Would you play it differently? (2 Viewers)

[Taghkanic]

Setting:
1/3 private game which goes off weekly. Pretty standard set of characters. The game is very limpy/station-y, with only a few of us 3betting pre or generally showing appropriate levels of aggression.

Villain:
Lady in her 60s with long white hair, glasses, heavyset. Doesn't say much, buys in short (100-200 at a time) but rebuys often. Plays a very wide range of hands, VPIPing as much as 75%.

Sticky with any Ace or pocket pair, plays pretty much all suited and all Broadway combos. Typically passive until the river, where she may go all in with as little as top pair/bad kicker. Not uncommon for her to call down with as little as middle pair, even on scary boards where middle pair can’t possibly be good.

In general I find she plays her own hand with little regard to the board texture or much thought to what other people mighthave.

Stacks:
I have ~$850, covering the villain’s ~$300.

Preflop:
Two limpers, I make it $15 on the button with . Blinds fold, villain calls UTG+1, other limper calls in hijack.

Flop ($47 pot after rake):


Villain checks, hijack bets $20, I call with my trips/OK kicker, not wanting to lose customers.

Villain clicks it back, min check-raising to $40.

Hijack folds.

Thoughts: Villain is unlikely to have a better 9 here, and unlikely to bet it. I assume she has lots of pocket pairs, especially 99+, but not AA, which is then pp she wouldn't raise pre. Also lots of Kx, maybe even some gutshots. Could have some of the remaining 9x, but these are roughly equally split between combos better or worse than mine given how many hands she plays.

Probably I should have 4bet here, given how wide an inelastic her calling range, but I just call. Villain only has ~$245 behind, so it should not be hard to get her all in by the river.

Turn ($147 in pot):


This is as bricky as it gets. Should not improve either player. No draws improve, and no backdoors come in.

Villain continues for the same $40. I raise to $90.

Villain calls.

Thoughts: I considered shoving here, given that I think she often overvalues her hands, and will continue with not just a lot of Kx but also most pocket pairs, gutshots, etc. I thought $90 was the max amount I think she would call without a meter 9. This also knocks her stack down well below the potting to the river.

River ($327 in pot):


Villain checks.

I bet $90 again.

Villain thinks a long time then goes all in for her remaining ~$150.

I sigh/call for the extra $60, but of course Villain turns over:


--------------------

Thoughts below... What are yours?

 

[Taghkanic]

Thoughts: Just a really gross cooler?

Or did I bring it on myself by not betting more aggressively on the flop/turn?

Should I have not bet the river when I checked, treating my boat as having only showdown value at best?

(I don’t think I could go away for the last $60, once I’d made those other mistakes, even though a chop or a loss was more likely than a win.)

In my defense, if I had not seen this person pay off on multiple streets with really weak made hands before, I never would have played it this way.

I also don’t think she was folding any King postflop.

 

[PARADOX]

Setting:
1/3 private game which goes off weekly. Pretty standard set of characters. The game is very limpy/station-y, with only a few of us 3betting pre or generally showing appropriate levels of aggression.

Villain:
Lady in her 60s with long white hair, glasses, heavyset. Doesn't say much, buys in short (100-200 at a time) but rebuys often. Plays a very wide range of hands, VPIPing as much as 75%.

Sticky with any Ace or pocket pair, plays pretty much all suited and all Broadway combos. Typically passive until the river, where she may go all in with as little as top pair/bad kicker. Not uncommon for her to call down with as little as middle pair, even on scary boards where middle pair can’t possibly be good.

In general I find she plays her own hand with little regard to the board texture or much thought to what other people mighthave.

Stacks:
I have ~$850, covering the villain’s ~$300.

Preflop:
Two limpers, I make it $15 on the button with . Blinds fold, villain calls UTG+1, other limper calls in hijack.

Flop ($47 pot after rake):


Villain checks, hijack bets $20, I call with my trips/OK kicker, not wanting to lose customers.

Villain clicks it back, min check-raising to $40.

Hijack folds.

Thoughts: Villain is unlikely to have a better 9 here, and unlikely to bet it. I assume she has lots of pocket pairs, especially 99+, but not AA, which is then pp she wouldn't raise pre. Also lots of Kx, maybe even some gutshots. Could have some of the remaining 9x, but these are roughly equally split between combos better or worse than mine given how many hands she plays.

Probably I should have 4bet here, given how wide an inelastic her calling range, but I just call. Villain only has ~$245 behind, so it should not be hard to get her all in by the river.

Turn ($147 in pot):


This is as bricky as it gets. Should not improve either player. No draws improve, and no backdoors come in.

Villain continues for the same $40. I raise to $90.

Villain calls.

Thoughts: I considered shoving here, given that I think she often overvalues her hands, and will continue with not just a lot of Kx but also most pocket pairs, gutshots, etc. I thought $90 was the max amount I think she would call without a meter 9. This also knocks her stack down well below the potting to the river.

River ($327 in pot):


Villain checks.

I bet $90 again.

Villain thinks a long time then goes all in for her remaining ~$150.

I sigh/call for the extra $60, but of course Villain turns over:


--------------------

Thoughts below... What are yours?

I like a limp preflop in this spot. You're only going to fold out the blinds and open yourself to getting raised by one of the early limpers, especially UTG +1 who could have a monster waiting for someone to raise. You mentioned that that player is sticky, so a raise IMO doesn't accomplish much.

They only time I check trips (Not Sets) on flop are early position with multiple opponents, to induce check raise, or trip card plus high kicker (Q,K,A). A solid raise of 5x initial bet here is what I like. This should fold out the straight draw and should fold out Kx with x being <10. I think a lot of people look at trips as a strong flop hand, but IMO it's not. A set of course is different.

Turn for sure you should have ripped it to make the Kx player decide if they want to play for stacks.


River. If it gets this far and the K comes it's a check and lick your wounds. You had to figure after the turn that they had a K in their hand. If they call a turn jam and the K comes, they got lucky. If they get here with how the hand played out in your OP, bad play on your part.

None of this is mentioned to offend, but just a view of how I play these spots.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

You're probably better than me, but these hands hurt worse when we're not building a pot on the way to the river. If shes sticky with a King theres only a few left in the deck, keep raising.

Just off your reads I would've bet bigger on flop and especially turn, we know what she has and we're winning the majority of these hands, lets build the pot to supplement these times that we get the rug pulled if theres a chance she folds a brick river. As played, I compliment her hand, exactly as expected.

 

[Burke]

I think leading out on the river was the largest mistake against this villain

 

[kmccormick100]

I'm ok with everything up til the turn. The min check raise on the turn is pretty much never ever a bluff in my experience - a std 3x raise looks a little less suspicious and sets up a river shove a bit easier IMO.

That's a pretty gross river - I'm putting her on a ton of combos with a King here, and even if she happens to have the case 9, I don't think you're ever getting her to fold a chop for a 40% pot bet. I think the nitty check is pretty much always right here, BUT if you are going to bet small you have to be able to fold when she shoves, so a blocker bet of like $50 might be better. I don't understand the $90 bet at all - are you trying to get value from... a pocket pair? At least shove so you have some modicum of fold value if you're trying to push her off a chop on the rare chance she has a 9, especially if you're going to call her shove anyway.

 

[Taghkanic]

I think leading out on the river was the largest mistake against this villain

Definitely against 95% of opponents. When she checked I figured I could be good against a pocket pair (which I’ve seen her be unable to fold unimproved), or that she might be scared by the K pairing and could avoid a 9x chop. But I didn’t reason out that those two things couldn’t really both be true, so there was little point in betting.

 

[Taghkanic]

I don't understand the $90 bet at all - are you trying to get value from... a pocket pair?

Yeah, mostly. Per above when she checked I started to recall all the other hands where she got stuck on something like 77 or 66 and paid me or another player off despite the board running out terribly for those hands…

I guess this was just a rare price one has to pay for having such fish in a game. My iffy flop/turn line should still be profitable 19 out of 20 times… But I could have lost less on the river if I’d thought more clearly about it.

 

[JustinInMN]

Piling on, I hate the river bet. There is no value in it. You are targeting Tt-QQ specifically as the only way to get called by weaker, but villian has way more Kx than that in my opinion even if she wasn't playing as loose as K6o.

The rest is okay, I don't mind limping along with t9s on the button instead of the raise. You are playing to flop big so you don't need to "fold anyone out" anyway.

But raise gives you the initiative in position and may present bluffing opportunities later.

 

[upNdown]

The way youve described her, I don’t think you could have bet better earlier to get her off her hand, because she flopped two pair and she probably wasn’t folding it. So if you’re never folding your boat, it doesn’t make a difference. But I’m not sure how you don’t check fold your boat, knowing it only takes a king to beat you and that she has a king.

I started to recall all the other hands where she got stuck on something like 77 or 66 and paid me or another player off despite the board running out terribly for those hands…

Okay, but that check minraise screamed K, didn’t it?

 

[pokerpilot]

Agreed with what others have said about not needing to raise. It’s way too easy to value-own yourself when betting into sticky players

 

[JMC9389]

I think I'd check/call flop, shove turn. As played, I check back river with the underfull. Not getting called by worse with a bet. Even the worst players are not bluffing this river.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

You played it fine until the river. Don’t know why you bet, don’t know why you called. Absolutely threw away $150 there.

 

[jamesjkim]

Okay, but that check minraise screamed K, didn’t it?

This. And agree with others.

You should have expected the check-raise on the river. Seems like her trying her best to be a “pro” player (and using the same move twice on the hand).

 

[warma]

The way you described V at the start, I knew something was going to happen on the flop that would seem out of character. I immediately knew the odds would catch up to you and V would get lucky on what was otherwise bad play. I don’t think it’s a cooler.

Thoughts: I considered shoving here, given that I think she often overvalues her hands, and will continue with not just a lot of Kx but also most pocket pairs, gutshots, etc. I thought $90 was the max amount I think she would call without a meter 9. This also knocks her stack down well below the potting to the river.

River ($327 in pot):

The interesting piece for me in this, is that you were targeting Kxs and pocket pairs, and a K showed. You were on to it, but V’s history of bad showdowns won over in your mind and V’s remaining stack was less than pot, so the risk of calling was somewhat more manageable. If V had a bigger stack and you folded, we’d all be saying “great lay down,” but then would V be smart enough to exploit you in the future? I suspect your strategy has won you more than you’ve lost against V?

 

[jamesjkim]

I suspect your strategy has won you more than you’ve lost against V?

That’s a fair point.

 

[NeutronHim]

I've done this so so often. I put villain on a range, and then they make an action and I just throw that range out the window.

I'm editing this message because I dont think it was fair before.

Terrible spot to be in. You feel like your opponent just has 55 or something and wants to call down. We don't want to give our opponent credit for an uncapped range otr when they check because we think they are bad.

Here's my generic take -- we shouldnt give our opponents credit for finding a line that requires a mediocre understanding of the game to find, but we CAN give them credit for finding lines that take very little intuition to find.

Flop is close. We can trap value to get max value vs a player betting and barreling too thin, but there's (little) use to risk scare cards messing up our action if our opponent has 0 bluffs, is betting too thin, and won't fold.

As played, ott the optimal play is probably to ship it but I don't think that your exploitative minclick is wrong, either. Only thing is you can probably go bigger and still have the same effect (like 105, idk.)

River bet is unprofitable (in hindsight.) For it to be profitable, your opponents calling range just has to have more worse than better. Our opponent loves broadways, and all broadways are kings. He has more of these than pp. (Good spot to count combos.)

Calling it off otr is surely profitable.

I think the entire hand was played pretty well. Only real branching point is to shove more money in on the flop or maybe raise bigger on turn, but I'm not sure either of those are even wrong. I think betting river is wrong but its hard to see in the moment; we need to consider the the fact that our opponent plays too many hands actually skews their range that gets to the river towards K/x to the point where they might accidentally employ a balanced checking strategy.

Biggest takeaway IMO: our opponent isn't always capped when they check oop otr, even if they mostly are. Pick some runouts, maybe 20% to throw out a number, and commit yourself to not betting them thin otr under the assumption that our opponent will accidentally arrive uncapped.

 

[JustinInMN]

Yeah, mostly. Per above when she checked I started to recall all the other hands where she got stuck on something like 77 or 66 and paid me or another player off despite the board running out terribly for those hands…

I guess this was just a rare price one has to pay for having such fish in a game. My iffy flop/turn line should still be profitable 19 out of 20 times… But I could have lost less on the river if I’d thought more clearly about it.

I don't hate check-call on this river against such a loose player. But bet-call does ensure you lose the maximum when behind, and I just don't think you are ahead often enough to overcome that. Even with a "normal" number of Kx hands (say down to KTo and K7s, for example) in villains range, there are just way more combinations of that then there are pairs QQ-TT. And given the showdown, we now know her range is way more weighted to Kx given she could possibly be playing every single offsuit K if she's showing K6o.

It is a cooler to get two outed, no doubt. But certainly hero exacerbated the issue by misplaying the river. It's a clear check, and perhaps a check-call given the description of this player could be overvaluing a pocket pair or a 9 here. And you might feel you left some value on the table by check-calling and being shown TT instead. But it more than makes up the value you don't lose in the usual outcome, and that's you will be shown a king.

 

[NeutronHim]

We are IP, there is no x/c line.

I don't hate check-call on this river against such a loose player. But bet-call does ensure you lose the maximum when behind, and I just don't think you are ahead often enough to overcome that. Even with a "normal" number of Kx hands (say down to KTo and K7s, for example) in villains range, there are just way more combinations of that then there are pairs QQ-TT. And given the showdown, we now know her range is way more weighted to Kx given she could possibly be playing every single offsuit K if she's showing K6o.

It is a cooler to get two outed, no doubt. But certainly hero exacerbated the issue by misplaying the river. It's a clear check, and perhaps a check-call given the description of this player could be overvaluing a pocket pair or a 9 here. And you might feel you left some value on the table by check-calling and being shown TT instead. But it more than makes up the value you don't lose in the usual outcome, and that's you will be shown a king.

 

[JustinInMN]

We are IP, there is no x/c line.

Good point, hero only checks behind. I guess these comments would apply if villain led the river, I might make a crying call for the same reasons.

 

[B0mbp0t]

I probably jam the turn after her raise. Otherwise, fine as played. From your description, I can honestly see her reraising the river with an ace thinking she's chopping, or pocket 10s. I play regularly against someone like this. He won't have a king more than 2 times out of 10 (more like 6 times out of 10), so it's profitable. I see her at least 1 time doing something stupid, so yeah, I'm calling.

 

[Taghkanic]

I probably jam the turn after her raise. Otherwise, fine as played. From your description, I can honestly see her reraising the river with an ace thinking she's chopping, or pocket 10s. I play regularly against someone like this. He won't have a king more than 2 times out of 10 (more like 6 times out of 10), so it's profitable. I see her at least 1 time doing something stupid, so yeah, I'm calling.

I also thought there was a chance she was playing AA exactly this way. But I was fooling myself.

 

[JustinInMN]

I also thought there was a chance she was playing AA exactly this way. But I was fooling myself.

I wouldn't say that was impossible either. Early in the poker boom, there was emphasis on "putting your opponent on a hand," but a welcome breakthrough in the last several years has been to alternatively, put your opponent on a range of hands and weigh them. Villain is just weighted too heavily toward Kx on this line, even though I would say AA, QQ, JJ, TT are all reasonable possibilities as well (and throw in some 9x chops and I wouldn't hate a call if villain had chosen to lead the river), that as played I think the check-behind is superior. The extra value you get the few times it's a pair do not outweigh the max losses every time villain has Kx. But that's what range thinking offers, you have to consider all possibilities and their frequencies, not tunnel in on "I put you on one specific thing" which makes it much harder to "fool myself" as you put it .

 

[Taghkanic]

My problem exactly here… Almost all normal opponents’ ranges are almost entirely Kx with a small amount of 9x, and few if any bluffs (given my actions, and the lack of draws). The unusually poor play of this villain caused me to lose my common sense at the end, and convince myself that her range could include many more worse hands. Even the fish can read a board that simple.

 

[JustinInMN]

My problem exactly here… Almost all normal opponents’ ranges are almost entirely Kx with a small amount of 9x, and few if any bluffs (given my actions, and the lack of draws). The unusually poor play of this villain caused me to lose my common sense at the end, and convince myself that her range could include many more worse hands. Even the fish can read a board that simple.

Yes, the fish can have Kx too. In fact, given she showed K6o, the fish can have way more Kx than a lot of players.

 

[Frogzilla]

Don’t think you beat >50% river calling range so river looks like a check back. A player would have to be kinda creative and aggressive to do a check/raise flop, bet/call turn, check/call river line with a hand with a hand you beat…and your read is passive.

Preflop play is good. Flop play is good. Turn raise is small but you’re in a weird SPR so it’s either your size or jam, and I dunno. Hard to say either way. River, I hope I could find the check back, but it’s rare to ever check back boats on the river, so in flow I might bet out of habit.

 

[Taghkanic]

This doesn’t really justify my specific play, which was still a mistake… But here is an example of a hand from just last night involving the same villain.

I wasn’t in the hand, but was keeping a close eye on her approach.

Board runs out:



PRE: Villain limps UTG+1, then calls a $15 bet. 3-way to the flop

FLOP: Villain check/calls a $20 cbet and $60 reraise. Still three-way.

TURN: Leads for $20. Calls a $80 reraise. Now heads up.

RIVER: Leads again for $20, calls a $125 reraise (the rest of her stack).

Loses with to a flopped straight, villain had.

Guy who folded the turn says he would have rivered a K high flush if he’d stayed.

So in other words:

On the flop, she called a big reraise with a middling A hoping (I guess) to spike a 5 or an A… Even though flopped A5/56s straights, 55, small sets, flush draws and is only ahead of six combos of A6 and A7 among all the zillion other Ax possibilities.

On the turn, she leads with the spiked weak A with no flush draw, again even though she is still losing to a ton of hands given the action. Also bets too small to fold out any draws even if she had been ahead; then calls another reraise with the remaining other villain showing strength across multiple streets.

On the river, leads out small again and calls off despite things getting even worse with the flush draw coming in (which she doesn’t block at all).

———-

I saw a lot of other mistakes like this from her last night, especially overvaluing any A. (Saw her lose another big hand when she has A2o against AJ.)

Point being that with non-thinking villains like this it can be very profitable to just see things to the river with almost all TP+ made hands and big draws, even when you think you normally could be beat. Though my losing hand might be the rare exception. Four-flushed boards could be a time to fold too.

 

[NeutronHim]

flop: call is fine, but once V raises we need to blast in the 4bet imo. we ALWAYS ALWAYS get called by range here. If we think villain has any pp thats "raising to deny equity" or something, they will always call flop but also always fold later streets for a similar price.

turn: ppl do overvalue their hands, and some are absolute stations. That said, I think these characters are scared off by any decently sized all in.

I want 125-135 on this turn.

river: we need to check behind. I think people check these sorts of spots back WAYY too much, scared that the opponent has value. However, the flop raise is enough to find a check back. If villain instead does not raise flop, I think b30/fold is mandatory.