Probably betting smaller OTR since the board is rainbow and your flop x/c range lean towards paired hands . If you are betting only 75s+ and he is repping 66677+ (he can have 22277 also but not everyone is opening it UTG), then 7x hands probably aren't the best bluff catchers (specially having an 8/9/T that blocks hands that he can bluff).

If his river raising range for value is KK, 66, 76s then 76s (assuming that shoving A7s for example is way over the top) is only one combo and your best bluff catcher becomes K6s, if you have it in your preflop range. Given the dynamics and you already called on a similar spot and is probably more likely than average to call again (given player type and that you already got a spot like this correctly) I am probably mucking 87.

Hey Raphael,

thanks for your feedback. You´re most certainly right about the bet probably being a little bit too big. I will vbet pretty thinly here and therefore should bet smaller when I will get called by better a non-zero but rather substantial % of the time. I think 88+/ A6 is an easy vbet here though. He might even hero me with some AT+ combos as well. What do you think about simply folding 87o here in this spot pf? It just feels so dirty getting like 4.5:1 (the handhistory above doesnt show antes it seems).

My problem here was and still is that he has so very few combos that get to the river the way he did. There is only one more 7 out there and any 7x or Kx (except for maybe 76/K7/KK) as well as 66 should and probably would bet turn again as my flop chk/calling range leans heavily towards pairs and any Kx (I hold) would probably call turn again. Then again I am not sure how many 7x hands he would open UTG fairly close to the bubble. The same goes for 22 (at least UTG) or even 66 (assuming he´d fold that pf might be a little far fetched though).

In my mind we´re realistically only looking at a range of KKK or 666 even if we throw in a 76 combo (which would be a rare instance imo) we are looking at a very narrow range and other factors come in to play. What bluffs can he have and would he decide to risk a very big chunk of his stack in this spot when I showed that folding is the least of my worries? Again, I dont know if he noticed, but for the sake of the argument let´s assume he did. There are some straight and backdoor flush draw combos he could have, but wouldnt he bet those on the turn? All things considered this seems like pretty bad spot to bluff in my opinion as he just repping such a narrow range.

"it's a trap!"

You have a lot of 7x not a good bluffing spot for villain.Also, not sure what you wanna be value betting super thin, its not like villain never checks Kx ott.Youll also have a lot of air, so you do want to bet larger.

@ Raphael

maybe 66 doesn't bet the turn 100% of the time, but given that I have way more Kx combos when he has 66, he should be charging those hands and also given the fact that 66 is more vulnerable than other boats, he should be betting >70% of the time would be my rough guess. This would lead me to disregard some 66 combos on this river.

@ Nick

quite possibly

@ SPrince

Im not sure if I have that many 7x hands here. I will probably have more 7x combos than others, but he doesnt know that, which could lead him to decide that he is now (on the river) repping slow played turned trips. You´re also totally right that he may have some Kx combos that he is not betting the turn again, but that is fine and that is also why I should be betting smaller on the river as Raphael suggested as I will loose some % of the time with my (perceived) vbet. But then again he will miss that flop a lot as well and could hero me on the river when I bet my floats and missed draws to get him off of A high or small pairs.

What do you specifically figure his bluffing range can be in this spot? I don't have much to add except that it crossed my mind that AK/QK could actually be in his bluffing range here.

Given bubble is close, agree that it's a v bad bluff spot and v good trap spot for vill. And if he noticed your earlier hand, instinct suggests he's going for max value against you in this spot.

I don´t really think he has much of a bluffing range here as I would assume that most reasonable bluff combos bet the turn as well. As played and as discussed above there are just so few value combos in his range here that he cant credibly add many (if any) bluff combos to his river range.

That being said in game I called and sure enough he had KK for the obvious boat. I was and still am very mad at myself for how I played this hand. It is highly unlikely that he would throw that many chips away at this point in the tournament on a less than credible bluff. I´m fine with the preflop call as long as I dont make many postflop mistakes. This was one of those costly mistakes. Thank you guys for your feedback.

Not much to add to above comments. I agree with OP that he has so few value combos at this point, but it's as hard, if not harder, to find his bluff combos. It's a weird spot, and the river jam after the turn check is a bit surprising, because we would expect him to bet lots of his value hands on the turn. But then again, he might not.

A bit off topic, but whenever I am in these kinds of "unusual" spots, I try my best not to instill my poker logic/strategy into his mind. Or better yet, whenever he is telling me a couple of conflicting stories, I try to find out which one is more (or less) credible. For example, it's not too credible that he checks back 66 on the turn, but still possible. On the other hand, it's far less credible that he is bluffing on the river or value raising worse. Because of that, I'd probably find a fold.

About preflop though, I can't see myself possibly folding this when getting 4.5 to 1. All we have to do is to capture ~18% of the pot postflop, and it's not THAT hard to do. :)

vs UTG range of reasonable opponents it is quite hard to capture 18% of the pot postflop. The PF call is borderline but can be okay depending on how aggressive the opponent is. The more aggressive, the harder to realize our equity.

It is true that MTT play is very exploitative and thereby villian will probably bet the vast majority of his bluffs on the turn. In my opinion however he can easily have 4 combos of T9s which he does not want to bet on the turn as he has so large reverse implieds (flushes, boats, might even be drawing dead already). Same goes for 3 combos 89. He should generally not be betting this turn very aggressively with his range imo because this is the best card in the deck for our range after c/c the flop. Also, I think in a 1k FTOPS we should give a random reg some credit to know that he needs to have a bet/check/bet bluffing range (I would play most of my AK combos like this because its a 2 street hand, getting check/raised is ugly on this turn and we induce bluffs of 89, missed BDFD etc OTR). I think I would only bet AA, 66 and if I have it 67 here for value (no K blocker) and balance this with a few weak flush draws. The rest probably goes into the checking back range. he could even be turning some random turn give ups into bluffs on the river. if we seriously give him 22 in the range then he can also show up with so many other hands that he needs to give up a decent portion on the turn and now has the opportunity to bluff again. Especially since he can use the bubble for extra pressure...

Whether I fold or call here depends on the number of Kx that I defend preflop but we probably have enough to fold this hand. Were toprange but thats irrelevant since we have a bluffcatcher. Any Kx is a better bluffcatcher as Raphael said since some of them dont block potential bluffs and more importantly we block 2 KK combos which is a decent part of his value range. Similarly we can catch A6, wouldnt go much lower though as he could potentially be jamming a weak 6 here (if he opens 65s, 96s, 86s) to make Kx,TT-QQ fold and then we look like an idiot.

Long story short, I think the problem is not the non-existing bluff combos but rather that we have lots of better hands to catch.

haha, no sorry if that wasnt clear. I am talking from villains perspective OTT. I would only bet AA, 66, 67 and some flushdraws on the turn due to the fact that this card hits the BB range so well but we do not block any Kx combos. Imagine were UTG with AK which is a decent part of our value range on the turn and get a check/raise.. that is quite ugly. Its a 2 street hand unless the BB is a station so we should check it back OTT to value bet/catch river imo. Consequently, we need to check some bluffs back on the turn in order to be able to bluff the river once the BB checks again as we want to balance our AK and KQs hands. (I would take 89 and 9T due to the reverse implieds and unclean outs). Once the BB leads the river, these hands are obviously the ones that we can consider jamming now as bluff. Thereby, I can see him having a reasonable number of bluff combos.

You could argue to put AK in your 3 street value range UTG but I think it is very difficult to get called by worse on the river when the BB has significantly more 7x than we do. Only works if we use very small sizing obviously. I prefer to use larger sizing than most MTT regs and make it 2 streets (Flop and River) which also protects our 88-QQ hands that often want to check back OTT.

Would you always bet AK 3 streets as villain here? I think the playerpool tendency does so but I think its bad because our checking back range OTT is super weak without it (unless we open KJo, KQo which I wouldnt do cause I believe its too loose).

Thanks maxderwayner for your insightful comments.

I totally agree with you that most regs that play 1k mtts will know that you need a thinner vbet-range in order for you to being able to add more bluff combos. That being said: is this really the spot to take advantage of the ranges we constructed in theory? Each and every possible (turned) draw missed. You said it yourself. Our range is far more 7x heavy than villains.

I am very much in favor of balancing each and every spot and I do like checking back AK as villain to induce bets from whatever bluff/1 pair combos hero might have on the river, but why play AK exactly like villain here? I cant wrap my head around what this would accomplish. What worse hands are calling us? Isnt the fact that you might get someone (tough to find someone in this spot imo) to call you with QK here less relevant than preserving your chips against a pretty strong value range on the river?

I personally would like to have some (if not most) AK combos in my 3 barrel range here as villain. Mostly due to the fact that as far as I am concerned many BBs dont defend very many 7x combos. Then again, we would have think about what that does to our checking the turn range.

I am not sure whether I get your point. Obviously villain is not jamming AK here for value if that is what you mean. I am saying that once you play AK the way I would play most of my combos (check behind on the turn) you consequently need bluffs to be played in the same way. Otherwise you are not balanced. As a result, you need to check back some bluffs on the turn and not bet them. I would take 89 and T9 for this. On this river I would then0 as villian:
Catch: AK, KQ etc
Value jam:KK, 66, 67 (if I have it)
Bluffjam: 89s

I would probably bet 66 on the Turn though if I was villian and thereby only bluff 1-2 combos of 89 to balance KK which I always check behind on the turn. By having AK in our checking range, the BB cannot recklessly bet the river himself. However, since I assume the playerpool to bet AK 3 streets, it makes sense for the BB to stab the river wide. This in turn means that villain could potenetially be bluffing here if he is reexploiting the playerpool exploit...

Not saying that its likely, just saying that villain can definitely be bluffing. My point is to catch with Kx as BB because we block KK which is by far the most likely value holding of villain imo.

Ok, I think I misunderstood your point the first time I read it. You were saying in general you would be playing AK bet/check/bet here and not bet/check/jam over a river bet from BB, which would make very little sense for value imo. I think we´re in the same boat then. Thank you.

like the discussion. all i got to add is that not convinced that 98s is only and best bluff. what about QJs JTs ATs type hands that bet flop and give up turn? those hands dont block opponents bluffs on river (98 T9 85s as much) and do block his stronger 7x. Tho i actually see some logic if he bets too small to call with QJs or ATs here given he has loose enough preflop stats to defend t9o 98o T8o, which is reasonable given swoop defended 87o and the pot odds offered

He surely might have a wider jamming range here on the river, but given that there are so few real value combos (as discussed above) for him, he cant really believably add more and more bluff combos to his range without getting to the point where he would just be spewing. Given that I think he was at least a normal reg without any crazy tendencies - at least that I had seen so far - I dont think he would have many of the combos you mentioned. I am also unclear about whether or not he´d open JT and QJ UTG at this point. He might though given that the bubble wasnt too far away.