Do I have the nuts, or is is possible he has me beat?

[RiverHebrew2]

I NEVER

[bilbo-san]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
u guys dont think a flush will call my 4bet? seriously?

[/ QUOTE ]

How bad is villain? Only worst flushes (assuming villain is a 22/xx player) would be 89, J9 and maybe 56. J9 probably stacks off, but most sane players easily fold 56 and should be folding 89 to a shove.

Edit - Eliminate J9 because he would have flopped the straight.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he's limping T7s, he's also limping J8s, 86s, and suited Kings, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, all of those hands call Tick's raise, and none of them 3-bet.

Tick,

It's a limped pot but it's also protected. The SB bets, then someone raises and the action gets to you.

You 3-bet here with the non-nut flush? If you do I think you are a spewer. And you said both players were decent. BB (You) looks exactly like he has a flush, and Button 3-bets anyway.

A river 3-bet here is always a monster. Always. And as Frank pointed out, the K-high flush is really unlikely, and the Q-high is impossible. So what monster does a decent player have that can ever 3-bet here? Really? Villain's always calling (not 3-betting) with lower flushes.

I think this is a fold (and I thought so before you posted results). Calling is probably not as bad as I think it is, but shoving is absolutely horrible.

[gimmetheloot]

Um, shoving would be my def play. I would count on him having a lower flush like, 94% of the time.

[Tickner]

I didnt say both players were decent. Thats the other thread.

This hand I had no reads, except for hes 22/8 PF (yeh, he limps a lot but probably a crappy tag/fish - which I am now going to coin the accronym TAF (pronounced: tag fish) - wtf dont people use TAF yet??)

Eh, advocating this is a fold is most definitely a result-oriented statement. If I said I 4bet shoved and he called with the 7 high flush, I dont think youd still advocate a fold.

As I said, I think that calling is probably the btter play, but I also dont think that 4betting is overall -EV.

PEOPLE: DO YOU REALLLLLLLLLY THINK THEY ARE FOLDING A FLUSH TO MY 4-BET?

I'm still unsure.

[Tickner]

T7 is the ONLY HAND that makes him a FH house. VERY rarely will sets and better 2 pairs flat call the turn in a 3 way pot with him closing the action. But he calls the turn with FDs always.

[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]


PEOPLE: DO YOU REALLLLLLLLLY THINK THEY ARE FOLDING A FLUSH TO MY 4-BET?

I'm still unsure.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is a flush will almost never 3 bet you in the first place.

[Tickner]

We will have to agree to disagree about that, because I believe that simply isn't true.

[Fonkey123]

[ QUOTE ]
Call. I think value shoving is too thin here.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Imrahil]

Guys this is Party by the way?? After watching IStrong's video I don't think I could fold TPNK against these donks.

[bilbo-san]

[ QUOTE ]

Eh, advocating this is a fold is most definitely a result-oriented statement. If I said I 4bet shoved and he called with the 7 high flush, I dont think youd still advocate a fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nah, "fold" was my first thought when I read the OP. I should name this a new theorem, because I've said it before in tons of other threads:

When a player raises the river on a paired, 3-flush board, it's usually the nut flush or better, because people don't [censored] around on paired boards.

How often have you been in this spot? If you can show me 5 hand histories from your PTDB where someone 3-bet a PROTECTED pot with less than the nut-flush, I'll recant everything I said.

SB bets. BB raises what sure as [censored] looks like a flush. What the hell does a 22/8 ever RE-raise with here? Really?

The answer is the nut-flush +, or some weird-ass, insane, stupid donktastic bluff. You have the nut flush. So he has T7 or he's bluffing. But you aren't getting the odds to call the improbable donkey-bluff.

I know T7 is only one hand, and T7 is statistically improbable. But Bayes Theorem says that you revise your estimates of probability based on recent evidence. I say, the odds of him having T7 *OR* playing KT or 77 or some such in a weird manner is way higher than the odds that he 3-bets the river with 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].