Feeling squirrly how much to bury your fourth nuts by this river?
1/3 NLHE 8 handed
We just sat down at our normal Saturday night game and recognize most people. We're just saying hi and
What hands exactly are we afraid of? We need 36% and someone is seriously considering folding our hand? Are you kidding me? Your mindset and playing style are precisely why you'll never play higher limits than 1/3. This is a snap call against everyone except complete nits (and our opponent was described quite differently). I honestly can't believe the terrible advice being given here. And yes - of course, Hero called and lost the hand in this specific case (otherwise, he wouldn't be posting it). But even in this case, this remains a snap call.
Being capable of bluffing is nowhere near the same as bluffing in spots that nobody bluffs, ever. Like does anyone genuinely believe a reg overbets this river with anything but the nut-flush(also questionable) and boats? If the answer is no, you saying he's targetting Qx FDs makes no sense because those shouldn't overbet the river.I don't think we can discount KK/99, 22 we prob
Obviously, if V was random $1/$3 player its an easy fold. You can fold 100% of overbet jams at $1/$3 and be just fine. It's because we believe V is capable of finding bluffs that its a discussion at all.
It's a bit funny to me that people say this spot is underbluffed, when in reality if its being bluffed at all, it is almost certainly overbluffed. V should have almost no value here and therefore should have almost no bluffs. It's a line that doesn't make much sense for value. With the post-flop action, Vs line makes the most sense for a hand like 62 or K2. Which we can discount because of his preflop raise. But it's about as plausible that he raised with 62s to splash around as it is that he played KK so passively, then suddenly jams.
If a line doesn't make sense for value, I default to call against any player I judge as decently aggressive with their value. If its a random fish doing things for fishy reasons, that's different.
Can I name the bluff? No. But I can't name the value, and that's more important in my book.
What hands exactly are we afraid of? We need 36% and someone is seriously considering folding our hand? Are you kidding me? Your mindset and playing style are precisely why you'll never play higher limits than 1/3. This is a snap call against everyone except complete nits (and our opponent was described quite differently). I honestly can't believe the terrible advice being give
i really hope my mindset and style improve enough that one day i can play higher than 1/3
still think you mostly have bluff catcher vs this line (am open to him having k2ss, am not open to seeing the nf here with any kind of regularity although maybe a9dd makes sense for both turn / river play) in a spot you need to call 25% and i dont think really have any relevant blockers to value (i doubt he has 66 super often given flop / turn line, doubt he has 62ss bc of pre and flop / turn line). if we think we see k2ss or a9dd i think its a super clear call i just think we're too deep to really expect a9dd to do this and i not really that convinced he does this with k2ss pre all that often). idk maybe we have flushes or something in this line and its autocall but idk man. i still think b200 or b250 is better sizing otr though still nightmare scenario facing jam. kind of think ppl just saying lol trivial bluff catch for 250bb in single raised pot facing this line dont play poker
cool hand but suspect its just going to end up being kk always
My point was that you would think KK/22 would try to get some value before the river, right? Or at least he bets the river, especially after H bets turn. And 99 would bet the turn, probably? It's obvious that H does not have KK, so a crusher LAG could have AdKx or similar and be bluffing. If he has it, I'm thinking 22 -- but a LAG crusher should want some value along the way an
I wouldn't think BB would make that big raise pre with 22. I'm expecting to see KK usually and 99 pretty much the rest of the time.
On the flop checking top set is pretty standard. Same on turn. Hands that would call your bet likely stab themselves. You're blocking top pair.
When hero bets it's unlikely to be a 2 given the preflop tell combined with the flop check back. If villain has KK he's blocking top pair so it's likely hero has a pocket pair, some other weak stab or a flush draw, all of which likely fold to a check raise on the paired board. So it makes sense for him to continue by calling.
When the diamond River hits he knows you will bet flushes when checked to. When you overbet he's probably thinking, "Yahtzee."
Time to spring the trap and go all in.
Of course that is a lot of assumptions. I suppose it's possible he's turning 9x into a bluff or something, but I wouldn't expect that given that you overbet river. I think his image makes it more likely this is a shove for value. He's expecting you to hero call.
I would sometimes raise to $25 in the BB w/ 22 given the right table dynamics. If he was waiting for someone to bet, he got extremely lucky. Just doesn't sound like the way a LAG crusher would play, but if he had it, it worked.
only thing i keep thinking about with this hand is if he can have k2ss from pre in which case its auto call
...
don't care what villain description is. he is a random guy grinding 1/3. would not overreact to crusher / runs sick bluffs and think lol i can call here because hes good.
But him "being good" as a reason to call means he has to be doing things that other randos at 1-3 aren't ... and I'm trying to think about wtf that would be?
2 combos. of K2s maybe make sense ... although I think river shove is an overplay vs. most people, unless V thinks we are calling flushes.
It's impossible to have 62s, given H's hand and the board. And there's only one combo. of 92s left although that seems insane to take this line before the river anyway (might as well start giving him AdQd or whatever).
So I still don't see enough (thin) value we beat.
About the best we can hope for is "V is good and realizes that H's line looks like BS, and/or that he can't have KK/99, so is shoving as a bluff" ... and maybe massively overbluffing this spot is "good" in some sense, but it's pretty out there.
But him "being good" as a reason to call means he has to be doing things that other randos at 1-3 aren't ... and I'm trying to think about wtf that would be?2 combos. of K2s maybe make sense ... although I think river shove is an overplay vs. most people, unless V thinks we are calling flushes.It's impossible to have 62s, given H's hand and the board. And there's only one combo
i dont think he should call, at least not pure lol. someone earlier in the thread said v is good and by definition good players bluff so i call was what i was referencing. is odd hand because of (bad) turn stab and maybe we just never have boats here and v goes for it lighter than he should i just think its really hard for him to take this line and get to the river without sdv or even for him to realize that ingame. re the turn stab, how often do you expect reasonably aggro crusher lag to iso large oop into the field and then just x/f this board. believe turn is just putting in money with minimal - no fold equity / equity. wouldn't fault a call ingame or anything, and i guess we never really got better except quads, id just be floored to see a bluff here and i find it kind of hard to come up with assumptions where we beat value (maybe he raises k2ss like 10% of the time pre?).
realistically only theoretical reason i can find to call this over anything else is to prevent him from bluffing 2x / value jamming flushes / not let him take this line w 66 (again find this v unlikely given flop / turn line) / the k2ss or 92ss pre argument. maybe is enough when combined together
solve worth little because hard to come up with pre ranges and its 3 ways but
flop strat as oop. i expect this to get played as basically range bet. when i think about what hands would end up doing something else the most obvious candidates to me are something like KK or QQ, not really AdQx or ATdd or 66.
turn i forced it to bet your hand to see what it would do otr if i bet the turn (it wanted to pure check). substantial error to bet here and i think its worse in practice as i really think bb never has air he is just giving up on the hand given action
sizing preferences for 66 otr
facing jam otr w 66
yay submersible
i think going a step further and looking at the actual villain reads. ok hes good player for this game and lag. to me that makes it more likely he is going to bet flop with his range as opposed to finding complicated float to turn sdv into bluff otr vs polar range w 200+bb x/r. again, its a 1/3 game. this isn't a hs reg playing vs another hs reg who tries to make sure he is balanced in every single node. if you call every 0 ev bluff catcher vs every line because villain is good and good players bluff you are going to die in almost every game as a default (most lines are underbluffed, particularly tricky ones), and substantially more so once they see what you're doing
Have to remember he's a crusher LAG that can run insane bluffs.
I guess it's up to banana to figure out if this is one of them.
he is playing 1/3 regularly (enough that op plays with him consistently and the guy knows op's game) lol
im not trying to be pedantic or elitist, but people that are super sick simply don't do that. likely he is good for op's game and wins maybe even alot, but come on. from probablistic standpoint, is hometown hero that runs over small stakes game, not linus or prodigy
I play with a guy who would 100% bluff here, but he's just a LAG maniac who runs insane bluffs, not a LAG crusher.
Obviously, if V was random $1/$3 player its an easy fold. You can fold 100% of overbet jams at $1/$3 and be just fine. It's because we believe V is capable of finding bluffs that its a discussion at all.
Right and I'm questioning how relevant/trustworthy that read is. Having seen him triple barrel ace-high once or twice is no where near the same as shoving 250bb into a river over-bet.
It's a bit funny to me that people say this spot is underbluffed, when in reality if its being bluffed at all, it is almost certainly overbluffed. V should have almost no value here and therefore should have almost no bluffs.
Sure I guess? We're just playing nonsensical word games now. Underbluffed really means overbluffed when we all know you see a bluff on this river at 1/3 close to never.
It's a line that doesn't make much sense for value. With the post-flop action, Vs line makes the most sense for a hand like 62 or K2. Which we can discount because of his preflop raise. But it's about as plausible that he raised with 62s to splash around as it is that he played KK so passively, then suddenly jams.
I mean no. It's far more likely this is KK/99/22 than it is 62 or K2 and I'd be okay with discounting 22 entirely all though perhaps a LAG does iso this.
If a line doesn't make sense for value, I default to call against any player I judge as decently aggressive with their value. If its a random fish doing things for fishy reasons, that's different.
Can I name the bluff No. But I can't name the value, and that's more important in my book.
I agree it's a nonsense line all together for the most part, perhaps a few slowplayed boats but it's not a snap call and I'd argue it's closer to a fold than a call in pretty much every 1/3 game ignoring the ''read'' we have which is really the only reason for a call.
So far range construction has been pretty poor so we're def not calling because we all agree on a reasonable range for villain.
Anyone who snap calls rivers like this likely doesn't play higher than 1/3 either.
But him "being good" as a reason to call means he has to be doing things that other randos at 1-3 aren't ... and I'm trying to think about wtf that would be?
Exactly. Does a good 1/3 reg really try and get people to fold what ever they have on this river when he's facing an over-bet?
About the best we can hope for is "V is good and realizes that H's line looks like BS, and/or that he can't have KK/99, so is shoving as a bluff" ... and maybe massively overbluffing this spot is "good" in some sense, but it's pretty out there.
Agreed which is the only reason I'd be okay with calling. Our line does look like BS but I also fear we'll go into endless loops lol. How many 1/3 regs have overbet bluffs on this river? I'd say the number is very close to 0, so villain is essentially trying to bluff vs a population that never bluffs. It's also less likely because are we really expecting villain to call naked Ad on the turn here? Does he iso Ad9x? Doubt it.
Plus wouldn't a LAG do the betting when he's bluffing?
Maybe the dynamic between Banana and villain is the deciding factor and it's just a sigh call. I have no idea. I do however think a lot of the advice given here to support a call is ambitious at best, just plain awful at worst.
Have to remember he's a crusher LAG that can run insane bluffs.
I guess it's up to banana to figure out if this is one of them.
Yeah, while I hate this reasoning as we don't even know what an ''insane bluff'' means for Banana. I'm somewhat fine with calling purely because of that.
i find it kind of hard to come up with assumptions where we beat value (maybe he raises k2ss like 10% of the time pre?). realistically only theoretical reason i can find to call this over anything else is to prevent him from bluffing 2x / value jamming flushes / not let him take this line w 66 (again find this v unlikely given flop / turn line) / the k2ss or 92ss pre argument.
I would probably call, but it's definitely value focused.
I'm a little surprised at the idea that, even in a Banana read, a player active enough to be described as a "LAG" would be unlikely to squeeze a hand like K2s. Heck, there are probably LAGs (without comment on whether they win or not) who would look at this preflop action and make that raise with ATC. With typical LLS weak-passive fish it might even be +EV to do it. Although, to be fair, going on to check a paired board is not how.
We're behind seven combos of better boats and quads, and while I agree that I don't think V is ever bluffing here, I don't think it's that hard to find plausible combos we beat for value. I wouldn't even be surprised to find V jamming the NF expecting to get called by a hand like A2, or simply jamming the NF because "it's a good hand" without considering what will call vs. fold. In that sense I'm probably disregarding any idea that V is good, but if any part of the read is reliable it's likely just someone who can put in a squeeze very wide pre. Also keep in mind that any hand that is beating us here had to call turn and check river versus a very whatever middling bet and it's also hard for me to see a described LAG being that patient. Though I suppose it's kind of hard to see any hand played that passively by V, and it is a Banana read...
It would be an insane bluff to try to get someone who overbet the river for value to fold. So it is read-dependent how many insane bluffs he has and how insane.
I would probably call, but it's definitely value focused.I'm a little surprised at the idea that, even in a Banana read, a player active enough to be described as a "LAG" would be unlikely to squeeze a hand like K2s. Heck, there are probably LAGs (without comment on whether they win or not) who would look at this preflop action and make that raise with ATC. With typical LLS w
last attempt
i think its unlikely the guy he describes as a big winner in his game is squeezing bad hands into these stacks / players w regularity.
re the nf i think its unlikely said lag turns down the opportunity to cbet k22tt into 2 limp call ranges (filled w low pairs and mostly devoid of strong top pairs) to take a passive check line otf to c/c the turn w essentially minimal sdv vs the 55 type hands of the limp callers as opposed to either betting or checkraising. there are spots and lines in which ace high has sdv, its fairly clear this isn't really one of them and he has initiative and a really good board to stab
usually solves are whatever for these clown hands but the stuff i posted above confirms most of this, pls refer to the ss's
very unlikely to me any of you actually play with people that bluff here re the nuance of the situation (i still think its basically never bluffed)
Villain knows hero cannot have KK or 99, so he could theoretically bluff shove to get 66 or a high flush to fold.
As others have mentioned, hard to believe he could make that bluff. Also, hard to believe he would be overplaying the nut flush.
I don't think V is bluffing. I think he has a strong hand. Kudos to him and his enormous testicles if he is bluffing.
I'm discounting the "crusher" read, and just guessing V is one of the better players in OP's local pool. The other thing that has me discounting better boats is the "short speech" bit.
When a bad player does that, it's an obvious attempt at deception. When an experienced player does it, it's often an indication of a hand that's too strong to over-limp, and too strong to fold to a 3B, but doesn't love getting 3B or going multi-way, or playing OOP post.
I don't think he's raising 22 out of the BB, and don't see why he'd give a speech if he is. I don't think he'd say anything if he's raising KK with a UTG who likes to limp-3B on his left. That basically leaves 99 and some AXdd combos for thick value on the river.
Meanwhile, OP isn't supposed to have any boats here, when he limp-calls pre. He's not over-limp-calling with KK, and probably not with 99 or the one combo of 22. He shouldn't be stabbing turn with 66.
OP probably stabs flop with the NFD at some frequency. V probably bets turn with 99 at some frequency.
OP's most likely holding is going to be some suited Broadway combo that flopped a FDFD and started a semi-bluff when he turned a GSSD. If V shows up with 99, nice hand, good game. It seems at least as likely he has the NF and thinks OP has a worse flush.
...Exactly. Does a good 1/3 reg really try and get people to fold what ever they have on this river when he's facing an over-bet?...How many 1/3 regs have overbet bluffs on this river? I'd say the number is very close to 0, so villain is essentially trying to bluff vs a population that never bluffs. It's also less likely because are we really expecting villain to call naked Ad
A couple of thoughts. V knows Banana. This is both good and bad because V knows B can lay down a flush to this action (more on that in a sec) but...and we love you for it Banana, but if anyone in that player pool is unlikely to just check down all three streets, it's B. So V knowing this, might be OK with checking a flopped mega boat, check/calling turn and checking river, knowing B'll still pounce on something like the flush draw coming in. Even as silly deep as they are.
KK fits. But so does AdKx, IMHO. Maybe Ad2x too? It's very unlikely the other V has a 2; ditto B, unless 22, and the part about V not wanting to check a street as deep as they are, cuts both ways. Is B really checking back quads here on the flop last to act, with SPR like 17-1? Maybe. I think B gets a bet in though. So, Kx with the Ad blocker, is sitting pretty, and maybe goes for a x-r vs a std cbet on flop?
Banana then bets a 9, but is unlikely to have limped 99, I'd think. I don't know why V wouldn't have led turn, or if they wanted to see what V2 did, why they didn't x-r B's bet. I think V thinks B has a lot of T9dd/98dd etc in their limp/call vs open in front of meganit range. Still behind Kx though, and B's probably going to vbet or bluff again on river, plus is V2 going to call this turn bet? So that might explain V's passivity here, and not that he has a monster.
River brings a completed FD, and an overpot bet from B. Uh-oh. Kx no good no more. Unless B has 66---I think V thinks B would limp/call that, and maybe also stab turn with it---B's got a flush. Even if that is a gigantic bet with one on a paired board. Well, V does have the nut blocker, and is deep enough to bluff credibly, and B's good enough to fold a flush, so... Maybe he's also good enough to fold a baby boat too? I really don't think V thinks B has a boat though, because who can fold those?
Strange sizing on the jam if it's value, what can call here, besides boats, and even those should have 2nd thoughts. How elastic should B be with a flush here? Pure bet/fold? Call a cib? Should B even bet a flush here?
If it's not KK, I think it's AdKx.
I don't think V is bluffing. I think he has a strong hand. Kudos to him and his enormous testicles if he is bluffing. I'm discounting the "crusher" read, and just guessing V is one of the better players in OP's local pool. The other thing that has me discounting better boats is the "short speech" bit. When a bad player does that, it's an obvious attempt at deception. When an ex
He simply is not LAG and good if he has the nut flush here and it’s equally surprising people believe a good LAG plays axdd this way.
A true LAG doesn’t even play 99 this way….
I don’t think we agree on what LAG and good means.
I remember you saying before that Banana’s reads(maybe descriptions) have been wrong. This would certainly be the case if he played axdd this way.
Very curious about the results.
Reading all the arguments has me second-guessing.
It feels super-MUBSy to fold a boat, but...I'm starting to wonder if V makes a speech before raising KK because he knows UTG likes to limp-3B with AA, then he checks flop and turn because he thinks a bet can't get called, and then sees that gin card diamond on the river.
The thing that's killing me is OP's pre-flop limp and turn bet. Why, Banana? Why? Just raise-fold pre, and check back the turn. This hand shouldn't cost us more than $20 if we raise-fold pre, or at most maybe $150-$200 on the river. We don't need to get stacked.
I don't know how we limp-call pre, turn 66 into a near-zero-equity bluff on the turn, hit a two-outer to river a boat, and then bet-fold when V goes check-check-check like he's Mike Mc-goddam-Dermott.
I don't think I could do it. I'd convince myself he's got AXdd and beat him into the pot, then repeatedly scream F**K into the steering wheel on the shameful drive home after he shows down KK.
The preflop speech sounds like KK, which is consistent with other action. Maybe Banana's read on how good villain is is off, because the speech is generally a donk move.
He simply is not LAG and good if he has the nut flush here and it’s equally surprising people believe a good LAG plays axdd this way. A true LAG doesn’t even play 99 this way….I don’t think we agree on what LAG and good means. I remember you saying before that Banana’s reads(maybe descriptions) have been wrong. This would certainly be the case if he played axdd this way. Very c
Good LAGs are hard to find at 1/3. Even if V is just a bad LAG, he's going to have a wider range than TAGs, and play his range more aggressively, meaning he'll have more bluffs, and go thinner for value.
Banana's reads tend to run to the extremes. Players he sees as good are crushers. Players he sees as bad are fish. If V is break-even or better in his local pool, he's a "crusher" on the Banana scale.
I was having a hard time wrapping my head around anyone playing KK/99 this way. I can wrap my head around someone playing AXdd this way, when he's OOP and multi-way on this board, at low stakes.
I may have a common tendency to read the hand history, see hero rivered a boat, and look for justification to call, because boat. It's not hard to do. Just give V any AXdd combo and make him think OP has a worse flush.
OP having some non-nut flush makes more sense than him having a boat here. Once we get that far in our analysis, all that's left is the argle-bargle over whether or not V plays KK/99 or AXdd this way.
I started out thinking AXdd is more likely than KK/99, because I think any LAG, good or bad, is going to want to get more money into the pot starting on the turn with KK/99, and wouldn't want to let OP keep the betting lead going to the river.
Most LAGs are going to bet the turn with KK/99, not check again, but if they do check-call turn, they're very likely to donk the river when the flush comes in. They bet because their image will get them loose calls, and they don't want to risk OP checking back.
Thinking about it more, what hands is OP betting on the turn that aren't going to bet the river? K9? V blocks that with KK/99. 9Xdd? OP didn't bet turn with 2nd pair and a FDFD just to check back when he makes his hand on the river. A bluff? If OP was bluffing, he wouldn't call if V bet, so V may as well check again.
Does V play AXdd this way on flop and turn? I dunno. Maybe he's not as LAG as Banana thinks he is. I'd think even a good LAG is going to have a hard time putting Banana on a boat here, when he limp-calls pre. If he thinks Banana is a dummy, he might give Banana a range that includes hands worse than the 2nd NF.
Does a *good* LAG take this line with KK/99? I dunno. Maybe. Most good LAGs aren't playing 1/3, and "good" in Banana land may just mean he's won money from Banana.
I don't know what to think any more. Good LAG? Bad LAG? We're so far off the rails when OP limp-calls pre and stabs on the turn that I don't think nailing the read is going to help us enough.
OP could have 22 here. V doesn't know. This game is nuts. This hand is Bananas.
If you fold this hand against a reasonably competent opponent, they'll destroy you in the long run. These overfolds are the reason why live poker is still incredibly profitable (and the posts in this thread show that NL 1/3 is still likely a massive money-printing machine).
