks like 2P / sets that hate the turn, but can't fold to a 1/2 pot bet, and are just hoping to boat up on the river.

Aside from 2P / sets, your range on the flop looks like 6x, but possibly 64 that doesn't want to see a 9, T or J come. 6x and 64 aren't folding turn, and might check to check-call river. The problem here is that few opponents are going to bet the river when the board pairs and we check to them, unless they have a boat.

We'd never donk huge or jam with 6x or 64, and so polarizing to a boat or nothing doesn't get called nearly as much as we'd like. I think betting small is the only way to credibly rep a low straight that doesn't want to check and face a huge river bet.

Thanks for the vote and comprehensive suggestions on all streets.

I'd like to see more votes on whether to call a jam with A6 if you were the villain? Anyone calling please don't be shy to put your hands up!

Not looking to beat a dead horse, but the only hand beating 6x on the turn is JT, and it's very unlikely JT check raises this 578rb flop.

The flop check raise is really repping 2P, sets, and 96 / 64 for value, and maybe some 1P + a draw for bluffs.

Occasionally maybe someone x/r's JT and spikes the miracle 9 on the turn. But it seems unlikely that person would check-call a 1/2 pot bet on the turn, AND donk-jam the board-pairing river.

It's just such an unlikely scenario. It's much more likely the river donk jam is going to be a boat. But even if it is JT, A6 still loses. I'm struggling to think of a hand A6 thinks it's beating on the river, if hero donk jams.

Not sure it really matters. If V turned a straight after calling a flop check raise, I'd think he'd bet bigger on the turn when you check to him, at least some of the time. His half pot bet looks like he's unsure what to do with his over-pairs, or a higher set, or maybe 98, now that there's four to a straight on board.

Even if he has the nuts on the turn, he gets significantly downgraded on the river. If he had a higher set or 87 on the turn, he's been upgraded. 6x is rarely if ever calling a jam here, as played.

Here is the review:

After posting the review, I got interested in the above paragraph you said regarding his term bet size. I wondered,
1. in the game dynamic of your local game, when 6x bets bigger on the term (e.g. pot size), do you see sets / two pairs / overpairs calling from the SB, if the stack depth remains unchanged?
2. If the SB's range only includes sets, two pairs, overpairs, sets certainly has the highest equity to continue. If you were the SB with 55, what's the max you can check-call for? Will you call a pot-size bet?
3. If you have an overpair on the button, will you check back the turn, or to open up the action to risk being check raised again?

In the game dynamic of my local game, when button bets half pot on the turn, only sets can continue (or two pairs sometimes, or overpairs from top 1% of the fish). Therefore I think his term sizing is not too small.

I knew you would be the first one implying you would call with A6 😀 Don't be shy next time.

I actually posted this two days ago:

I'd just jam river. It's not even a psb. Anyone calling 1/2 psb will call for all of it.

I saw your first post. Did you look at my question on #14？

I've only got one vote so far, from Docvail saying 'he'd almost certainly fold A6'. So, will you call with A6 facing a jam?

I don't like to think 'I will certainly fold A6 if I was V, but V wouldn't, because he's stupid.' In the title we have already specified the villain to be competent. Against some other villains, surely jamming is a no-brainer.

It's an interesting hand because the nuts change on every street, which I think goes to answering your questions, about how we or anyone else might play each street, from each players' position.

It's also a little hard for me to imagine all the nodes on the game tree for each player, when I'd be playing the hands differently on earlier nodes. But I guess I can try...

1) I'm not sure all players size up with their turn bets here, as V, with 6x (or JT), after facing a flop check-raise.

The flop x/r is heavily weighted towards 2P/sets, but could also be some 6x or 1P + a draw, and maybe occasionally JTs with a BDFD. I would think that most V's would feel more emboldened to bet large with JT, unblocking / coolering 6x (if they think about blockers/unblockers), or with T6 (blocking JT and coolering other 6x), than with some other 6x combos like A6 or 64.

But all of those hands might also not want to bet too big, for fear of folding out 2P/sets. But then again, 2P/sets can still boat up, so, yes, I think 2P/sets aren't necessarily folding turn to a larger bet size, depending on how large it is.

So, if I'm V on turn, yeah, I'm probably sizing up, to get max value from 2P/sets and worse straights (if I have T6 or especially JT). And if I'm hero with 2P/sets, I'm probably not folding to less than a PSB.

Also, because the ranges become so face-up on the flop and turn, I really can't over-emphasize my preference for donking out as hero with bottom set, with the fish in the middle, the fairly wet board, and the possibility that V's over-pairs can still make a higher set on a ton of run-outs, when the flop is 8 high. A donk bet is not going to be anywhere near as face up as the check-raise.

2) As hero, I'm not putting 96, 77, 88, or 87 into V's range when he doesn't 3B the flop. As V, I'm not ruling out that hero flopped a straight with 96, though more likely 64, or that hero turned a straight with any 6x, so I can't really go too huge with 99, just because hero checks.

This is why I said I think it's a good spot to go for a double-check-raise. He can't necessarily jam 99 on the turn, and I would think he's folding 99 at some non-zero percent frequency, if you double check-raise. He's certainly going to be uncomfortable with all his sets and over-pairs, and some non-nut straights.

So with 55, and ruling out higher sets other than 99, I think V's range is going to be weighted towards turned straights, and over-pairs that think hero's x/r was FOS when hero checks turn. But if we count all the combos of 6x, I think he has a lot more over-pairs, which is why I'd probably continue to barrel, not check.

Bear in mind I'd have donked flop, and barreled turn. I think most opponents with 6x are happy to let us barrel with all our worse value, and won't raise very often.

If we check-raise flop, barreling turn gets a little dicey, because V's will want to punish us, but even so - how often is he going to raise? JT is the nuts. Does he call the flop x/r with JT? Can he be certain you don't have JT, or T6, if he just has A6?

Does he want to raise with 6x, ever, and risk letting you get away from all your 2P and sets, or risk you coming over the top with JT/T6? I'm not expecting V's to raise very often if we barrel turn.

Checking turn isn't bad, though. We can see what size he bets, and consider what that says about his hand.

His 1/2 PSB seems either uncertain what to do with his 99 and over-pairs, and maybe uncertain what to do with 6x, or a bit cheeky with his straights. I think his sizing is a mistake, and I'd be tempted to pounce on it by raising. I'm not sure I believe he had 6x, and wonder if he didn't actually have an over-pair.

As V, I think I'd over-bet a straight here, after hero x/r's flop, and I might bet big as a bluff. As hero, I'm not folding to anything less than a PSB, and I'm probably raising anything less than a 1/2 PSB.

3. As V, with an over-pair, I might check back the flop. If I c-bet, I'm not going over 1/3 pot. V made a mistake when he bet as large as he did.

When he bets 70% pot, and gets check-raised, he's in no-man's land. Can't really 3B anything other than 96, 88, and 77. Can't fold his over-pairs or draws.

Going to the turn, the pot is already too big for V's over-pairs, so, yeah, I'd check back all my over-pairs. If he bets again, with an over-pair, he's basically bluffing. I'd rather bluff with some combo that picks up a flush draw, but otherwise has no showdown value.

Turning an over-pair into a bluff seems like a spew, unless maybe it's JJ or TT that picks up a draw to the nuts. Even with JJ or TT, I don't think I would bet, but I'd take a larger sizing if I did, since I'd be blocking JT.

The issue I have with his turn bet sizing is that sets and 2P are likely to continue for a larger size bet. Sets have something like 40% chance to boat up. 2P a bit less, but many low stakes recs can't let go of 2P to a single bet that isn't a PSB or more. Betting 1/2 pot is giving sets too good a price to realize their equity, and isn't charging 2P what they'd be willing to pay.

When V takes this line, of c-betting 70% pot, calling an x/r, and then betting 1/2 pot on turn, he's painting himself into a corner. He can't call a donk jam when the board pairs, and won't bet if checked to on the river. But if hero bets small, he can level himself into thinking hero is blocking with the low straight, or perhaps bluffing, and will at least call, if not raise.

I like that you think so throughly in both hero & villain's spots. I believe that the key thing that leads you to think V should bet larger is that you believe 'sets have something like 40% chance to boat up. 2P a bit less'. In fact, on the turn, sets are at 22.73% and two pairs are at 9% (direct odds). Out of position against a competent player, implied odds are not as good as playing against a fish.

Given his half-pot bet on the term, I would certainly need to waive good-bye to my hands if I have two pairs. Even if I had TT I was in a better shape against his straight, comparing to 2Ps.

Before posting this hand, I would assume that the '22.73% or let's say roughly 25%, and the 9% or let's say 10% are built into every competent player's mind, but even good players like you get the equity percentages wrong. I then tested my husband, without thinking for long and carefully, just tell me how much equity sets & 2ps each is at, to catch up against a straight on the turn. To my surprise, he got the sets one wrong (he said 15%), and just about right for 2ps.

This led me to believe I should probably significantly adjust my bet size when I am ahead, because my 'competent villain' may still forget how bad shape they are at, when they call.