PAHWM - Mis-reg donks huge then gives up a tell.

Yes, we still lose to sets that filled up.

Do you think this is how a low-stakes mis-reg would play a flopped set / turned boat, as an over-bet donk into three opponents, and then a check on a double-flush-draw board?

Honestly, I don't know. I can't remember ever seeing this before, at least not in recent memory.

I struggle to make sense of opponents' lines when they defy logic and / or population tendencies. I'd think the population would go for a x/r on the flop with 2P or a set on this board.

I played a flopped top set in a somewhat similar way in a recent session, donking into multiple opponents on a wet and dynamic board, but I donked for 40% pot, then checked turn when I filled up on a card that paired the board but also brought in the FDFD. The PFR who called the flop when action folded to him just checked back. I think the flop donk / turn check line doesn't induce opponents to bet turn all that often, especially not when the board pairs or an obvious draw comes in.

His donk into multiple opponents with 2P or a set on a wet board makes sense, but not the insane over-bet sizing, or the turn check, if his flop donk and speech play is supposed to look strong.

Once I call the over-bet, and the board pairs on the turn, things get weird when he checks the turn 5c. It's hard for me to have QQ/JJ if he has QJ, and obviously he's not worried about those hands if he has 55 and turned quads. But, obviously, I have to have some sort of hand to call flop. I'd think the worst hand I'd ever have here is AQdd.

If V is boated up but doesn't block AQdd, would he think I'd stab at this when he checks? I'd think we'd have to jam, but why wouldn't we just take the free card here? Like, what hands can he have that would fold now, if we have AQdd? If we were going to jam turn with AQdd, we could have and probably would have just jammed the flop to make sure we see all five cards.

If he has QJ, would he be worried about me having a 5? What 5x do I have here, other than exactly the one combo of 55?

I'd think if he was semi-bluffing with AQdd, he'd just want to go with it and jam on this card that mostly looks like a brick. If he has QJ and is afraid of the FDFD, I'd think he'd jam for the same reasons.

It's kind of insane to give him a range of QJ, 55, and AQdd on the flop, then try to make sense of his turn check on the 5c, unless he was hoping we'd jam flop with AA/KK, and ruined his plans by flatting with our over-pairs that now make a better 2P than his QJ, if that's what he has, or unless he's got 55 and is regretting his over-bet donk now that he's made quads.

Like, at this point, I'm trying to figure out if he has QJ and just $hlt himself when the board pairs, 55 that is praying I have QQ/JJ, or AQdd that wishes he didn't over-bet donk and talk $hlt to me on the flop.

I admit I'm often wrong. I sat there one memorable time bluffing a V who had exactly what your V now has as a possibility, quad 5s. But my experience is that over time I make more money being aggro than paso. It's usually better to make him sweat than to allow him to make me sweat. Shove flop might be behind with almost no outs, but those hands don't come around all that often when I have an overpair. If I'm making a mistake, do it betting or folding, not calling.

Based on the turn, you might have won the pot but it killed your action because it emasculated one of his prime candidate hands, QJ. Or maybe he boated and your dead except for a 2 outer K. I'm willing to gamble it's the former. His stack is so short there isn't a great bet to be made other than AI.

I mean, if he has quads, good for him. It's one combo and maybe a bit less than that given flop action. You now beat his top 2 and lose to his silly Q5/Js combos. I'd tend to check back here to deleverage, and plan to either call or bet if checked to on most rivers.

Interesting. Doubt he calls it off with QJ if you jam, and there isn't really another size here besides jam. If he's got 55 instead, no point in ending it now, I guess.

Mainly trying to confuse and irritate V to make a stab at on river though. I'm calling a V shove on river. Doubt V's got a diamond draw, but stranger things have happened, yet still calling even if river is a diamond. I'm wondering if it is a counterfeited QJ. Could be QTdd, I guess.

I think you showing KK here, however it happens, is going to give you some room later to be aggressive with semi-bluffing, "Oh, he actually has it," instead of people making a stand later lighter than we'd like.

I'm trying to learn here...

why check and call his river AI? The only way it helps us is if we induced him to bluff the river.

if we're miles behind, calling turn doesn't lose any more than shoving.

It seems that are more V hands where a turn shove either takes the pot or makes him call with worse.

I didn't mean to suggest you were wrong, nor sound argumentative. A quick count I did showed the split as 5 folds and 4 jams, so it's not like you were out there on an island all by yer lonesome.

Like I said, it didn't even cross my mind. I post here to see what thoughts should cross my mind. Maybe jamming flop makes more sense than calling. I'm wrong a good bit, too.

I mean, now that I'm thinking of it, if we think he's FOS and just has TP + a draw, maybe we should jam at this SPR. I'm not too proud to admit that in game, I was thinking I didn't want to jam and get snap called, which may have pushed me to make a loose call, even knowing I might have to make a disciplined fold on some turns.

Now that we get to the turn the way we did, I think it's a tough fold for him if I jam when he checks. It's just hard to find two ranges to give him and give me where that would make much sense.

Like, if he has AQdd and I just have AA/KK or QJ, he has outs. If he's boated up, he's obviously not folding. The worst case scenario for him is he's got QJ vs my over-pairs that turn a better 2P, but if he doesn't have the Qd in his hand, I could have AQdd, and he's way ahead.

Even if he has the Qd in his hand with KQo or QJs/QJo, I could have called flop with AKdd or AJdd and I'll jam now that he's slowed down and checks. How does he fold if I jam $285 into $380, unless he was just getting completely OOL on the flop?

That's what makes his check strange. If he can't fold value, why not jam himself? If he was getting OOL, that's a helluva gamble on the flop, but when I tank-call, not jam, I can't look all that strong, so maybe it makes more sense for him to follow through with his bluff and jam turn, to get a range fold out of me.

It's just hard for me to figure out what he was thinking when he over-bet donks flop and doesn't jam turn.

Deleverage?

Congrats. You introduced me to a new poker term. What's the meaning in this context, and the reasoning?

(Also - wait 'till you see the river.)

You have no idea how much I love generating irritation EV.

So, you're suggesting we check back? Why don't you think V has a diamond draw? You think he'd just go with it and jam from up front?

I hadn't thought about the future EV of showing KK here. It's a good point, though, I think. Another example of thoughts I should maybe be having in game but I'm not having.

I think I might have a punchable face. People really don't like folding to me. I got some VERY loose action in this session, resulting in my dragging in some VERY big pots. Not sure how much showing KK here is going to make people think twice.

Punchable face might outweigh he had KK that one time, as far as people's motivations go.

Thank God for casino security.

I don't think your question was directed at me. Not even sure I understand what you're asking, but I never let that slow me down before, so...

First off, this hand is off the rails from pre-flop, and even farther off on the flop. I think we're all guessing what the highest EV play is here.

Trying to get inside V's head to understand what it looks like we have, from his perspective - maybe if we check back it looks like we have some sort of SDV that made a super-loose call on the draw-heavy flop, and now just wants to get to showdown, so will check back. Maybe something like 99 or TT, or AQ/KQ/AJ. Maybe some of those hands will check back turn and hero call river if he jams.

Like, give us TT or 99. If we called flop thinking he just had a flush draw, why would we fold if he bets a river brick? That looks like a bluff. If we think he'd jam turn with a FD, why would we fold on a river diamond when he checks turn? That also looks like a bluff.

Not sure if I'm remembering this right, but I'm recalling an exchange I had with someone here, I think @illiterat, who was saying bet-check-bet lines look bluffy as hell and don't get many river folds. Maybe this is a good example. I'd think his FDFD's would jam turn, so his turn check / river jam line is going to look like a bluff (or at least, polarized) no matter what the river card is.

Maybe checking back with AA/KK here looks like we have TT/99, and induces him to jam river just to make TT/99 fold. Logically, we have to call with AA/KK, if the point of checking back turn was to induce a river jam from something like QJ or just QX.

I just can't figure out what hands that are worse than TT/99 would play this way. All I can see is maybe T9dd, which would block some of those TT/99 combos he'd be trying to make us fold.

Obviously, if we jam turn, he either folds or calls, because those are his only two options. We can't know what he'll do with a worse hand facing a turn jam until after we actually jam.

If we don't jam, I'm not sure what he does with a worse hand on the river. I don't know how convinced I'd be that he'd bet worse, either for value or as a bluff.

I'd think our flop call has to look pretty strong. I can't imagine him betting worse for value on the river, or what his bluffs would think I'm folding for less than a PSB.

I have tried this live alot of times, not sure my image is tight or opponents tend to have missed draws only. Whenever I go for the bet x bet line, they fold like 90% of the time.

This line used to work alot back in the old days for my pot control value hands.

Deleveraging in this context means that you can often get a bet called OTR that wouldn't call OTT, because OTR there are no more cards or bets coming later. The V is no longer under the stress of not only the actual action, but potential future action. Also, with you having checked a street, your perceived range is likely to be weaker, so there's that additional impetus to call, or to bet a marginal hand.

I didn't do the math on remaining stacks here, but it seems like OTT there's no point to a bet smaller than a shove, as it would lead to so little back OTR, whereas we might be able to open other bet sizes OTR to try to get a crying call as well. Though we are almost certainly too shallow to bet/fold.

Okay, so I've been deleveraging without knowing it had a name. I tend to do it with nutted hands, mostly when I'm OOP, especially when my line to that point looks strong.

I'll frequently check back turns to bluff catch rivers with SDV when I'm IP. I have a hard time finding that same line in spots like this, where we could be way behind, but if we're ahead our hand is still vulnerable and we're not sure what we need to fade.

If we check back with thin value or SDV here, I think I'd have a hard time folding river, even on a bad card for us, because it feels like we induced. When I check back in a spot like this, I'm more likely to be polarized to a nutted hand or something that doesn't mind taking a free card or has an easy fold facing a river bet.

Are you doing it IP or OOP? As the PFR or the PFC?

Without thinking about it too long or too hard, I think b/x/b looks bluffy from OOP, and not as bluffy from IP.

I don't get to take the line very much from OOP because I'm mostly range-checking flop when I'm OOP, whether I'm the PFR or PFC. If I x/r flop, I'm either barreling turn or giving up and checking.

When V bet-calls my flop x/r, then checks back turn, I'll sometimes bet river as a bluff, but probably not very often. For whatever reason, it does seem like when I x/r flop and bet river after the turn checks through, they always seem to call when I'm bluffing and fold when I have value, unless they made a light call on the flop and somehow improved on the river.

Maybe it's because when we have value they were chasing a busted draw, and when we have a busted draw, they're trapping with value.

Starting to think this could be a heuristic - never bet river as a bluff after x/r'ing flop and the turn checks through.

No worries, I didn't take it that way. I was just trying to convey that I realize in this hand, my rules of the road may mean I'm doing something that will produce results that make me look dumb. Like if you tell me he has quads, I won't be shocked.

It's like I operate, with a few exceptions, that pre is raise or fold. I realize my relatively frequent 3Bs give you the opportunity to steal my 3B with premiums. I can live with that. Playing with my rule makes my decisions lots easier and gives you more opportunities to err.

So in your hand, by my rules, I can't call. I'm not getting favorable pot odds to justify a draw. I don't have trap worthy domination. So I have to fold or bet/raise.

Your V is a strange bird. Against a lot of my local competition, I would fold to his overbet. If I'm proven wrong when he shows AQ, ehhh, there will be another hand in under a minute. I'll never forget my fave Dan Harrington quote, "folding can only be a small mistake."

Sent from my SM-A546V using Tapatalk

Feigning disinterest in the hand, talking to a waitress, watching tv, sipping his drink, then giving you a speech, all hallmark tells. Not to mention nobody overbet donks flop multiway with anything but a nutted hand. He just wants to kill the action because he's scared of the flush draw. Now he checks when the board pairs because he no longer has anything to fear by losing or losing value, as he can still just as easily get the money in on the river if you check back.

Working from memory to reconstruct my missing post to continue the hand...

Hero raised to $25 pre with KcKd and got three callers.

FLOP ($100) - QcJd5d.

V1 thinks a few seconds before donking for $140. EP limper folds, and action is on hero. Hero tanks for not that long and V gets irritated.

Hero calls. V2 folds.

TURN ($380) - QcJd5d 5c,

Back-door flush draw and the board is paired. V doesn't think too long before checking. He's got about $285 left behind.

Hero?

(PS - the reason I posted this as a PAHWM is I figured seeing the turn might influence what people said about the flop.)

I would fold with the aggressive talk. Speech is usually the nuts, and he is trying to provoke you. Saying "what happened", like he was mad you didn't fold. Not a good player. His sizing and act are not AQ or a draw.

i mean folding the flop is criminally bad

is unlikely to me anyone is winning if your standard is to fold KK here to one bet, idc really what the size is. if he open jammed i would be relatively happy to call at this spr / texture / situation. im not exagerating or trying to shame people, this would be a very large mistake both in approach / practice, and legitimately nothing in the thread description suggests doing otherwise

you have very good hand that probably beats some value from this line, with pre ranges that make it unlikely you are behind and a line that people just don't really take often with better hands vs what appears to be goofball rec with a fairly shallow spr. i think with a d / position you probably flat and gii on anything except an ace

i think its very difficult to advocate for a gigantic deviation in terms of bb given bloated nature of the pot when you can't even remember the pre action. theres just no way you're aware enough of the nuance of when to make truly large adjustments

i get its not the end all be all and solves are not ideal in 0% nodes but this is just way too big of an error if you're wrong. there are very few decisions in poker worth 30+evbb and you can't afford to turn them down

turn it pure jams your hand

Yeah, by any reasonable analysis, this is not a fold, but live with the sizing and speech play tells it is an easy fold.

theres no sizing or speech that could ever lead you to consider folding here is my point

like idk maybe if youre playing vs a generational nit reg you have hundreds of hours with and there's a generational whale in between you guys or something, but this isn't it. the times you're right just aren't going to compensate for all of the nodes you make mistakes in with basically no information. if the solver said this is worth 2bb or something im much more open to hearing an argument for the other side but this will be one of the most profitable decisions you will make over the course of a 50 hour stretch beyond something incredibly obvious like 5b jamming AA or calling the river with the nuts. you cannot afford to turn these down. if you lose, sometimes bad things happen to good people

so much of the profit live (potentially all of it for most people) comes from catching punts from recs, not soulread folding in places you are clearly (and happily!) commited

edited a bit for diplomacy

I'm afraid that the powers that be tell me that the missing posts are unrecoverable. You'll have to post turn action again.

It is not a soul read. There are very strong tells here. If it was just a soul read, then of course you could ignore it and go with your overpair.

I don't agree with this assertion. My winrate soared when somebody posted "fish don't raise with nothing, they call with nothing" in response to someone considering calling off with one pair back in the aughts. Yes, the game has evolved, and yes there are definitely aggrofish, even at low stakes, but I still get way more of my profit with fat value bets against ranges dominated by TPMK than I do from catching punts.

I mean, this particular situation is arguable, but solvers are all about ranges, and I don't believe its analysis of what a misreg's range for this line in a live 1/3 game is even close to accurate. He is nowhere close to balanced here. GIGO applies.