TPGK on a paired turn, raise, call, or fold?

Against this opponent (whom you believe is a relative newbie), we should probably fold the turn, especially since Villain purportedly has seen a lot of flops, and this is the first post-flop board he's really liked.

Thanks for the first reply. I believe pre-flop min 3-bet is a newbie sign, plus he looks like a student (just around 20) - not sure how I should interpret this age + student-like image.

If the profile is more vague, such as an average profile in average population, how do we react to this flop XR and the turn lead?

According to the solver, the turn is a pure fold, and presumably this Villain has fewer bluffs than a standard, GTO opponent would have.

Curiously, the solver mostly folds both KJo and AJo to the flop c/r, which is surprising to me (i.e. 75% folds...25% split between calling and raising)

check back the flop. i actually think you can check back this flop with 100% of your range.

fold to the flop CR. there are no good turn cards.

are you running your solver w/node locks?

No...why would I need to? It's a simple PF raise and a call.

Hard to think we're beating anything in his value range, unless he's getting WAY out of line with QJ.

I hate folding flop, but I might. I probably wouldn't call the turn without picking up any additional equity.

Folding the turn is easier than folding the flop for me. Come on, our opponent is not an OMC.

Interesting stuff from solver.

I actually have the reveal of this hand. Will post tmr.

Yes, I agree. Folding the turn is easier than folding the flop.

But consider what V's bluffs or worse value may be, when he x/r's the flop.

For thick value, He could have a straight with Q9 or 97, every 2P combo, and possibly some sets.

What are his bluffs? K9 (which we block), and...76, maybe? Or possibly he limped in with AQ/AK/KQ and has decided to bluff with those? But again, we block all those Kx combos.

What worse value does he have? QJ? QT? J9? Is he really check-raising those hands? We block QJ and J9.

I think we could find our way to a disrespectful fold on the flop. But if not, surely we can fold the turn.

Sometimes a hero fold is sexier than a hero call.

i was wondering why you are bothering trying to play GTO vs players that dont play GTO.

It feels like you're either trolling and/or really confused about the very nature of GTO.

Nonetheless, if the solver says we should fold here to opponents who are solid and aggressive (i.e. they play GTO), even though they likely have a fair amount of bluffs in their range... Do you think that the villain in this hand is going to play more straightforward or less straightforward than a "GTO" opponent?

I like your analysis of his range.

Imagine the flop wasn't rainbow, instead it has two clubs and one heart, everything else unchanged, how do we react to the flop CR and V's turn bet?

tbh i feel most of your posts are trolls

re: your question, its 1/2, take a guess.

He could have more bluffs, so it's a closer decision on both streets.

In theory, V should have some check raise bluffs on the flop that give up and check turn. So if he bets, our reads come into play, but think I'd still lean towards a fold.

Multiway I don't mind a check on the flop. HU a bet is ok, as is the bet-call.

My default versus an x-r on connected boards versus inexperienced players is that they overprotect, particularly 2 pair.

It's plausible that they overvalue weaker combo draws such as QJ, QT, J9, T9. A more experienced player may x-r these combos if they've a bdf and then barrel a paired turn for 50%.

I'm reluctant to give Villain too many of these semi-bluff combos, though, so favour a nitty fold on the turn. Some live reads could sway me toward a call.

What kind of live reads are we paying attention to? Timing tell before the half-pot bet on the turn? Is the half-pot bet a bit too "standard" here?

Generally, I think timing tells and sizing tells are reasonably reliable within the low-stakes player pool. But I tend to favor direct observation of individual opponents, looking for patterns and inconsistencies.

So, in this instance, if we'd observed V's actions with strong holdings or bluffs in previous hands, we might discern something in his bet timing or sizing, or see something else which might give us some indication of his actual hand strength.

Only looking at the population, I would consider a snap check-raise on the flop here to be an authentic sign of strength. I wouldn't put too much into his tank-1/2 pot bet on the turn, because that's something he might do with a straight (tank-betting only half pot, fearing you boated up), or a boat (considering the possibility of an action-killing card on the river, before he decides how much to bet), or a bluff (considering what hands you might have that called flop but will fold turn, or possibly fold river if he barrels).

Well played, V.

Don't beat yourself up (or anyone else who said you should fold). He made a gutsy play on the turn. If we never fold the best hand, we're not folding enough.

Are you serious?

He defended his BB with a suited Q, then check-raised flop with 1 over, an ISSD, and a BDFD. That's a reasonable hand to turn into a check-raise.

He rightfully surmised that you're not going to have much Q9 in your range when you raise pre and flat call the flop, and that you aren't likely to have 2P that boats up on the turn. Meanwhile, he picked up the BDFD to go with his ISSD, so he's bluffing with a decent amount of equity.

You made a reasonable (if smallish) raise pre, and then somewhat over-played your hand on the flop, by c-betting 2/3 pot when 1/3 would do. Neither the small pre-flop raise nor the large c-bet are egregious errors, but in tandem they open the door for V to make this play, and have it seem credible, more credible than it would seem if we opened larger pre and c-bet smaller.

He made a gutsy play, likely figuring you'd have over-pairs and Broadway combos that don't make the nuts on this board, then followed through with a turn barrel on a nut-changing card.

PF - BB called with Q6s against my UTG open. Way too loose and completely unnecessary.

OTF - Against my big bet (nearly impossible to be two overs), his CR is more of an overplay, unlikely to get thru, and not easy to continue OOP on the following street. I recall you said you might fold to his CR on the flop, and you think that's a 'sexy fold'. I hold different opinions, but surely every one plays different ways.

OTT - As played, anyone in BB's shoes when picking up additional equity with this lucky turn card can easily continue bluffing. Lack of difficulty.

Villain also showed his bluff, when no one asked him to. I played in a casino where most pp are more quiet, not the vibe in private games. I don't think anyone at the table gave him any praise. Later on when this villain stacked off KK vs QQ when he didn't know the difference between 'all-in raise' and 'call' on the flop, and got committed on the turn when the nut changed, certainly no one laughed at him as well. I don't think he deserves the thought process you credit to him.

I've seen the results, so don't feel like I can offer a decent opinion now. It's difficult to generalise live reads aside from the obvious ones (e.g. involuntary nervousness/anxiety, which can still represent strength). I just made a bad fold based on live reads yesterday, so confidence in my rader is not great atm. Timing tells can be relevant but really you need some correlation with showdowns, as well as understanding whether your opponent is aware of their own tells.

I tend to agree with docvail regarding Villain's semi-bluff. Sure calling with Q6s from the bb is marginal but at least he played the hand aggressively versus a range that isn't particularly favoured by a JT8 flop. C-betting 60% on this board isn't a big bet btw (100%+ is); his x-r is difficult to counter, particularly as you folded to a 50% bet on the turn (think about how many turn cards improve his range more than yours --- in other words, he didn't get lucky with a magical card on turn, since all repeats, 7x, 9x, Qx favour him) . Before knowing the results, the consensus was that folding turn was ok, which suggests to me Villain played the hand well. He exploited your flop bet, which is useful to keep in mind. The only major mistake Villain made was showing you his bluff.

Take all this for what it's worth, and know I mean this with the utmost respect. Reading your reply, I get the sense that your ego has come into this, which, while understandable, is detrimental to our game, and our improvement.

You opened UTG to 4x in a 1/2 game. I don't know the normal open size in that game, but 4x isn't overly large in the low-stakes games I play (my usual RFI open at 1/3 is $15). I'm not going to go checking a solver or searching for a chart to support this, but my hunch is that Q6s isn't too far out of line as a BB defend, and might be "standard" for all I know.

I don't see why it's impossible for you to have two overs on the flop, but you could certainly have all the over-pairs.

My point was that Q9 isn't going to make up very much of your UTG opening range, and V blocks that hand with his Q, so with one over, an ISSD, and a BDFD, his hand is a very reasonable check-raise candidate on the flop. Whether or not it's likely to get through on the flop isn't the sole criterion for judging.

In fact, I think he will be able to continue on many turns. He picks up equity on any heart, Q, or 7, and makes a straight on a 9. Even a 6 will give him a pair, which beats your over-card combos. Additionally, since you're unlikely to have 2P or a set when you flat call his x/r, he can barrel on a board pairing card.

It's okay to make incorrect folds with 1P when facing aggression at low stakes. Against an opponent who you've pegged as VPIP'ing wide, we should consider how many good hands he can have on the flop, that would play as a check-raise for value.

So, yes, I do think folding the flop would be reasonable, since most low-stakes opponents aren't capable of finding enough x/r-bluffs. It's rare to see an x/r from a low-stakes rec playing that isn't 2P+.

Villain may have showed his bluff for future value, hoping to earn more calls with his value bets. Or perhaps your critique is right, and he's not very good, as well as undeservedly arrogant. Sometimes not very good players stumble their way into making fairly good plays, without understanding why what they're doing is good.

You seem genuinely interested in improving. My recommendation is to think through the hand from both his position and yours, understand why his line makes sense with his hand, and consider alternative outcomes which may have resulted from you taking different actions along the way.

Perhaps he'd have folded pre to a larger open size. He wouldn't have been able to check-raise had we checked back the flop. If we c-bet smaller, he may have still checked-raise, but we'd have had an easier decision to continue. Perhaps he may have checked turn, with less invested in the pot.

I think his play was fine. I think your fold was fine. I'd have made the same fold on the turn, and probably been a little angry at myself for not folding on the flop.