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
ah okokyeah is weird hand where i think theres very little difference between j9dd and 66 in terms of beating bluffs or i guess value unless we think he has k2ss when we face this line (i dont think you really need to disincentivize him from jamming something like AQdd because i just dont believe he really takes this line on this board with it ever). i guess thats dangerous tho
I think you are not only struggling to see why he wouldnt just hero call qq but with winning at the lowest stakes at all….
A few points in response to various points made by others...
K2s would be a massively -EV raise to 25 preflop. So based on read of "lag crusher, " I'm assuming it can't be in his range. If the read was that he was a maniac, we would be having a whole different discussion and probably most of us would agree that river would be a call.
The same logic applies for those saying he could be overvaluing the nut flush. He's supposedly good so I'm assuming this is not a thing.
Regarding river blockers, some have said villain could bluff with the A flush blocker. I don't think that would be correct. I think he would want a hand that blocks our full houses. That's because Banana's overbet bluffs would be hands with the A blocker, and the value hands he would be targeting for folds are flushes. Villain would want to block full houses, not flushes.
To J2 saying, "lol snap call." It's really not. Submersible ran the sim. In theory his jam is repping an ultra-polarized range that makes 66 a bluffcatcher. In theory we have to call sometimes or he could run over us with bluffs.
In practice this is not an under bluffed spot, it's a "never bluffed" spot. That's for good reason because population snap calls with a flush and that's as far as their thought process goes ... They had a flush so they call.
Against population this is an easy fold. If this is that one guy capable of bluffing here, the answer is to call sometimes against him only.
My reasoning for folding is mainly related to my read of banana. He sees this guy as a wild bluffer and doesn't want to get run over. He's going to be prone to making hero calls. This means the lag crusher likely will look at him as the wrong customer to run a big bluff against here.
In the end this is as close as you can get to pure chicken poker in the solver era. Does he have it or doesn't he? You've got to call to find out.
Almost every single post in this thread gives bad advice. If I'm the opponent, I can raise 100% of my hands against 99% of the posters on the river, since KK isn't in your hand range and you'll fold anything but 22. Poker is still the easiest game in the world at NL1/3, because those players who think they're the regs at this level are the easiest to beat.
The trouble with your "analysis" is you assume no one will notice that you bluff this often and just assume you always have it. If you play as you describe you are just giving your money away. And more to the point here the read on you would be always bluffs or often bluffs. Ask the original question with that being the read.
The trouble with your "analysis" is you assume no one will notice that you bluff this often and just assume you always have it. If you play as you describe you are just giving your money away. And more to the point here the read on you would be always bluffs or often bluffs. Ask the original question with that being the read.
Who says I bluff this often? I said I can bluff raise the river at this exact runout at nearly 100% against all the nitty regs as my opponent is capped (except 22).
I am not bluff raising every river but these rivers where I know the reh nits fold at a very high %.
The trouble with your "analysis" is you assume no one will notice that you bluff this often and just assume you always have it. If you play as you describe you are just giving your money away. And more to the point here the read on you would be always bluffs or often bluffs. Ask the original question with that being the read.
Who says I bluff this often? I said I can bluff raise
The thing about live poker is many players have a pretty well-developed intuition for these spots. It's not like you can just say, "Lol, you're never calling. I bluff always, " and print.
Polarbear's point is that if you're the guy bluffing these spots regs can just call against you only.
But the reg still has to figure out when it's a bluff, which is what banana needs to do!
I don't think hero ever has 99 pre.
Only a stupid banana would stab turn with 66, so V isn't putting him on 66.
Hero has a lot of flushes, most of them non nut flushes.
V probably wouldn't be speechifying pre before he raises KK or 22. That sounds more like AXs or 99
It never occurred to me V might raise K2/92/62. If he's doing that, don't see how we ever fold.
He could slow play the nutted hands he probably doesn't have. That seems less likely than him getting to the river with the NFD and thinking hero has the 2nd nuts that picked up a GS on the turn.
I don't think hero ever has 99 pre. Only a stupid banana would stab turn with 66, so V isn't putting him on 66.Hero has a lot of flushes, most of them non nut flushes.V probably wouldn't be speechifying pre before he raises KK or 22. That sounds more like AXs or 99 It never occurred to me V might raise K2/92/62. If he's doing that, don't see how we ever fold. He could slow play
Can we stay in some form of reality? I’m all for “we have a boat call”. Totally fine. To now entertain the idea a “lag crusher” is isoing total garbage vs multiple limpers is just bs.
My reasoning for folding is mainly related to my read of banana. He sees this guy as a wild bluffer and doesn't want to get run over. He's going to be prone to making hero calls. This means the lag crusher likely will look at him as the wrong customer to run a big bluff against here.
Yes. Part of analyzing Banana hand histories is psycho-analyzing Banana, trying to see the hand how we think he thinks V see it.
I think V thinks Banana has the 2nd nut flush, and Banana never has a boat, so even if V wouldn't over-value the NF versus anyone else, he's nutted vs Banana's pre flop limp calling range.
Can we stay in some form of reality? I’m all for “we have a boat call”. Totally fine. To now entertain the idea a “lag crusher” is isoing total garbage vs multiple limpers is just bs.
I wasn't suggesting he has those hands. Other people did. I was saying I never gave him those hands. It literally never occurred to me until I read others' comments.
Do you read all the comments people post, or just zero in on the people you like to call stupid?
I wasn't suggesting he has those hands. Other people did. I was saying I never gave him those hands. It literally never occurred to me until I read others' comments.
Do you read all the comments people post, or just zero in on the people you like to call stupid?
I respond to most not just you. It looked like you suggested he could have those hands. Calm down.
Can we get the results Banana? I’m really curious lol.
Re-reading some comments, it seems like the read that UTG likes to limp-3B is driving how we view V's perception of hero's range because UTG can limp-3B.
This is just how I view it...
If we believe V is good, and we believe UTG likes to limp-3B, then V probably knows V likes to do that, but V doesn't know if Banana noticed it. The UTG limp-3B read is more likely to affect V's actions and range than V's perception of hero's range. Hero may not be adjusting.
We don't even know if V thinks UTG likes to limp-3B. Banana may have seen UTG do it once, two hours ago, and is telling us because it explains why he's over-limping rather than raising pre.
So I'm discounting that V thinks hero over-limps 99 pre. Hero can over-limp QXdd no matter what V thinks about whether or not hero may be appropriately adjusting to what UTG may or may not actually be doing.
We're playing six degrees of who gives a f**k? Hero can over-limp QXdd all day long. He may or may not limp 99. V doesn't know, but he's probably not giving hero a good starting hand when he over-limps on the BTN pre.
When V checks twice, hero can stab turn with any two. Hero doesn't need 99, a note from his doctor, or a permission slip from his mom to start a bluff. Banana is the GOAT who cold-check-3B's over a nit grinder's x/r with effing air, and then barrels when he gets called. Banana is the end-boss of zero-equity bluffs.
I'm sorry, Banana. I love you. But we all know what I'm saying is true.
On what planet is V narrowing hero's turn stabbing range to 99, simply because UTG was seen limp-3B'ing last Summer solstice?
If we put ourselves in V's position, which of these seems most likely?
A - With two limpers already VPIP'ing, and having already doubled up after just sitting down, Banana over-limps 99 pre on the BTN, checks back the K22fd flop with a vulnerable 1P, binks a 2-outer to boat up, bets less than half pot for value with the world's trashiest table image, versus an opponent who's been owning him, and then BARELY over-bets the river.
B - Banana over-limps some suited B-list suited Broadway combo, checks back the flop with no showdown value, sees an opportunity to steal the pot when V checks to him again and he picks up some equity, but bets so small that he may as well turn his cards face up, then binks the river and makes a small over-bet because he wants to get hero'd by whatever weak trash V has when he checks three times.
C - Banana over-limps 66, checks back flop with no showdown value, stabs turn with no showdown value, for God knows what reason, then luck-boxes his way into the fourth nuts on the one card in the deck that also brings in the car obvious flush draw.
(Hint: A and C are equally preposterous, even though C is what actually happened.)
last attempti 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
Yeah ok, I agree with this. Think it comes down to whether we focus on V as good player or V as loose. A good player who knows Banana will blast off with almost anything when checked to here is probably happy to check 99/KK for three streets.
That being said, LLS players are just so absolutely, egregiously bad preflop in general. And I have a strong heuristic that when players suddenly get really aggressive it tends to be on a hand that suddenly improved on that street. But if we are counting V as good, I agree with your analysis.
i want at least one HH example from banana of the "LAG Crusher"
running an insane bluff
Spoiler
inb4 it's this hand, because hero folded and got shown two napkins
I am also curious why banana over-bet the river? Does that have an affect on V's shove? Would banana over-bet with 22 (or KK, which banana should not have)? Why not try to get some value from a flush if banana had those hands?
Banana's overbet is probably good with his image. The turn bet was I guess a bluff and he could easily overbet bluff the river.
Villain could have a nut flush blocker and/or maybe a 9 or 6 as a blocker. He knows Banana can't have KK and probably not 99. So technically, there are good reasons to bluff.
Just a question of whether he is capable of bluffing over an overbet for stacks and whether he thinks Banana will fold. If he knows Banana is a decent player, he is more likely to try it. Many 1/3 players, if they overbet a low boat or high flush or whatever, won't fold. It isn't a common type of bluff, particularly at low stakes.
On the other hand, with Banana's image villain could slow play KK/99. The speech is stereotypically a tell for something like KK.
This is one of the most interesting situations I have seen posted on forums or on Crush Live Poker videos, etc.
This is one of the most interesting situations I have seen posted on forums or on Crush Live Poker videos, etc.
Agree this is an interesting hand, although it's such a one off I'm not sure how much value there is in analyzing it. Still I would love for Banana to email it to Bart Hanson and try to get him to go over it on an episode of his blog. I would be interested to get his take.
Has not betting the flop been discussed?
Obvious IYGIYGI call on river.
