Whipman

What is the idea behind that? To bet T + R? I guess it depends on how often he checks back turn here.

"Even if the enemy calls with Qx, is that an horrible call?" I don't know if it's horrible, but I surely don't have a ton of bluffs by the river. As a matter of fact, I think that AK is the only hand that I have in my bluffing range and given that I am going to 4 bet it quite often, it's not that relevant.

I think that most "good" players would suggest a 3 bet. We are surely going to get called by worse. Calling AJ, KQ, AQ in SB seems crazy tight to me. I can't see how that can ever be good. You should also be aware of the fact that 3 betting can win us the pot instantly or give us initiative postflop, while we are often going to play oop vs a very wide range if we just flat; ultimately being forced to make thin decisions.

As far as the actual hand goes, it seems to me that this is a spot in which you kinda have to eb aware of what your range will be and how AJ fits into your gameplan on this texture. c/c flop seems reasonable because we block second pairs, some draws and we have a hand that can play well on an A turn or river, while if we only c/c QQ here something like TT, QJs that won't be the case. So, I think that I have AJ in my c/c range and QQ in my betting range cause I can get called by more worse second pairs and I don't have to be scared of running into a Kx hand, cause many of those are either discounted (AK) or blocked by the board and by our hand (KQ; KJ). TT I'd probably bet cause we can't really c/c, AK I'd bet, AQ, I'd bet, JJ and KK I might c/c or bet.

As played, I c/c river cause we hardly have a c/c range on the river if we fold AJ here. Plus, he shouldn't have that many Kx hands in this spot.

Calling makes sense if villain 3 bets a lot but does not expand his value/ bluff 5betting range to match the adjustment that you might make (basically 4 betting him more). Other reasons include villain being aggressive pre. In this case, I would 4 bet; given his small size, you can flat areally wide range of hands and you don't need to have AA in there. I think calling and raising flop are both fine. Since you're not really benefitting from the board developing in any direction, and develop it surely will, I think that raising makes sense.

You basically deliver an argument for folding pre, but you say we should 3 bet? I assume we're kinda 3 betting as a bluff here then? I would c/r flop if the A were a spade, so we have a better backdoor fd and blockers to a lot of what he would bet/ call on the flop. Kinda difficult to say anything about the turn as played, cause the mistake happens prior to it. A is pretty much the worst card, cause he is very Ax heavy here; may it be the Ax FD or AK. Tight as he is, he probably raises only KQ+ in UTG as far as Kx hands go. I might make a smallish 1/3 pot bet to deny him equity and get thin value from pretty much KQ only, but I'm not too happy about either option here tbh.

I call. You should take into account that recreational players like to rep stuff that looks scary, flushes, paired boards, etc. He shouldn't have a ton of 2 pairs in his range except for 65s maybe and I expect him to play his sets more aggressively since recs are super afraid of flush draws. He migh bluffshove a GS or just a 1 pair hand. Considering that he kinda commits himself he might even show up with a desperation shove with KQ or something.

I meant that he has less equity if he only draws to a flush and nothing else and if we never fold an Ax, he has little to no fold equity. Especially if you consider that there ar enot many 9x hands which we would flat pre in SB

I don't understand why you want to turn 99 into a bluff. We can of course bet to deny Villain his equity, but I don't see the point in bluffing with SD value.

I would have prefered betting a blank turn to betting a diamond turn, cause with the flush getting there, his c/c range will now include more Kx hands. I like checking back turn and reevaluating river. As played it's a fold.

People usually don't slowplay bluffs, so if he shows aggression on the flop, then becomes passive on the turn and then bets/ raises the river that is hardly ever a bluff. Call pre is borderline in these positions, I might prefer a 3 bet or fold strategy. He can absolutely have a flush; considering that there's a A on the river and that if he has a FD without a chance of hitting TP and assuming that you are going to be very Ax heavy after the flop call and you never fold an ace anyway, he can definetely take a free card with a FD here. I don't think that your hand is strong enough to bet. I don't think that he is going to bluff you in a spot where you can have Ax and a flush, especially if, as I said before, he kinda lets go of the hand on the turn.

I think I like a flat on the flop better than a 3 bet/ get it in. We don't have a ton of draws if we raise UTG, so ourr ange should be more Kx, TP heavy which means that villain might barrel hands that actually help our hand quite often. On the other hand, we want to make SPR smaller oop and reduce the amount of streets we play oop, so bet/ 3 bet has something going for it, especially considering that he can have weaker FDs here, JTs, QJs, etc. He can't really have 2 pair and he might 3 bet 99 pre, so hsi range seems bluff/ draw heavy, so ultimately I would prefer a callon the flop and a call on the turn as well. Our equity and implied odds should be more than enough to make a call here.

This is one of the boards that, in theory, benefit the preflopraiser cause he can have all the sets + 2 pairs. I see villain having AT, A3 on this board, some second pairs, maybe 3rd pair+ draw, some slowplayed straight, but not much more. Given that we have no sd value, but quite a few second barreling opportunities, I would def bet flop. The turn is a perfect card for us and we can barrel t + barrel pretty much every river, except Jx and Kx, imo.

I think checking back flop with AA is not an absolutely terrible play, since we will c/back some second pairs here, so it makes sense to put AA in our checking back range to strengthen it. However, AQ might be a better hand for that. I would not check back turn though. If he folds 99, TT or 89s, that's not a huge loss, cause you're not getting more than 2 streets out of those hands anyway - and c back turn, bet river certainly looks less bluffy than bet flop, bet river.

Do you guys think that a flop call is profitable? What part of his range do we beat with JJ?

C/c seems fine to me. Your hand is pretty strong and you don't really need FE. He might use K or A turns to continue bluffing or bet something like KQ for value. Since we shouldn't have that many drawing hands in our range, we could it get it in on flushboards without much variance. C/r can never be bad since we have so much equity, but we're deep and there's no need to apply maximum pressure.

My point is simply that if he 3 ebts and calls a 4 bet, I really don't see much 9Ts type of hands here, and neither do I think that he'll have QJ or KJ, KQ. Fish love to 3 bet pairs though. If he has those combos, I'd bet, but just as a population read, I really don't expect them to have those hands too often.

Just feel like as a fish he should have more PPs here than Kx or Tx hands.

I'd make a nitty fold... Looks like JJ to me. Even if he has KT here every once in a while, it's still not worth it. Don't see him bluffing busted combodraws with that sizing. Unless he's shown signs of being an imbecil, I'd fold.

I'm looking at this hand with the same facial expression as Durrr on your avatar. He reps Jx very much and very credibly. I think he'd bet 55 and OPs bigger, given that he doesn't block Jx which is the hand that you have here most of the time. Really looks like he's trying to make you call with a PP <J while having a J himself. You don't rep anything with your river raise other than 55. 3 combos is too narrow to bluff imo. He's never folding a Jack and that's precisely the hand he's repping.

I would check flop since we smack this flop really hard and I don't expect villain to have a strong range - we block AK, AT, AJ, AQ, Ax FDs and so on. I think that he will have a PP here a lot and he might turn it into a bluff (especially <99). As played, I really have no idea. Given that you block so many draws and he calls you on a flop that even from the perspective of a fish looks very good for your range (from a fish's perspective, AK is the hand you always have if they have a PP), I don't expect many floats. It's kinda nitty, but I suppose that if he is that loose and aggro, you will find a better spot to get his money and can fold here.

If your evaluation of his range is correct then we should call. Also, I don't think that villain is going to play any AK differently, especially with SB being in the pot. There's also the chance of SB calling the AI with worse, which gives you better odds to call.

Well, first of all, you neither have a bankroll nor a bankroll management. You're a recreational player and that's perfectly alright.

On a more general note: we are basically assuming that villain will not make much of a mistake on the river, for instance, that he will never shove AJ and that he will never bluff. I don't know if it helpful to think that villain is going to play the way we would play the hand/ that he would not make plays which we find incomprehensive. I think that we must include the possibility of him making a range mistake into our evaluation. For example, it's not impossible for him to think that we might call him twice with TT, JJ and that we can't have AK, in which case he might find a questionable bluff. However, I think that in this particular hand it's a fold, since villain can have
AK, A9, A5s, 99, maybe A7s. As far as bluffs go, I don't see much more
than a busted backdoor FD without a pair.

Another thing: the "top of my range" argument that comes up frequently in many threads seems kinda fallacious to me. The reasoning is that if we fold hand A we are never calling However, the fact that we end up with a range which is fairly weak even at it's top might imply that we have made an unbalanced play/ a range mistake on earlier streets, in which case we have to alter our range there to assure that we have a range on the river which, at it's top, includes hands which we can call with easily. That's not necessarily something that applies to this hand, just an idea that the title triggered in my head.

So, from the point of view of trying to make it as difficult as possible for villain to abuse us, do you think that we should have a checking range on this flop that is uncapped? How would you play OPs or PPs < 8? If you have a betting range ehre, what would it include as bluffs/ value hands?

I would c/r flop. You get called by worse draws + definetely have some fold equity vs his stabbing range which could potentially be very wide. You also make it easier for you to get value on later streets if you hit. As played, I think that we have enough equity + implied odds to c/c turn. I would c/r river; if he thought that TP, OP are good enough to bet turn, he'd probably bet a blank river as well. Plus, he might continue bluffing busted FDs and SDs cause your range is probably going to be rather weak on this particular river (not that he knows anything about ranges).

Tbh, my initial thought was to c/c flop with this hand instead of c betting. I decided to c bet because I have a backdoor FD which I would have used for a double barrel. On the downside, I don't rep much when I doublebarrel, so I'm kinda dependent on him folding sPPs to a second bet. If I c bet, I barrel a spade and a K and I probably would c/c an ace. I agree with you about the turn; it is definetely the street on which I have to make up my mind. As I said in my initial post, my line here is the worst of all, cause I invest a lot of money without getting to showdown.

Thanks, you're both right, I think. It seems like I have an emotional/ mental problem whilst playing. It's difficult to eliminate emotional responses and intentions from my game (desire to win, fear of losing etc.).