tt oop 200+bb deep

[piestack]

utg is obv a tard. villain plays fine in position. cont bets a lot and two barrels often but slows down betting freq and agg on river.
not many hands on him but about 22/17 irrc
not sure i like my line on any street except river. please explain why you would do something different

6-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: hero ($883.80 in chips)
Seat 2: massiveblind ($462.50 in chips)
Seat 3: utg ($416.10 in chips)
Seat 4: utg+1 ($630.85 in chips)
Seat 5: co ($501.25 in chips)
Seat 6: villain ($1848.10 in chips)
hero: posts small blind $2
massiveblind: posts big blind $4

*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [ ]
utg: calls $4
utg+1: folds
co: folds
villain: raises $12 to $16
hero: calls $14
massiveblind: folds
utg: calls $12

*** FLOP *** [ ]
hero: checks
utg: checks
villain: bets $38
hero: calls $38
utg: folds

*** TURN *** [ ] []
hero: checks
villain: bets $88
hero: calls $88

*** RIVER *** [ ] [ ]
hero: bets $150
villain: raises $1556.10 to $1706.10 and is all-in
hero: folds  (would be ~$600 more for me to call)

[Rupert]

pre/flop/turn standard IMO, could raise flop but without history priority should be to keep fish in the pot.  River pot is $304 I think he's gonna slow down with his turned and any PPs he was merging with, think you only get a call out of the on the river.  You can't ever have a flush because he knows you wouldn't have c/c with it twice and would expect most 2/4 regs capable of turning a lot of hands into a bluff here including bluffing with all the bluffs he already has which would be quite a lot on this board I expect.  So yeah i'd prefer basically any line over the one you took, probably c/c>c/f>b/c but they're all fairly close for me.

[pleno1]

c/f being close to c/c and b/c? Really?

[Rupert]

well no not really, it's a pretty straightforward c/c but against some opponents the other 2 are better.  Against joe reg c/c

[Whollyflush]

I think leading the flop is best with a fish in the pot. C/C river, as played its probably a fold given your description altho i dislike the line in this spot on this board.

[Patonius2000]

Depending on what you think of villains 3bing range leading flop can be good. Not sure how well it fits in to a decent overall strategy very well for this spot but it's always going to be awkward playing a hand where your range pre is fairly narrow oop with deep stacks. As played the river lead seems like a pretty huge mistake unless you think he just shuts down with all his bluffs when checked to and you induce him to shove a lot of the hands he'd just check behind. In other words donk leading this river without snapping his neck off when he jams makes absolutely no sense. Check calling seems very standard...

[AlexMartin]

utg is obv a tard. villain plays fine in position. cont bets a lot and two barrels often but slows down betting freq and agg on river.
not many hands on him but about 22/17 irrc
not sure i like my line on any street except river. please explain why you would do something different

6-max Seat #6 is the button
Seat 1: hero ($883.80 in chips)
Seat 2: massiveblind ($462.50 in chips)
Seat 3: utg ($416.10 in chips)
Seat 4: utg+1 ($630.85 in chips)
Seat 5: co ($501.25 in chips)
Seat 6: villain ($1848.10 in chips)
hero: posts small blind $2
massiveblind: posts big blind $4

*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [ ]
utg: calls $4
utg+1: folds
co: folds
villain: raises $12 to $16
hero: calls $14
massiveblind: folds
utg: calls $12

*** FLOP *** [ ]
hero: checks
utg: checks
villain: bets $38
hero: calls $38
utg: folds

*** TURN *** [ ] []
hero: checks
villain: bets $88
hero: calls $88

*** RIVER *** [ ] [ ]
hero: bets $150
villain: raises $1556.10 to $1706.10 and is all-in
hero: folds  (would be ~$600 more for me to call)

coolest convertor ever?

[AlexMartin]

whoa there, c/c river

[piestack]

i'm trying to understand why check calling the river is best?
surely there is a better line earlier in the hand if check calling river is best.
i'm not saying i am right that bet folding is better than check calling river but i don't understand how he will bluff often after i lead the diamond. if i check he can surely check behind everything other than flushes??

[Patonius2000]

i'm trying to understand why check calling the river is best?
surely there is a better line earlier in the hand if check calling river is best.
i'm not saying i am right that bet folding is better than check calling river but i don't understand how he will bluff often after i lead the diamond. if i check he can surely check behind everything other than flushes??

The bolded part makes no sense. Are you saying we should never check call 3 streets? Are you saying we should somehow protect our hand by raising or leading at some point? This needs some elaboration because I suspect the logic behind this statement is pretty flawed.

The italicized part justifies why checking (and then calling with the particular hand) is almost always the best action for you to take on the river. You don't think he will bluff diamonds if you lead, well that's a bad thing. You have 3 of a kind, and a hand that is very very near the top of you range for overcalling pre and c/c two streets (aside from AdQd and maybe AdKd you have the nut combination relative to your range). What you don't want to do in these spots is shit on your check calling range by throwing in a random lead with the top of your range. We want his bluffing range to be as wide as possible on the river with this hand and we want him to be able to value bet worse hands (you said he only vbets flushes but this just isn't true vs anyone remotely good at hand reading/understanding ranges and relative hand strength). Check calling achieves those two things better than any other line and is the only line that could possibly fit in to a balanced strategy here.

[piestack]

i didn't say anywhere you can't check call 3 streets. i just don't like it with my hand on this board because, due to my read, i think he almost never bluffs the river, and won't value bet less than a flush after the diamond hits on this board.

if i don't think he will bluff after the diamond hits, you think it's bad to lead? if he doesn't bet worse but calls with worse, how is leading anything other than best?

also, deep stacked, why would i not be happy to play diamonds like this? to say tt is the top of my range is not right.

[Patonius2000]

i didn't say anywhere you can't check call 3 streets. i just don't like it with my hand on this board because, due to my read, i think he almost never bluffs the river, and won't value bet less than a flush after the diamond hits on this board.

if i don't think he will bluff after the diamond hits, you think it's bad to lead? if he doesn't bet worse but calls with worse, how is leading anything other than best?

also, deep stacked, why would i not be happy to play diamonds like this? to say tt is the top of my range is not right.

We disagree with the bolded part and you're going to have to go in to more depth than cont bets a lot and two barrels often but slows down betting freq and agg on river. The default for anyone remotely good is  not to never bluff this river when checked to and only value bet flushes. This is just due to the fact that anyone remotely good will have a moderate grasp for what your range is pre and play accordingly. Given you said villain played 22/17 and continuation bets a lot I am working on the assumption that villains falls under my categorisation of "remotely good".

I don't know what your range is for overcalling here but I have played enough msnl to know that your perceived range vs any sort of regular is almost exclusively pps. You can add AdQd to that maybe AdJd idk. There are probably a maximum of 3/4 dd combos in your perceived range pre. Now consider there are 6 combinations of every pocket pair and your overcall 77-QQ, that's 24 combinations, and maybe more if you overcall smaller pocket pairs. You check call 2 streets with all these combos assuming you do so with TT. If we look at this in terms of combinations it is very unlikely that you have a flush on the river. Even our most ambitious estimate that you can have 4 flush combos means that we have a flush less than 15% of time (4/28*100). If we only overcall AdQd and 4b AK then we only have 1combo of our 28 that make flushes meaning we can have a flush less than 4% of the time (1/28*100). This doens't have to be exact but in any reasonable mathematic breakdown of this hand our range is going to be massively weighted toward one pairs hand as opposed to flushes. This makes him value betting hands like AA/AK on the river very trivial and it would certainly not be too remote to rule out the prospect of QQ/JJ being a 'good' value bet. With all that I've said about your perceived range it should be fairly obvious why this would be a good spot for him to 3barrel bluff and value bet worse hands than ours. Infact, depending on your tendancies, it might be a fairly big mistake for him to not bet anything he bet the turn with on the river.

Now you tell me you overcall a lot of dd combinations  pre flop because of implied odds.!£$%!$%

[Rupert]

due to my read, i think he almost never bluffs the river, and won't value bet less than a flush after the diamond hits on this board.

ur read is wrong

[piestack]

ty kindly all for you comments. very clear your last post there patrick, much appreciated