Sickest dodge o_o

lol thats actually a good c/c by that guy

yea so sick wtf

Maybe I'm just used to thin value, but isn't this a shitty 'call-only' by villain?

10-9 and straight flush wins.

So? Shitty c/c imo, but I'm really not sure. Then again - I'm assuming most people have no clue if it's good.

... Which reminds me... why the f am I playing nl still

3 straight flushes (pretty key otherwise yea he would obviously be c/r or bet). If he bets he opens himself up to blocker bluffs since his hand will be a bluffcatcher vs raise (or if he wants to call raises then he heavily valuecuts himself vs straightflushes when hero doesnt have much of a raising range other than that and isn't bluffing SF blockers since the only complete ones take 2 clubs like J6cc). If he checks he can get money out of the parts of hero's range that will now bluff when checked to instead of fold to a bet.

And the value range on the river that hero calls a bet with isn't much wider (or weaker) than the range he bets himself when checked to.

doesnt he reduce his premium hand to a bluffcatcher by doing anything other than check call? like basically, he's way underrepped, so you're gonna vbet pretty much any hand you call, right? and then if he check raises river, do you really call worse than tens full? (which makes it T7 exactly he loses value against, lose vs SF+T9) and if he bets out then same outcome except you can raise with the few hands that beat him.

like intuitively I don't think I'd check call in his spot, but trying to analyze it it seems like the best play against a solid player?

How is villain's best play not to just bet/call? I think he could have bluffed with 78 on turn and river, and after river card could probably turn all naked tens into a bluff too. So he should definitely be able to have bluffs. Check/call sevens full and eights full or something. I dono. There is just absolutely no way that if there is only betting on 1-street, that you should check/call with the second nuts on this board.

I think check-raise is the worst line (other than check-fold)

i think a thing to consider is that also protects his river checking range by checking a hand as strong as this here. Value betting vs his river range in this spot will be a lot more difficult.

On December 10 2015 20:24 HungarianGOD wrote: How is villain's best play not to just bet/call? I think he could have bluffed with 78 on turn and river, and after river card could probably turn all naked tens into a bluff too. So he should definitely be able to have bluffs. Check/call sevens full and eights full or something. I dono. There is just absolutely no way that if there is only betting on 1-street, that you should check/call with the second nuts on this board. I think check-raise is the worst line (other than check-fold)

5th nuts, 3 sf combos and t9

Why would he ever raise.

Check/call over bet/fold is kinda weird though.

On December 10 2015 20:27 Liquid`Drone wrote: Show nested quote + On December 10 2015 20:24 HungarianGOD wrote: How is villain's best play not to just bet/call? I think he could have bluffed with 78 on turn and river, and after river card could probably turn all naked tens into a bluff too. So he should definitely be able to have bluffs. Check/call sevens full and eights full or something. I dono. There is just absolutely no way that if there is only betting on 1-street, that you should check/call with the second nuts on this board. I think check-raise is the worst line (other than check-fold) 5th nuts, 3 sf combos and t9

yeah yeah ;-p

On December 10 2015 20:55 Twisted wrote: Why would he ever raise. Check/call over bet/fold is kinda weird though.

why bet/fold? seems to me like it's only slightly ahead of check/call in terms of extracting value (villain is so underrepped when checking river that most hands that would call river bet are also likely to vbet?) I mean I can see some that won't, so I accept that for extracting value bet fold is better than check call. But then if he was gonna bluff, you've gone from him either bluffing over (and winning the pot) or folding, as opposed to him betting into you.

I basically think he'd need to have a really really low bluff frequency (and not just bluff over the bet, but bluff if checked to) for bet fold to be better. Likewise I think he'd need to have a really high bluff frequency for bet/call to be better. ;p Pretty cool math spot, wish I had the tools and the knowhow :D

On December 10 2015 20:16 Liquid`Drone wrote: doesnt he reduce his premium hand to a bluffcatcher by doing anything other than check call? like basically, he's way underrepped, so you're gonna vbet pretty much any hand you call, right? and then if he check raises river, do you really call worse than tens full? (which makes it T7 exactly he loses value against, lose vs SF+T9) and if he bets out then same outcome except you can raise with the few hands that beat him. like intuitively I don't think I'd check call in his spot, but trying to analyze it it seems like the best play against a solid player?

I don't think I should vbet river light at all. Not even sure I should vbet a naked A high flush unless it has a T or 9/8 etc to block a full house.

I guess he ran very bad before this hand

what would you call a vbet from him with then? all flushes?

Yeah probably. He might get some bets from Tx and like 96xx on river but he blocks Tx and doesn't block clubs.

I don't play much PLO but def feels like he should be betting to get called by a bunch of flushes most of which would check back river otherwise

LOL