FT200 Puking in the river

[Dire]

I bet this turn 100%. This inordinate fear of turning your hand into a bluff in 3-bet pots is becoming more cliche and overused than pot control. I would barrel the turn with alot more than an ace as well, since it's just such a nice scare card. I'll leave the tough decisions up to villain.

[sh58]

bet the turn. as played, i think you have to call as you played it so weak up to now

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
i think you have to call as you played it so weak up to now

[/ QUOTE ]

That alone is not enough reason to justify a call.

[PugsMcGee]

Bet the turn, and if he calls, c/f river

[Imrahil]

What do we think villain has to make this a call guys????? We sure did play it weak but I can't see what villain calls the flop with and decides to overshove river with that we beat.

[markuisis]

[ QUOTE ]
bet the turn. as played, i think you have to call as you played it so weak up to now

[/ QUOTE ]

I cant stand these statements - provide a range and plzzzz dont tell me that he ever ever has AJ here. If hes value betting we r definitely behind.


[ QUOTE ]
i assume that you're thinking is that such a large bet is either the nuts or air?

If Villain is good, then fold. Unless you think Villain is good enough to turn a pair into a bluff, but even then would he really shove...wouldn't he just make a 3/4-pot size bet?

If Villain is bad, then you still need to suggest a hand that is bluffing the river...86?

[/ QUOTE ]

if villain is pretty good and therefore capable of bluff overbetting with a missed straight draw then id call fwiw. I dont think he is though since he should probably be shoving the flop with most of his draws and almost certainly betting the turn with them unless hero is a habitual turn trapper.

[sh58]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
bet the turn. as played, i think you have to call as you played it so weak up to now

[/ QUOTE ]

I cant stand these statements - provide a range and plzzzz dont tell me that he ever ever has AJ here. If hes value betting we r definitely behind.


[ QUOTE ]
i assume that you're thinking is that such a large bet is either the nuts or air?

If Villain is good, then fold. Unless you think Villain is good enough to turn a pair into a bluff, but even then would he really shove...wouldn't he just make a 3/4-pot size bet?

If Villain is bad, then you still need to suggest a hand that is bluffing the river...86?

[/ QUOTE ]

if villain is pretty good and therefore capable of bluff overbetting with a missed straight draw then id call fwiw. I dont think he is though since he should probably be shoving the flop with most of his draws and almost certainly betting the turn with them unless hero is a habitual turn trapper.

[/ QUOTE ]

if i were villain i would suspect he had something like QQ, JJ or TT that has showdown value, or nothing. i wouldn't put him on an ace. indeed this is the reason nielsio checked behind imo (if it was for any other reason, then it is awful). so i would pretty much be betting my whole range that has no showdown value here.

of course villain could also be valuebetting with a set, 2 pair, a flush, or w/e. but i think we are good enough to call

[markuisis]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
bet the turn. as played, i think you have to call as you played it so weak up to now

[/ QUOTE ]

I cant stand these statements - provide a range and plzzzz dont tell me that he ever ever has AJ here. If hes value betting we r definitely behind.


[ QUOTE ]
i assume that you're thinking is that such a large bet is either the nuts or air?

If Villain is good, then fold. Unless you think Villain is good enough to turn a pair into a bluff, but even then would he really shove...wouldn't he just make a 3/4-pot size bet?

If Villain is bad, then you still need to suggest a hand that is bluffing the river...86?

[/ QUOTE ]

if villain is pretty good and therefore capable of bluff overbetting with a missed straight draw then id call fwiw. I dont think he is though since he should probably be shoving the flop with most of his draws and almost certainly betting the turn with them unless hero is a habitual turn trapper.

[/ QUOTE ]

if i were villain i would suspect he had something like QQ, JJ or TT that has showdown value, or nothing. i wouldn't put him on an ace. indeed this is the reason nielsio checked behind imo (if it was for any other reason, then it is awful). so i would pretty much be betting my whole range that has no showdown value here.

of course villain could also be valuebetting with a set, 2 pair, a flush, or w/e. but i think we are good enough to call

[/ QUOTE ]

I think given the way the hand played out villain almost always has either a straight or flush draw. If u think he would almost always overbet shove a missed straight draw then snap-call because I think it is much more likely to flat the flop than a fd. In general though, without a history of overbetting - I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt and then re-evaluate if the situation comes up again. I also don't really understand ur first sentence but the only "nothing" that could be in villain's range would be a busted straight draw so it just comes down to what I stated earlier about an unknown's overbet bluff shoving frequency. I also don't think he ever has two pair or a set (if u do think thats part of his range - then its an even bigger reason to fold).

edit: enough with the "u played it weak so u have to pay it off" garbage, villain is never floating with pure air so just propose ranges dont say gib like ur hand is under-repped - explain y that might change villain's range. In the end itll all come down to whether or not u think he overbet bluff shoves the river with a busted straight draw IMO and i've already given my thoughts on that.

[Dire]

The river is incredibly marginal. Hero likely has a crappy image due his style, he played the hand poorly and now has an incredibly difficult decision. IMO, there is not enough information to make an even remotely reasonable decision. This would depend so heavily on history, bet timing, game flow, blah..

And trying to give a range for villain here is just silly. Villain is bluffing or has hero crushed. There's no telling if he decided to float the flop planning to bluff a later street but was scared by the ace, if he's turning a marginal made hand into a bluff or what. Obviously his 'crushing' range is extremely miniscule, but what's important is his bluffing frequency and how likely hero's image/play is likely to have induced a bluff.

I think the comment: "you played it so weak up to now, so you have to call" is extremely legit. Hero's play and image could easily induce bluffs. Of course, there's no way of being even remotely certain. Not enough information. That said, I do think the weak play could easily induce a bluff so I would call this.

[Double Eagle]

Please bet/call the turn or don't 3 bet this hand in the first place. Your reluctance to get stacked is really quite boring.