$25 NL HE Full Ring: Too agro with nut blocker?

[Station_Master]

Game

Hold'em

Game Format

No Limit

Stakes

$.10/$.25

Table Format

Full (8-10 seats)

Currency

$

pokerstars, Hold'em No Limit - $0.10/$0.25 - 8 players
Hand delivered by CardsChat

UTG: $35.68 (143 bb)
UTG+1: $57.13 (229 bb)
MP: $10.00 (40 bb)
MP+1: $21.13 (85 bb)
CO: $23.33 (93 bb)
BU: $11.07 (44 bb)
SB: $18.70 (75 bb)
BB (Hero): $25.00 (100 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.35) Hero is BB with A♦ 8♣
3 players fold, MP+1 raises to $0.50, 3 players fold, Hero calls $0.25

Bad hand, though i think it needs to be defended v a min raise. No particular reads on villain as only had about 10 hands with him, but possible fish based on stack size.

Flop: ($1.10) 6♥ T♦ 5♦ (2 players)
Hero checks, MP+1 checks

Turn: ($1.10) Q♦ (2 players)
Hero bets $0.54, MP+1 raises to $2.08, Hero raises to $4, MP+1 calls $1.92

I don't expect villain to have many flushes having checked back flop so I thought a good spot to lead, even though the Q favours his range. I was slightly surprised to get raised, but with nut blocker i expected this to be a bluff often or thinish value, so I went for the three bet. Slightly surprised to get called and expecting alot of flushes or something like KdQx.

River: ($9.10) 7♥ (2 players)
Hero bets $8.80,

What do you think about continuing the bluff? Do weaker flushes fold here? Thoughts on sizing?

 

[Aballinamion]

Bad hand, though i think it needs to be defended v a min raise. No particular reads on villain as only had about

Okay, villain has a broken stack and the sizing gives odds for a call: but we must keep in mind throughout the whole streets that there’s a great chance that villain is a recreational one.

Hero bets $0.54, MP+1 raises to $2.08, Hero raises to $4, MP+1 calls $1.92

This is a nice move because only us have all the nutted flushes. But a bad idea considering that villain is a potential recreational player and might call with top pairs, two pairs, sets or lower flushes. Our plan here is to jam any river in spite if it is a diamonds or not.

What do you think about continuing the bluff? Do weaker flushes fold here? Thoughts on sizing?

I think that overall you are not considering what a recreational player is: a player that has little idea about anything and hardly can be bluffed. So when we jam river we are praying for villain not to call with a Qx or any other hand that shouldn’t be calling.
When villain raises our donk OTT this is a red flag and a burning sign: recreational players are too passive and clicking buttons when they think they own a strong hand, i.e, villain shouldn’t be raising this turn with any hands because it doesn’t own the nuts (we own it holding the ace of diamonds), so what the hell are we re-raising here?
Yes, I know we have some equity for the river but when it completes a fourth diamonds are we going to get paid? 70-80% of times we are missing this draw so what’s our plan exactly?
Ergo, if we shoved river and villain called with Qx or a dominated flush, we cannot complain because we are applying a level of thought that villain could never reach: if villain was decent it wouldn’t min-raise, it wouldn’t be broken stack, it wouldn’t check flop and raise turn with whatever it has.
So why the hell are we trying to bluff this guy when it is not in the same level (metathinking) as we are?

 

[Station_Master]

Okay, villain has a broken stack and the sizing gives odds for a call: but we must keep in mind throughout the whole streets that there’s a great chance that villain is a recreational one.

This is a nice move because only us have all the nutted flushes. But a bad idea considering that villain is a potential recreational player and might call with top pairs, two pairs, sets or lower flushes. Our plan here is to jam any river in spite if it is a diamonds or not.

I think that overall you are not considering what a recreational player is: a player that has little idea about anything and hardly can be bluffed. So when we jam river we are praying for villain not to call with a Qx or any other hand that shouldn’t be calling.
When villain raises our donk OTT this is a red flag and a burning sign: recreational players are too passive and clicking buttons when they think they own a strong hand, i.e, villain shouldn’t be raising this turn with any hands because it doesn’t own the nuts (we own it holding the ace of diamonds), so what the hell are we re-raising here?
Yes, I know we have some equity for the river but when it completes a fourth diamonds are we going to get paid? 70-80% of times we are missing this draw so what’s our plan exactly?
Ergo, if we shoved river and villain called with Qx or a dominated flush, we cannot complain because we are applying a level of thought that villain could never reach: if villain was decent it wouldn’t min-raise, it wouldn’t be broken stack, it wouldn’t check flop and raise turn with whatever it has.
So why the hell are we trying to bluff this guy when it is not in the same level (metathinking) as we are?

Interesting points about recreational players. I only had him as possible fish, as 90+bb is not that short, so there was still a chance he was a reg.

I read his turn raise as more likely to be a bluff, given most flush draws bet flop, I have the Ace and Q and T are on table not leaving many combos.

What would you do on turn? I havent really got the odds to call but I wasnt keen on folding at this point!

I know recreational players like to call but I wouldn't expect a Q to call a big river bet having been 3bet on the turn with an obvious flush available. But they would be unlikely to fold a weaker flush (or set) whereas a reg might.

 

[lacroir]

but possible fish based on stack size.

Might be obvious but why do you consider this player a fish when having 85BBs? If started with 100BB, small downswing could happen any time.

 

[fundiver199]

Preflop and flop
Pretty standard, not much to add here.

Turn
Totally on board with leading out as a semi-bluff. However when you get raised, I would just call, and I would certainly not click it back. The reason is, I dont think, he is ever taking this line with nothing, so I dont think, you have any fold equity, especially not when you give him the best pot odds ever. Also you really dont want to get 4-bet here, because that might force you to fold out your equity. As for his range I think, he can be doing this with a flush or with top pair like AQ or KQ. A hand like KJ could also make sense having picked up an OESD, especially with K of diamonds. Finally a recreatinal player could have some slowplays as well, which would mainly be flopped sets.

River
First of all I would not have 3-bet the turn, so I would never arrive at the river like this. But as played I guess, you need to continue to tell the story and try to make him fold top pair. Anything better than that is likely always giving you action, especially if he is a recreational player. As for sizing I think, you did fine. Just under pot is a size, which is often used, when people have the nuts and wants to get max value, but dont want to scare the opponent away. So if he is thinking at this level, he might give you credit and fold. But the main issue here is, that you are trying to bluff someone, who seems like a recreational player and has shown strength by raising you on the turn. In general that is a losing strategy, but the most important decision is the one made on the turn facing his raise. At that point I would just call and then give up, when the river is a brick.

 

[fundiver199]

Might be obvious but why do you consider this player a fish when having 85BBs? If started with 100BB, small downswing could happen any time.

Because nearly all cash game regulars use the auto top-up feature. In that way they dont have to spend time manually reloading, and they always start the hand with at least 100BB. So when someone dont use that feature, its a pretty strong tell, they are a more casual or recreational player. They could be a cap stacker, who bought in for the minimum of 40BB and then won some pots. But these days few regular use that strategy, so it far less likely.

 

[lacroir]

Because nearly all cash game regulars use the auto top-up feature. In that way they dont have to spend time manually reloading, and they always start the hand with at least 100BB. So when someone dont use that feature, its a pretty strong tell, they are a more casual or recreational player. They could be a cap stacker, who bought in for the minimum of 40BB and then won some pots. But these days few regular use that strategy, so it far less likely.

Hmm, thanks! Haven't thought about it yet 😅 I never used the auto top-up feature before...

 

[G0930]

Not a comment about strategy although I'd be curious to know if villain folded in the end.

But we all are recreational players as long as we don't make a living of poker

 

[Station_Master]

Not a comment about strategy although I'd be curious to know if villain folded in the end.

But we all are recreational players as long as we don't make a living of poker
View attachment 338366

Yes villain did fold, so i dont know what he had, I would guess something like KdQ or KdJ. Even though he folded I know it's not necessarily a good play so was keen to get opinions!

I tend to just say 'fish' but apparently 'recreational' is the preferred term now, apparently less insulting!

 

[Station_Master]

Preflop and flop
Pretty standard, not much to add here.

Turn
Totally on board with leading out as a semi-bluff. However when you get raised, I would just call, and I would certainly not click it back. The reason is, I dont think, he is ever taking this line with nothing, so I dont think, you have any fold equity, especially not when you give him the best pot odds ever. Also you really dont want to get 4-bet here, because that might force you to fold out your equity. As for his range I think, he can be doing this with a flush or with top pair like AQ or KQ. A hand like KJ could also make sense having picked up an OESD, especially with K of diamonds. Finally a recreatinal player could have some slowplays as well, which would mainly be flopped sets.

River
First of all I would not have 3-bet the turn, so I would never arrive at the river like this. But as played I guess, you need to continue to tell the story and try to make him fold top pair. Anything better than that is likely always giving you action, especially if he is a recreational player. As for sizing I think, you did fine. Just under pot is a size, which is often used, when people have the nuts and wants to get max value, but dont want to scare the opponent away. So if he is thinking at this level, he might give you credit and fold. But the main issue here is, that you are trying to bluff someone, who seems like a recreational player and has shown strength by raising you on the turn. In general that is a losing strategy, but the most important decision is the one made on the turn facing his raise. At that point I would just call and then give up, when the river is a brick.

Thanks for the comments, seems like you also think I was too aggressive here!

Interesting you would call turn. Often in the past I would have done the same. The problem is that it's about a 2/3rd pot bet so we are not really getting the odds to draw. If you factor in some implied odds it could be fine but do we get paid off often enough when the draw hits? My instinct would say no but v a fish with a K high flush perhaps we do, so call might still be profitable on the turn. Though we would have to lead river when we hit.

 

[fundiver199]

I tend to just say 'fish' but apparently 'recreational' is the preferred term now, apparently less insulting!

For me those two terms basically mean the same, but "recreational" is indeed less insulting. And for the record when I say any of these things, I mean people, who are playing casually and not studying poker strategy on any kind of deeper level. I dont call someone "fish" or "recreational" solely because, they have other sources of income than poker. In that case even Doug Polk should be considered "recreational", because he makes money from his training site and other businesses.

Interesting you would call turn. Often in the past I would have done the same. The problem is that it's about a 2/3rd pot bet so we are not really getting the odds to draw. If you factor in some implied odds it could be fine but do we get paid off often enough when the draw hits? My instinct would say no but v a fish with a K high flush perhaps we do, so call might still be profitable on the turn. Though we would have to lead river when we hit.

This is a good point, and indeed you were not getting the right direct odds to just draw to a flush. But as you say, there is at least some implied odds, when you river the nuts, even though your hand is very obvious, and even though you are out of position and therefore most likely have to make a donk bet to get paid. But even so is he folding like a K or J high flush, when he just made it? Of course not.

And if you read his raise as bluffy, then there are also going to be times, where it goes check-check on the river, because he gives up, and then you beat his KJ or whatever at showdown. So all in all I do think, bet-folding the nut flushdraw on the turn would be a bit to weak or tight. But with his sizing it is actually close, and I would prefer folding over 3-betting.