1/3, flopped flush, but this Rock is cooking something

You both could have anything. I would keep betting too, if I were him and had 65, 52, Ahx, etc.

So he has all the flushes/boats for value.

I think we can fold easily especially this type of spot is way underbluffed. We don't beat any value(maybe like 26hh or 86hh like you said). We basically have a bluff catcher at this point which there's rarely any bluff right?

I don't think he's betting river this big with st8s. I mean he could but usually they don't but your hand is a bit underrepped.

I don't think Ax with 1 heart plays this way, maybe A3 with that 1 heart specifically.

So yea easy fold.

It looks like AdXx to me. How likely is he to comple the sb with a naked A?

Ad? I assume you mean Ah?

I'm unsure how likely it is he limped in with AXo. I've only got about 30 hours with him, and really only started to get a good feel for his game in the past 10-15. I know enough to know he's tight, not overly aggro, and not overly bluffy.

Maybe not very relevant here, but perhaps indicative of his risk-aversion - his 4B range is just AA and nothing else. He opened UTG1 and then flatted a raise with KK, when I 3B him from UTG2 with QQ, instead of 4B'ing from OOP. But then he x/r'd the 532rb flop, and barreled turn pretty big. After the hand he literally said he x/r'd to see where he was at.

That hand made me think he's risk averse with his pre-flop actions, but there's a disconnect in his logic from pre-flop to post-flop. Like, if he's concerned I have AA when I 3B over his KK, why's he x/r'ing the 532rb board, and barreling the turn, when I could still have AA, rather than continuing to play his hand like a bluff-catcher? It seems he expected me to 3B flop with AA, which I'd literally never do there.

I'm fairly sure he's opening tight ranges. Hard to say what his SB limping range looks like over five limps. It might include some trashy AXo, but I'd think it would more likely be wheel aces, or perhaps A9o, rather than the trashiest A6o-A8o, though maybe getting 9 to 1 he'll toss in the other $2 with any AXo.

Probably more relevant - would he raise SC's higher than my 95, like JTs and better, or limp in with them? I'd think he'd raise AKs-AJs, and maybe ATs and KQs. Not sure about KJs, KTs, QJs, QTs, or JTs. I'd guess that as the combo gets weaker and more easily dominated, he'd be more likely to limp rather than raise.

What I got stuck thinking about was the disconnect in his logic. Like, if he's limping JTs because it's easily dominated, why's he leading out into six opponents, any of whom might have some AXhh, KXhh or QXhh combo. When I check my option pre and call next to act in the BB, I could easily have something like A6hh, K8hh or Q9hh.

I'd think most players who bet or raise just to "see where they're at" would slow down with thin value when they get called, but maybe not. Maybe the logic is they just keep betting until someone raises. If so, because I didn't raise flop or turn, he could have better or worse value, and I'm back to wondering what the hell he has.

Interesting spot Doc. Thanks for sharing. A few points:

1) Almost all the low hearts are accounted for. Broadway heart combos are raising preflop. V reps thin.

2) V really should value bet, bet polar or check when the Ace falls on the turn. H should be Ax-wheel card heavy to continue on the flop, or already holding a flush, 65 or holding Ahx. Why .75 psb? Maybe he thinks H is aggro enough to raise many Ax from bb preflop so he doesn't have to fear it. V's small flush should be overbetting turn.

3) Did you consider raising turn? Both H and V can have Ahx with two pair and a redraw here, along with small flushes that need to deny equity to Ahx with redraw.

4) River: V bets 100. Why? He should be getting value from our Ax, 65, 53s and our small flushes when he has better ones. V's overall line makes no sense to me, so I'm calling getting 2-1 and if he has it, so be it. I'm not levelling myself into folding here. Somehow I think the QQ vs. KK hand makes V believe you are capable of hero folds, so he can blast off here.

It's 33 bigs, we only have to be right 1/3 off the time: seems like a shrug-call. If they shoved for 100 bigs, different story. V like that seems like they'd over limp AThh-, right?

I idly wondered if you could rep 44 by shoving over him, but most Vs aren't folding a big flush here, and I don't think you've a nitty (or passive)-enough image to pull it off.

V donks flop b50 a gazillion-ways with a low flush, is I think by far the most likely choice here. If V has a naked K-QhX, aren't they going to check with best absolute position, and see if an actual flush wants to start throwing money in? I'm surprised they didn't x a decent flush, considering 2P or 65 very possibly stabs 7-ways(!). Then they can raise or call, and get aggressive later. Donking flop with Axhh seems unnecessary, but Vs do it.

My ? is will V think you just called down two streets with a set on a monotone flop? I think that answer is no, so you don't have a boat/quads, and you can't rep one on the river.

Tbh, I just call and don't think much about it. Think you played it well. You could have raised flop, and then kept bombing, and I think V folds to 3 barrels, but obv higher variance.

Do many 1/3 Vs think betting 75% does constitute blasting off? While obv we can bet as much as we want in NL, I remember being surprised when people betting 1.5-2X pot on the turn started being advocated.

As to #1, aren't a lot of 1/3 Vs completing SB with a bunch of A2-ATs, or K7(?)-KTs, and maybe Qxs or Jxs vs opening over 5 limpers? I know we're squeezing wider than AJs/KJs, but I'd thought many Vs were like, "Meh, it's 2 bucks; let's see a flop."?

1) At first pass, I thought he was repping thin. But recent discussions have me questioning my understanding of some commonly used terms, like repping thin.

Upon further analysis (see my last reply to dangomango, above) I think he could conceivably have as many as 31 combos that beat us on the river, but he's got to limp in, lead flop, and barrel turn with all of them, and I'm not sure how likely that is.

2) Honestly, V might have bet 1/2 pot on the turn, which would make his river bet of $100 a polar over-bet. Not sure how much it changes things, between a 1/2p to 2/3p bet. My read on him is that he's conservative with his approach to the game, and doesn't use big bet or raise sizes very often, either because he's scared he'll chase an opponent away when he has it, or he's scared to over-commit to a bluff or thin value.

V has made the comment to me that I'm difficult to play against, because it seems like I can show up with anything, but I always seem to show up with something. So, maybe he thinks I'm aggro enough to raise a lot of trashy AX pre, even from the BB. Hard to say.

3) I briefly considered raising on flop, and on the turn. Wanting to be a better, more patient player got the best of me. I figured if he was betting a worse hand, I wanted him to keep betting, and if he had a better hand, there was no sense in raising, unless the 6h dribbles off and I make a straight flush.

4) You're saying his PSB on the river is too big to get value from our worse value hands? Or too small?

The KK v QQ hand was the week prior, and definitely in my mind here. I was thinking if he was ever going to bluff me, this would be a good spot.

But there was also an earlier hand I watched him play in this session, and after the hand I asked if he had 77. He looked at me, surprised, said he did have 77, and told me "you're too good". So on the other hand, I sort of thought he wouldn't try to bluff me when I've been soul-reading him.

The thing is, he can't be trying to get value from my aces up and worse flushes and also trying to bluff me. It can be one or the other, or maybe just a worse value hand (I figure he's got 14-18 worse value hands that could conceivably play this way). It wouldn't shock me if he was making a mergey bet with some sort of thin SDV.

He's the SB with five limps. He's completing with almost ATC. He's usually not aggressive, fast plays value, and you've never seen him bluff. Plus, he bet into six players, which you think he won't do w/o a real hand. Such an easy fold. I might just fold the turn.

You're touching on the problem I had on the river. His play is consistent with a low flush, but my hand and the board blocks all but 86, 82, and 62. And the only one of those I thought he'd actually limp in with was 86.

But, if he's thinking, and realizes how many 2P and 65 combos are possible, why lead out at all, rather than let those hands stab? For the same reasons, why lead into 6 opponents with AXhh? And if there's no reason to lead with a flush, is there any reason to lead with 65, a set, 2P, or 1P with the Ah? Would he lead with some hand that's relatively weak value here, and barrel off?

Not sure if V thinks I'd flat call two streets with a set on a monotone flop. I think I would, hoping to boat up or pot-control / bluff-catch, but he might not think that. He might think I'm wild enough to raise with sets. Maybe not on the flop, with five opponents left to act, but probably on the A turn. That would make some sense, if I thought he was leading flop with AhXx, and wouldn't fold turn to a raise.

I honestly can't think of a hand he'd lead out with on the flop that would fold flop to a raise from me. If I raised flop and barreled turn, or just raised turn, he might fold out a straight, but maybe not, if he thinks I'm just too aggro, and I could have a ton of AhXx. I'm not sure if he folds turn with 2P or a set that could still improve to a boat.

In game, I thought there was a pretty big chance I'd be value-owning myself if I raised flop or turn.

So, hypothetically, if I raised flop and barreled, or just raised turn, I think he's getting to the river with an even stronger range of better flushes, boats/quads, and maybe some stubborn 2P or straights. If he checked river, I'd probably just check back. If he suddenly donked out, I'd probably turbo-muck.

You might fold turn, with a 9-high flush in a limped pot, to a $30 bet, with a chance to win a $500 bonus if the river is the 6h?

No, I've never seen him bluff. But when the flop is monotone and the river pairs the board, and he bets three streets, he's either bluffing or over-playing something on flop and turn, or bluffing or over-playing something on the river, when the nuts change.

Like, if he's got a flush, I could have a better flush or a boat. If he's got a boat, he was over-playing 2P or a set on a monotone board.

I don't play for bonuses, especially when I have one card to come and I think I'm toast -- which your description of V clearly indicates.

You can't go into paragraphs of describing V and then state something different or tell us you were wrong.

I play the hand the exact same way to the river (general idea of not going broke in a limped pot) where I now think we have a trivial fold against this guy.

He never bluffs so we don't have to worry about some weirdo barrelled busted draw.

He respects our game and likely sees absolutely no reason to get involved with us in a big pot OOP.

He's not lol overvalueing worse against us in this configuration (our flop call with the world to act behind is extremely strong).

This is mostly just a full house, maybe a ~nuttish flush.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Not going broke in a limped pot was exactly the idea behind not raising flop or turn.

I hesitate to make a definitive statement that someone never bluffs, but when I can't remember someone bluffing, and they always seem to have it when they bet or raise, I suppose that's about as definitive as we can get - maybe not that he never bluffs, but it appears to be a pretty rare occurrence.

I would think our flop call next to act with the world behind is extremely strong, but I think he's capable of over-valuing something. He has to be, if he was betting flop and turn with a set that boated up, or betting river with a flush when the board pairs.

So far it seems like opinions are pretty evenly split between call and fold. I think it's pretty close, if only because V's line would require him to be over-valuing something on flop and turn or going pretty thin for value on the river.

It's not that I'm saying my read was wrong. I'm saying I've seen this guy take some lines that aren't logically consistent. That's part of the read. He's tight, fast-plays his value, and rarely if ever bluffs, but that doesn't preclude him from fast-playing worse value here, or possibly starting a bluff that turned some SDV.

In order to fold turn, we have to think he's never bluffing or betting worse for value. It would be an extremely exploitative deviation to fold turn with a flopped 9-high flush, when V could have flopped a straight, or a worse flush, or been semi-bluffing and run into top pair or aces up.

That's fine. Call the turn -- I said I might fold it. I'm definitely folding river given your read. However, now that I read more about this guy (not in OP) I'm inclined to raise the flop or the turn. Not sure why you didn't -- I mean, you wrote why you didn't, but it doesn't make much sense now.

In all seriousness, everything you've written leads to the river being a snap fold.

FWIW, this is not clear anywhere: I'm saying I've seen this guy take some lines that aren't logically consistent.

Also, you said you don't ever think he's bluffing here. The only hand he can bluff is the naked Ah, and if he's capable of it, then by all means call, but based on what you've written about this player, I'm folding -- or I'm raising flop or turn.

I feel like half my decisions in life, and at least as many of my decisions at the table, could be explained by "it seemed like a good idea at the time."

Trying to be as objective as I can be, I think flatting and raising flop or turn are both logically defensible decisions, all things considered. The fact that opinions seem divided on that lead would seem to support either as being viable.

Unfortunately the river muddied the waters by pairing the board, which might make us wish we raised flop or turn, but that's being results oriented. If the river was just a brick, and he bet, we'd be facing the same quandary of whether to call or fold. He just wouldn't have any boats in his range.

I am somewhat jealous of some folks on this forum, who can apparently make snap decisions in spots like this. I tanked because I thought it was really close, and close spots like this seem to drive the best discussions.

If figured best case, someone would be able to cut through the noise and provide some clarity. Worst case, everyone thinks I'm an idiot and nobody learns nothing.

Since I don't have to face anyone here in person, I don't worry about people thinking I'm an idiot or learning nothing.

Think I'll log off, grab a bite, and go play some. Hopefully I'll snap the soul-sucking losing streak I've been on the past few sessions.

Good day, m'lady, and good weekend to errbuddy else.

Doc's out.

PEACE!

(I'll post reveal tomorrow, assuming discussion dies down by then,)

It's a snap decision based on the reads you gave us. It might be a little more difficult a the table, but probably not given how you see this player. If you had written, "He takes inconsistent lines and is capable of bluffing with the naked Ah, " or "He thinks I'm tilted and playing scared money, " it might have changed our opinions -- mine at least.

All we have is what you wrote, and based on that I fold the river (and maybe the turn).

Nothing is a snap fold when you have a flush on a 3-flush board. Soul searching is healthy.

Against an unknown, I'd be tempted to say you are good a third of the time when you include the odd worse flush, straights (of which there could be lots) and NFD bluffs. Against this opponent, probably not, although live reads (timing etc) may come into play

A turn bet with something worse (even Ah that backed into TP, let alone two pairs or sets which can easily be ahead of our turn calling range) isn't a terrible overplay by him.

But by the river there is very little he can be overplaying for this huge sizing. I mean, no one in the pool is betting just Ah like this on the river, right? I mean, who even 3 barrels mediocre hands in the pool to begin with? Let alone OOP to the one guy at the table he'd probably just rather not get involved with? If I were to guess, most of the time he has a boat for this sizing. Some of the time he has perhaps slightly overplayed ~nutty flushes. There just isn't that much room for much else for most players, imo.

GcluelessNLnoobG

GG: I think the turn is the more interesting problem here. Would you raise turn as Hero? I agree with you that V's Ahx and other non-flush value can bet the turn, though I think the sizing is odd.

The river I think we all can agree is a close decision getting 2-1.

In game, I didn't think I beat much for value, but couldn't make sense of this line. After saying all the hands I thought he might have that beat me, like 77 and Ah3x, and ruling them out, I talked myself into thinking he'd play some big AhXo this way, and the only hand that made sense for value was 44, I flicked in the call, saying "I flopped a flush. 44 is good."