So the suggestions were a lot more split than I expected them to be, with a number of folks suggesting a call here.
Hero feels like there are a large number of Jx and draws in UTGs donking range (in spite of blocking both NFDs), and wants to get value on this wet board while he can. He raises, though probably a bit too small.
Preflop
UTG limps.
Hero (UTG+1) raises to 0.70 with .
SB calls, UTG calls, all others fold.
Flop ($2.30)
SB checks.
UTG donks for 1.55.
Hero raises to 4.50.
SB folds.
UTG calls.
Bet $8+. This would typically feel feel like villain is holding top pair or a flush/straight draw at this point and I want to just take it down here from those holders. Although the fact that you created a thread about this makes me feel like the villain is holding 44 at this point or they catch their third J on the river.
I am glad hero raised it. Folding out the SB makes me feel better about the turn. And the fact we didn't get shipped in by the donk better makes me assume we have the best hand here. I think most of what villian has are jx hands here. It would be a weird line with spades without a jack.
Of course I have this theory that a disproportionate number if strategy threads come down to an unexpected raise on the turn.
It is pretty much the way it works right. I don’t usually comment on these because I can’t get it out of my head “why was this thread created?” And trying to compensate for whatever happened that inspired the creation of thread.
The more I think about it, the harder it is to really put this villain on spades. Not only do we account for the in hero's hand and the on the board, but donking into hero on a semi bluff just makes no sense strategically, unless he was going for a big 3-bet semi-bluff. With spades, villain is probably better off checking hoping if hero bets that SB has enough to make a weak call, or getting a free card is great news for a villain with spades here. Villain could also try and check-raise the field with this line. Not to mention, we may realistically be talking about only KQ, KJ, and QJ in spades unless he open limping some 9-hi combos or lower. Obviously this turn is bad if villain has 98s suited, but again, it's a weird hand to donk into a flop that smashes hero.
So I guess it's up to hero to make this read, if villain is aware of hero's range on this flop. But if we can eliminate spades, then AJ, KJ, QJ are really all that make sense for villain to have. I don't even understand if villain is flatting with JT or 44 here, villain can surely collect from just about all of hero's range (except maybe for the weakest Jx hands and maybe hero has an AT here he can throw away) by going for 3 bets now, but villain would have to play defensively with these holdings on a number of scary turns. Hero can surely have spade combos that aren't blocked by villian (which we know include the nut flush draw) and hero can have gutshot+overs draws. (Maybe hero is just raising flop on his entire range, which is pretty reasonable.) This flop should be excellent for hero's range. Not to mention hero can have the top two sets, all the good jacks, and all the good draws mentioned above.
So I still favor going for value here on the turn, and it's going to be tough to talk myself in to folding to anything but a scary river (such as another jack, maybe a K or Q will give me some pause as well) as hero. If villain has a weird slowplay hand, so be it. I might keep the sizing low again because I really don't expect spades often, if at all, from villain. I really want to price a bet to compel QJ or better to continue so I might go as low as 30%-35% pot here. Which is like $3.50-4 I guess. This is another way to play pot control too, I suppose.
The best argument I can come up with for checking behind on the turn is it may induce villain to bet all misses on the river and this would be practicing a bit of pot control in a pretty deep stack situation. This would also make us pretty much bluff-proof on the river. We should be able to call one bet pretty much no matter what falls. But again, I would have to know that villain could play a draw this way, even if it's unwise strategically. Otherwise, maybe villian bets his own J again on a "safe" river. The downside is if villain has what we think and catches an overcard to a jack we won't get value on the turn or river when we should have at least collected on the turn. (Unless that card beats us.)
It seems to me checking leaves too much on the table, I think I still bet it here.
It is pretty much the way it works right. I don’t usually comment on these because I can’t get it out of my head “why was this thread created?” And trying to compensate for whatever happened that inspired the creation of thread.
I cant put Villain on spades here - not scared of the straight draw so why lead flop instead of X/R or take a free card to make the flush.
Hero calls the raise - this is strong but not nutted IMHO although a set is 3:1 vs the NFD so jamming into your raise with a set would be the right play. JTo is 2:1 and should jam as well so I think we are looking at Jx. The straight draw should fold but I dont think V is leading with either straight or flush draw so I dont think 89 just got there.
I think vs the villain described we have a pretty clear bet on the turn. Still targeting Jx and possible draws like spades or KQ. I would bet $6-7 and wouldn’t expect to get raised very often. Sets and 2-pairs should want to 3-bet the flop as well as big draws such as 98/KQ of spades. I would likely valuebet again on a blank river if checked to.
If we know villain is sticky with one pair hands or draws I guess that’s fine. But we also need to consider our entire range, not just the actual AA here. Are we potting AJ as well? What about 98 or spades? We don’t want villains to be able to correctly put us on a narrow range by looking at bet sizes. If we think villain’s not paying attention though, by all means, exploit away
It is pretty much the way it works right. I don’t usually comment on these because I can’t get it out of my head “why was this thread created?” And trying to compensate for whatever happened that inspired the creation of thread.
If we know villain is sticky with one pair hands or draws I guess that’s fine. But we also need to consider our entire range, not just the actual AA here. Are we potting AJ as well? What about 98 or spades? We don’t want villains to be able to correctly put us on a narrow range by looking at bet sizes. If we think villain’s not paying attention though, by all means, exploit away
‘I've only played against him a couple of times. He seems reasonably solid, maybe a little overaggressive with TP-type hands but I haven't seen him spew or overbluff.’
Is UTG advanced enough to be thinking about our ranges correlating with bet sizes? Given limited experience and the stakes being played, I’m not factoring that in here.
‘I've only played against him a couple of times. He seems reasonably solid, maybe a little overaggressive with TP-type hands but I haven't seen him spew or overbluff.’
Is UTG advanced enough to be thinking about our ranges correlating with bet sizes? Given limited experience and the stakes being played, I’m not factoring that in here.
No probably not in so many words but he will recognize that a pot sized bet is more money to call than a 1/2-2/3s and may have a harder time calling with the hands we want him to call with. But like I said, I’m all for exploiting with a big sizing if we think he will still call with that range
Is UTG advanced enough to be thinking about our ranges correlating with bet sizes? Given limited experience and the stakes being played, I’m not factoring that in here.
Well that's as good of a river as we could hope for, and now we have outdrawn JT, not that I think that's a likely villain holding, but it doesn't hurt.
We are only behind an underplayed 44 or 98 at this point. We pretty much have to think villain has exactly a jack here most of the time, I would bet 40-50% of pot for value. ($9-$11) Maybe there's a case for going for more, but I'd hate to get too greedy here and give villain a price where he might find a hero laydown.
If this is the case, hero did a good job of getting 2 two streets of full value after raising the flop.
If villain really played 44 like this and raises the river, he gets paid. But given the read that villain can overplay one pair hands, we still have to call a raise I think.
Late thought, mayyyybeee villian has J7s somehow, without check-raising the turn though? If he has it, he still gets paid. The likelyhood that AA beats villains holding is overwhelming and favors a bet, despite the risk.
7 should be a good card for us, only hands he has that it helps are 87ss and 97ss. I’d target jacks here, and bet $12.00 for value. He shouldn’t really be raising with 87 and 97 anyway, you could very easily have jj or tt.
Bet half pot, something he can call. Nice that we out-rivered JT.
Cry fold when he jams. I dont see how he can possibly have a 7 here. If he has a set, well played.
That low card pairing on the end is pretty nice for Hero. Bet $10-12 for value, but probably folding if Villain comes over the top.
I wouldn't hate checking behind here either. Simpler decision, protects Hero from folding to steal attempts, but I think there's some value to squeeze out of weaker hands that makes betting a better play.
Bet/fold small. Let's try $12. If Hero can't fold aces to a check-raise, then don't make the bet.
If we knew more about villain, I could decide to check behind. Lots of missed draws aren't paying off a value bet < but they might try a bluff > The value bet really only targets Jx. There are plenty of villains that don't pay three streets of value with top pair.
Bet/fold small. Let's try $12. If Hero can't fold aces to a check-raise, then don't make the bet.
If we knew more about villain, I could decide to check behind. Lots of missed draws aren't paying off a value bet < but they might try a bluff > The value bet really only targets Jx. There are plenty of villains that don't pay three streets of value with top pair.
I don’t know. I mean we raised pre, raised his flop donk into 2 players, bet turn and bet river. We can have all the sets. If he finds a bluff raise on the river despite all that, he might deserve the pot. Also, I’d be more inclined to bet/call without the A of spades in my hand. Still not loving it though.
I don’t know. I mean we raised pre, raised his flop donk into 2 players, bet turn and bet river. We can have all the sets. If he finds a bluff raise on the river despite all that, he might deserve the pot. Also, I’d be more inclined to bet/call without the A of spades in my hand. Still not loving it though.
.
(lol 
