Flop second nut straight vs maniac, do I call down?

[csuf_gambl0o0r]

why do you call the flop and turn if you not gonna call river.

[Poker monkey]

There's a distinction to be made between weak and passive. I was playing tight-passive for most of this session (a much underrated style versus the right opponents). It worked very nicely on a number of hands, e.g.

Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $1/$1
5 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $170.45
CO: $260.90
Button: $261.90
Hero: $113.45
BB: $178.00

Pre-flop: (5 players) Hero is SB with K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]
UTG calls, <font color="#cc0000">CO raises to $5</font>, Button calls, Hero calls, BB folds, UTG calls.

Flop: Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] ($21, 4 players)
Hero checks, UTG checks, CO checks, <font color="#cc0000">Button bets $15</font>, Hero calls, 2 folds.

Turn: 9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] ($51, 2 players)
Hero checks, Button checks.

River: Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] ($51, 2 players)
Hero checks, <font color="#cc0000">Button bets $40</font>, Hero calls.

Results:
Final pot: $131
Button shows 5[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
Hero shows K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

And once you have a passive image, you can get away with stuff like this:

Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $1/$1
5 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $194.85
CO: $212.30
Hero: $143.20
SB: $411.85
BB: $99

Pre-flop: (5 players) Hero is Button with Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
UTG calls, CO calls, Hero calls, SB checks, <font color="#cc0000">BB raises to $6</font>, UTG calls, CO calls, Hero calls, SB calls.

Flop: 5[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 6[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] ($30, 5 players)
SB checks, BB checks, UTG checks, <font color="#cc0000">CO bets $10</font>, Hero calls, 3 folds.

Turn: A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] ($50, 2 players)
<font color="#cc0000">CO bets $10</font>, <font color="#cc0000">Hero raises to $35</font>, CO folds.
Uncalled bets: $25 returned to Hero.

Results:
Final pot: $70

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
why do you call the flop and turn if you not gonna call river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably because each time he calls, he learns more about his opponents range of hands.
On the flop, villains pot bet can means a huge range of hands, and as hero is ahead of that range, he calls.
On the turn, villains range narrows, plus we pick up some possible outs, so he calls again.
Now on the river, the range tightens up again, but villain could still have a set or the same idiot end straight here.
Because hero check called each time, villain would believe top set or the idiot end straight is good here and bet for value.
I call, but it's not a huge mistake to fold the river since even a maniac's range gets smaller here after 3 pot bets. I would expect maniac to have the nuts maybe 50% of the time.

[Poker monkey]

[ QUOTE ]
why do you call the flop and turn if you not gonna call river.

[/ QUOTE ]Because he can bet the flop with a lot of hands that aren't the nuts. When he pots every street, it makes it a lot more likely that he actually has the nuts. And it's more expensive to call the river than all other streets combined.

[iggymcfly]

Is it just me or do people almost never pot the river on bluffs any more? Maybe 6 months ago, all the mediocre/bad players would quickly fire the pot when they missed and wanted a fold, but now it seems like that's almost always a reverse tell.

If villain would have bet $25 or something here, it would be an easy call, but I don't know what he'd be firing the pot the whole way with here except for the nuts or maybe blockers. If he's actually a maniac, OFC we wouldn't fold, but against this description:

[ QUOTE ]
CO is a lunatic playing 76/46/1.7. He definitely tries to bluff and bully, although usually shows up with a hand in the big pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not so sure. If you look more closely at the description, you see that he's applying "lunatic" to the PF stats and that he really has no indication to think villain will 3-barrel here. Include "villian just lost a big pot in the last 3 hands" or something and of course it would be a call. With all the info we have, I'd say this is the nuts probably 70% of the time and a split another 5%, which would be enough to make the call unprofitable.

[Nitilism]

[ QUOTE ]
If you look more closely at the description, you see that he's applying "lunatic" to the PF stats and that he really has no indication to think villain will 3-barrel here. Include "villian just lost a big pot in the last 3 hands" or something and of course it would be a call. With all the info we have, I'd say this is the nuts probably 70% of the time and a split another 5%, which would be enough to make the call unprofitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice point, I was going to say the same. I think it's worth mentioning that this an unraised pot. I think this means you need to steer this villian's range toward the nuts a lot more than you normally would.

I am not sure if I would play the earlier streets the same, but I think I fold the river if I get there the same way you did. His AF is 1.7, pretty low so I don't think 3-barrelling is a big enough part of his game to call.

[alavet]

offtopic: is 1.7 total agression is really "pretty low" ?