Hooray For Great Flop Texture

[shinzilla 0]

SB is 13/9/infinity after 100 hands. His bet river% is around 40%. Button is 20/8/2 after 200 hands or so. Haven't had any significant hands with either of these players.Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $1 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FCP)SB ($101.15)BB ($103.20)Hero ($169)MP ($153.20)CO ($121.70)Button ($98)Preflop: Hero is UTG with K , K . Hero raises to $4, 2 folds, Button calls $4, SB calls $3.50, 1 fold.Flop: ($13) 9 , 8 , 7 (3 players)SB checks, Hero bets $9, Button calls $9, SB calls $9.Turn: ($40) 8 (3 players)SB checks, Hero checks, Button checks.River: ($40) Q (3 players)SB bets $40, Hero folds, Button folds.Final Pot: $40Should I have bet the turn or no? Anyone play the other streets differently? (More on the flop, I know.)

[rdtedm 0]

Pretty standard fold, I would say. Rough board for kings.

[No_Neck 0]

yeah probably not making a ton of money on the river call... with all the people in the pot I like the fold.

[Scott3705 0]

I'm ok with it.

[mtdesmoines 2]

SB is 13/9/infinity after 100 hands. His bet river% is around 40%. Button is 20/8/2 after 200 hands or so. Haven't had any significant hands with either of these players.Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $1 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FCP)SB ($101.15)BB ($103.20)Hero ($169)MP ($153.20)CO ($121.70)Button ($98)Preflop: Hero is UTG with K , K . Hero raises to $4, 2 folds, Button calls $4, SB calls $3.50, 1 fold.Flop: ($13) 9 , 8 , 7 (3 players)SB checks, Hero bets $9, Button calls $9, SB calls $9.Turn: ($40) 8 (3 players)SB checks, Hero checks, Button checks.River: ($40) Q (3 players)SB bets $40, Hero folds, Button folds.Final Pot: $40Should I have bet the turn or no? Anyone play the other streets differently? (More on the flop, I know.)

I bet the turn. Checking let the SB in ... I bet SB had no better than KQ

[Lavitz 0]

I bet the turn. Checking let the SB in ... I bet SB had no better than KQ

SB never c/c flop with KQ OOP here after a bet and call. Hand played fine. Betting turn is going to inflate pot when we have a mediocre hand on a very coodinated board. Fullhouse/straight is in both villain's range. Not much else we beat is, maybe one having 910 or 10x but that's wishful thinking. SB is almost never bluffing river into 2 people.

[NoBBiR 0]

You flop as good as I do

[mtdesmoines 2]

SB never c/c flop with KQ OOP here after a bet and call. Hand played fine. Betting turn is going to inflate pot when we have a mediocre hand on a very coodinated board. Fullhouse/straight is in both villain's range. Not much else we beat is, maybe one having 910 or 10x but that's wishful thinking. SB is almost never bluffing river into 2 people.

We had the lead on the flop, what makes us think our KK is behind at the turn without testing it with a bet?

[Lavitz 0]

We had the lead on the flop, what makes us think our KK is behind at the turn without testing it with a bet?

Because the board is massively coordinated and I cant think of many hands besides 910 and 10x that we legitimately beat. HU is one thing, but two people called our c-bet. We can bet turn but if we bet turn and get cold called then there is no river besides a K which we're going to be comfortable calling a pot bet with and therefore we just threw pot control with a marginal hand out the window.

[coremiller 0]

This is a tricky hand. I agree that checking the turn for pot control is correct, but I'm not sure folding the river is right. It's one thing to look at this coordinated board and say somebody has us beat; it's another to actually put the SB on a hand that beats us.So what are the important pieces of information here? First, the SB is a total TAG over a decent but not huge sample. This makes his flop and turn play very unusual. Someone who is 13/9/infinity just calls pre-flop OOP, then just calls again OOP on a coordinated board after a bet and a call. What hands would he do this with? He does not have a big pair or non-spade overcards. He does not do this with two pair, and probably not if he flopped a set or a straight - there are too many draws he needs to protect against with two people in the hand. He can't have A9s or A8s, since the 8 and 9 of spades are both on the board.So what does this leave? He could have something like AQs, he could have 10-9 or J-9. He could have a naked 10. He could ahve a missed flush draw. 10-8, 10-7, 10-6 are less likely because he's tight preflop. The important fact is that we beat most of these hands. None of the draws hit; unless he has an 8 in his hand, anything that beats us now was beating us on the flop, and any hand that was beating us on the flop would almost certainly have raised on the flop. Getting 2:1 I think this is a call.The other thing to worry about is the button, but the button has shown zero strength so far, and his most likely hand is one of the missed draws. I think we have him beat, too.

[Lavitz 0]

Someone running at 13/9 or 20/8 is TAG/nitty and won't bluff much. SB is value betting this probably 9 times out of 10 and the 1 time when it is a bluff we still have to worry about button. Once again, from SB's perspective, bluffing this river into two people is pretty -EV.

[coremiller 0]

Someone running at 13/9 or 20/8 is TAG/nitty and won't bluff much. SB is value betting this probably 9 times out of 10 and the 1 time when it is a bluff we still have to worry about button. Once again, from SB's perspective, bluffing this river into two people is pretty -EV.

There's a difference between being tight pre-flop and only betting with a made hand post-flop. The SB has an infinite aggression factor over ~100 hands. It's pretty hard to do that if you never bluff. This is actually the first time in 100 or so hands he's called a post-flop bet. Now 100 hands is not a huge sample, but it's not small enough to completely disregard. Given that you think he's TAG/nitty, what hand does he hold that he's value betting here? How often does he call pre-flop with an 8 in his hand? What kind of hand does his play on all four streets add up to? He just has not played this hand the way an aggressive player (which he is) plays a big hand.

[shinzilla 0]

There's a difference between being tight pre-flop and only betting with a made hand post-flop. The SB has an infinite aggression factor over ~100 hands. It's pretty hard to do that if you never bluff. This is actually the first time in 100 or so hands he's called a post-flop bet. Now 100 hands is not a huge sample, but it's not small enough to completely disregard. Given that you think he's TAG/nitty, what hand does he hold that he's value betting here? How often does he call pre-flop with an 8 in his hand? What kind of hand does his play on all four streets add up to? He just has not played this hand the way an aggressive player (which he is) plays a big hand.

This is true. If it were just me and him, I probably would've called. But as Lavitz set, bluffing into two people is pretty gutsy. Villain did have a bet river % of 40% but still... I don't know. I think calling and folding are very close.

[coremiller 0]

This is true. If it were just me and him, I probably would've called. But as Lavitz set, bluffing into two people is pretty gutsy. Villain did have a bet river % of 40% but still... I don't know. I think calling and folding are very close.

Except that the Button has shown zero strength in this hand at any point, and he has aggressive tendencies as well. The button almost certainly has a missed draw here, MAYBE a weak 9, and it's probable that the SB is aware of this. If he puts the button on that kind of hand, and puts you on missed overcards (which is entirely consistent with your play so far), a bluff becomes a reasonable play for him.Also, the SB's bet strikes me as too large to be a value bet in this situation, because nobody else has indicated they have a hand strong enough to call a pot-sized bet. If he were really value-betting here, wouldn't he be more likely to bet 1/2-2/3 of the pot and try to get someone to make a crying call? Coming out with a river bet for the full pot, after showing no strength before in the hand, screams "bluff" to me.

[Cappy37 0]

Someone running at 13/9 or 20/8 is TAG/nitty and won't bluff much. SB is value betting this probably 9 times out of 10 and the 1 time when it is a bluff we still have to worry about button. Once again, from SB's perspective, bluffing this river into two people is pretty -EV.

It's complete suicide. *Unless* you view this as a mini-squeeze play. We all see the button as being weak, so it's highly likely the SB is worried about the Button, either. He could very well be squeezing you out of the hand, knowing you are likely to call, but less inclined to call a large bet with a player behind you. The funny thing about the meta-game is, the occasional -EV play is just like mixing a curveball in with your fastball and change. He knows bluffing into two people is suicide, but he also thinks you know that, too. If he's full of air, he's trying to appeal to your poker sense. He wants you to put him on an 8. He knows you can rationalize his turn check by wanting to make sure a 4th straight didn't show there. He knows if you lay down, he wins the pot outright. He's bluffing you, and using the Button player as a scarecrow.On the flip side, it might be worth the river bet to flip your hand straight up and show the SB how badly you can misplay big hands. /shrugI think it's safe to say the SB bets the pot three times a night on that type of board on the river. Once or twice, he's full of hot air... and once or twice he's making the "bluff" bet on the river to get his stone cold nuts paid off. Do we feel lucky?

[mtdesmoines 2]

Because the board is massively coordinated and I cant think of many hands besides 910 and 10x that we legitimately beat. HU is one thing, but two people called our c-bet. We can bet turn but if we bet turn and get cold called then there is no river besides a K which we're going to be comfortable calling a pot bet with and therefore we just threw pot control with a marginal hand out the window.

I don't see this as a "c-bet," and I don't see our holding as marginal. We have a big hand, our preflop raise should have eliminated most hands that coordinate here. So we're betting for value, not continuation-betting.I can see some kind of suited paint looking for a turn, catching a Q on the river and betting it, since we didn't bet the turn. So is the board "massively" coordinated? Well, I see a straight on the board, but, heck ... no one bet it on turn, so no one seems to be interested in getting value out of their "big hand." And while I can see playing a little stop and go with a pairing board on the turn heads up holding a straight, I wouldn't be interested in doing it with multiple people in the pot. I don't think there's a straight here. And a set pushes us harder on the flop. Also in consideration is this player's river aggression. He's not afraid to push people off pots (apparently), and a board like this is a good scary board to push people around. Also considered is that there was NO action on the turn. If I'm villain and I'm holding a big hand, I put callable chips in, not a pot-sized bet.My best guess if you call the river bet is that you'll see something with a Q that floated the flop, two pair that got counterfieted, a failed straight draw / air.

[nomad_monad 0]

We have a big hand, our preflop raise should have eliminated most hands that coordinate here.

it's only a single raise - with villain closing the action preflop and stacks large enough to play for implieds, i don't think we can eliminate any hands that coordinate well here, at least not until our flop bet.

no one bet it on turn, so no one seems to be interested in getting value out of their "big hand." And while I can see playing a little stop and go with a pairing board on the turn heads up holding a straight, I wouldn't be interested in doing it with multiple people in the pot. I don't think there's a straight here. And a set pushes us harder on the flop.

this all makes sense to us. but i've seen enough people play sets and flopped str8s horribly enough in exactly this spot to know that we shouldn't discount these possibilities just because we think it would be retarded to play them this way.i will say though that this is almost never a str8. with the button call on the flop, even a somewhat braindead SB check-raises here. a set i don't discount as much because it's not unusual to see a villain get a little unnerved by a board like this and play passive hoping to hit a boat and then cash in on implied odds.all that aside, if we're behind, i think the likeliest hand is a botched two pair that backed into a boat on the turn.

Also in consideration is this player's river aggression. He's not afraid to push people off pots (apparently), and a board like this is a good scary board to push people around.

yeah, this is what really swings me to a call. but i still think it's really close. his river aggression is high, but that might be exactly why he doesn't value bet here with the nuts/near-nuts. (i.e. he makes big bluffs on the river a lot so his big value bets are called more often) plus with hero and button looking not all that strong here, villain might figure that value betting less is near worthless here since it really looks like the range of hands in between near-nothing and something good is pretty thin.

[sierradave 0]

I'm comfortable with the turn check for pot control, but if we're going to do that and the river completes no draws (as is the case here), I think we pretty much have a must-call of the pot-sized bet. A lot of the point of controlling the pot on the turn is to keep it small enough to do so on the river.The button pretty much has to have air here. A str8, trips, or even TPTK on the flop are all often going to bet that turn once you've given up the lead. Your flop bet looks pretty standard to your opponents, so the turn check is usually going to be with a lot less than kings up. If I'm in the small blind with a busted draw, this looks like a good spot for a bluff. Hero needs AQ or better to even think about calling here, and as we see hero might fold regardless, and button is pretty much never calling.I think we make the crying call here and get paid off more than often enough to make up for the times we run into the genuine monster holding.