If the river bet was larger you have a decision but as it played out you have to call. If you don't call the 2nd nut here you're folding too much. You probably need to call with a few of your high flushes to be balanced considering you could have sets here sometimes or straights that you'd want to fold.
You would be surprised by how many people raise shove the river. Also i think the nut flush should be raised in the turn, to go all in in the river, i feel like he lost so much value there
There is very little upside to showing your hand. The arguments players make for shoeing is poorly thought out. And every player at the table gets information about your play. Not a good idea.
This is kind of a special RU-vid moment. I strongly agree with the video title, but not so much with the conclusion. I think I fold this river often, now exploit me. But keep in mind I'm looking at ALL the details here. The exact configuration, including villain being SB. The bet sizing's [although caller was a bit confused about pot size]. The board texture, coupled with hero's hand texture. What is villains bluffing hand here? Many of his big ace hands are playing 3 bet or fold from SB, like AK, AQ, AJ. How can he make this play without the ace of diamonds? He'd have to be at least uber laggy if not full maniac. So mayyybe AdTx ?? That's only 2 combo's AdTc & AdTh. Is this *ever* an over-value?? Of what? 89dd? Maybe if I thought villain ever had AdKx here... but doesn't that raise pre or on turn often? By contrast, villain has every AdXd combo possible & this line makes total sense. For the zillionth time: donks are usually mega draws or villains strong belief they are best & do NOT want a check back! There are no draws by the river. And also, those 2 logical bluff combos I can dream up [AT], there's only 2 because hero blocks it with ten on board & ten in his own hand. I think part of the "never fold here" thoughts are about hero's hand strength. Problem is, that actually works against hero. He has 4/5ths of a Royal. He blocks premium flushes, except the nut flush. That is wide open & hero loses to it. Finally, I'm not saying this is a "bad" call. Hero is getting over 2 to 1 & does have the 2nd nuts. But folding is a big advantage here considering hero *would* have value bet the river if not for villains donk. Taking advantage of opponents poor play is huge.
Ugh. I hate spots like this. I think I disagree with Bart about the flop (and turn) bet sizing. I think I might like to bet small here, to keep my opponents' range wide, so they can have all the 1P/2P and smaller flushes, and also so they will want to raise me with their flopped sets, and maybe want to raise me with their nut flush draws. I don't want to bet this flop or turn huge, and have to fold to an x/r, or continue against a very strong range that includes better made hands and very few worse hands. If we take smaller bet sizing on flop and turn, then I think it makes it much harder for V to extract max value. He can tip his hand strength by raising turn, but then we can comfortably fold if he barrels big on river. If he just smooth-calls our turn bet, it's going to look super-weird if he donk-leads huge on the river, but even then, the pot will be smaller, so the big river bet will be smaller. The way this was played, it's hard for me to find the over-valued hands. 89 maybe, but that's a hand some V's might raise on turn, to get value before a 4th diamond on the river. Likewise, it's hard for me to find the bluffs. I'd think all the bluffs would have the Ad in them, and there again, those hands might want to donk-lead or raise turn to rep the flush, knowing that they're either going to have to barrel the river on a brick, or miss value on a 4th diamond. When hero is the PFR, c-bets flop, AND barrels turn, I really don't like V's river donk-bet with the nut flush. Hero is going to barrel off here a lot, allowing V to go for a check-raise or just call hero's jam. Sure, opponents are going to call with the 2nd nuts a high percentage of the time, but we're taking away the opportunity for them to continue bluffing or barreling with a worse hand for value. I still don't know how often I'm folding here. It would really be player dependent. Considering I recently called off a river donk-lead with top set after a 3rd flush card came on the turn, I don't think I could fold very often here. The last time I folded a K-high flush (to a check-raise, not a donk-lead), my opponent showed me the naked ace as a bluff. That one still stings.
true. I exclude bluff as a possibility here. (Bluffing into all-street aggressor is a lose-lose position). So: it's a value bet. If I do not know that the opponent is LAG or a whale, I'd easily fold here, and never look back.
@@1vailchris I definitely agree with you that villain misplayed the hand. He must go for a check-raise at some point. As to calling here, I think it's fine. Hero has a strong enuff hand to bluff catch with. But I do think we lose quite often. The main reason I'm bringing up a fold possibility is that I actually liked Bart's analysis right up to the moment he said he's obviously calling the river. I think it's fine to call, but against a fair number of players I'm folding pretty comfortably. The fact their is no check-raise. The texture of the board combined with hero's holding. The sizing villain took. The fact it's a river donk. I don't see many bluffs taking this line. Hero's hand is strong, but I think we lose more often than win here. It's hard finding many logical bluffs. And the only over-value I can find is 98dd. And as I said originally: hero blocks AT so strongly.
@@EllieBanks333 I agree with you. I think most, if not all the hands we beat when V donk-leads the river are going to x/r on some earlier street, unless V is a maniac turning some hand with a lot of showdown value into a bluff, which seems very unlikely and over-the-top maniacal. It just doesn't make sense for V to check-call, check-call, then suddenly decide to donk-lead big on the river as a bluff. Even with some AdXx hand, I think the bluff is relying on hero being able to fold the 2nd nuts to this bizarre line V's taken. If we're in V's spot with AdXx, and we plan to bluff the river, I think we need to start that bluff on the turn, when the flush comes in.
Would villain have been better served by checking on the river, then check raising? Hero bet both previous streets, it seems likely he'll do so again. He might give up on total bluffs but you wouldn't have gotten more out of those anyway. If you think you might have out-flushed your opponent, it seems he could have easily gotten more value with a check raise. I'm no expert so curious what other people think
This is actually a very reliable betting tell from weak players when they have a strong hand. It's very heavily motivated out of a fear of losing out on value.
@@captzachevil Yes that's what Bart said too, but would villain have gotten more money on average in this spot by check-raising? Sometimes we don't want to do something (like donking on river) because while it increases EV in a particular spot, it causes us to give up even more EV in other spots. In this specific case, it seems that not only would it be more balanced to check-raise, it also would have gotten villain paid off more here.
2/3 pot already is kind of large on this turn isnt it? Nearly full pot seems excessive especially when the vast majority of his flushes beat us. I’d like it if we had the better end of a likely flush over flush scenario
I've seen this line plenty with draws that brick, too. Like if he took this exact same line on a board when the turn had also been a brick and I had some other sort of thick value like a set or top two, I'd know I'm good almost every time. I think the lesson is the same though - it's so polar that you should almost always just call. Either it's a bluff or thick value anyway. Unless you literally have the nuts, then you can go huge.
@@EllieBanks333 the naked nut flush draw, but my point was that in general river leads are polar. Whether it's a brick the whole way (usually a bluff if the flop has good draws), just a river brick (sometimes a bluff, sometimes a turned made hand), or a nut changing hand (sometimes a bluff, usually thick value). People at 2/5 level simply don't lead rivers with thin value.
@@JohnSmith-nx7zj KJ no diamonds? If the villain was a LAG, I missed that part of the call. J9 with 9d? That's maybe more LAG. If I had some kind of read here, then fine I call & cross my fingers. I think this is exactly what it looks like. And not to be results oriented, but it turned out to be exactly what it looked like.
@@EllieBanks333I’m not saying it’s super likely. KJ no diamond seems fine as a flop call. But calling turn and donking river would be a pretty odd line. At the end of the day I think you just have to call river here unless you know villain is the biggest nit in the world. You can’t be playing good poker if you’re folding here as a general rule.
I actually think I like smaller bet sizing on flop and turn, to keep our opponents' ranges as wide as possible, and force them to figure out an optimal response with their stronger hands. Say we bet 1/3 pot on flop, and 1/3 pot on turn. What does AdQx do? What about 77 or JJ, or KQ, or QJ, or JT? How does a V with a better flush extract maximum value without tipping the strength of their hand? It probably seems weird to take a pot-control line by betting small on flop and turn with this specific hand, but we're extracting max value from all our opponents' weaker hands that continue to that small sizing, and avoiding max damage when our opponents have us beat. Compare that to betting big - what can V continue with across all streets that we have beat? Top 2 hoping we check-back or that they hit one of 4 outs to boat up? Maybe some unlikely smaller flushes and some sticky straights, but most opponents aren't continuing here with many worse hands when hero bets big on the turn.
@@AdrienneVirginiaS you missed the point, and it doesn't matter. Bad recs are going to call down wider when we bet small, or tip their hand strength when we're beat.
I don’t know where you play, but most live players are continuing on flop and turn with all the hands you listed with a 66% pot bet, and a 66%-100% turn bet. You WANT to get all the money in when your opponent has QJ, JJ, 77, AK, etc on the river when you have a high flush.
@@supersmoo7377 You misunderstood. Read what I wrote again. I think we should bet smaller because we want opponents to call with a wider range. Even Bart said that when V calls flop, he's weighted towards top pair or better. The more we bet on flop and turn, the stronger our opponents' ranges need to be to continue on each street. When we bet 2/3 pot on flop and 2/3 on turn, most opponents aren't continuing with a lot of very weak hands. Of course we want them to call our river bet when we have the 2nd nuts. But they have to GET to the river first. And they're not getting there with very many weak hands, the way this was played. When we take this larger bet sizing, and it goes check-call, check-call, donk-big or check-raise, we're almost never winning against V's range, because V's folding out the weakest parts of his range along the way.
@@1vailchris bro you’re missing the point… These specific players made blunders preflop and we can safely assume forcing pocket 77 into indifference with a nuttish holding is not the most profitable play against button clickers.
Didn't mention royal flush draw on turn. Subconsciously knew villian had the ace of diamonds. Had villian checked river..would hero have bet..? Asking as seems like villain made an error betting.
Villain definitely made a mistake by leading the river. Villain could have gotten all the chips, possibly. Unless villain thinks hero is too nitty and won’t value bet hands like AK, QJ, TT, etc.
Who cares about the royal flush draw? Hero has a strong hand anyway. If the A of diamond came out on the river, then hero should be annoyed as there are almost no hands that can call him anymore.
@supersmoo7377 Fair pt re what could villian call with if royal flush gets there..he could still potentially bluff at it. And hero goes from 2nd nuts to nuts ofc..but yeah your pt is sound. Do some venues have a jackpot for royal flushes ?
It's a mistake. Hero has a lot of hands that bet river that end up folding instead when the river is donk led. I think 2nd nuts might be the only realistic call you'll ever see actually. I find it hard to see that making up for all the river bets you lose by donk leading.
I tried this line with 35s from sb I think in a limped pot or in a super multi way min raised pot with bunch of fish in the hand. XC XC my oesd on J42 then bluff donked like $300 into $400 on a front door flush completing river. Knew from this player he was betting a weak top pair. Apparently he doesn’t listen to you cause he called with top pair queen Jack kicker lol
Have a question: you said it was highly exploitable if you fold the basically second nuts here, and you have to call. Do you show your hand every time here so they know they can’t exploit you or do you just muck and let them wonder what bs you called with? I wrote this comment right before you said you’d probably muck 😅 I tend to always show these and be like, I’m not an idiot, I know how to play, so watch your back homie. And people play so scared and inevitably play more face up.
To Bart's point, you can't really fold here without ICM implications, massive knowledge on player, etc. In this pool it's a call, you're handcuffed. It's a bit exploitable if the players know you're only jamming the nut flush here also.
Yes that makes sense. I once folded second set on a flop because the guy was literally flogging himself under the table. Never would have considered it in a million other hands but I said to the guy you have AA or JJ and I can beat everything but JJ. Folded face up and the table goes insane and the guy showed JJ top set. It's obviously a horrible fold but you had to see this guy at the time.
No way you can fold that. So easy for villain to have weaker flushes, straights, sets 2 pairs such a wet board. And the great thing about bluffing from villain's perspective is that hero might try to bluff catch with a non flush hand that's actually losing. Say villains has a set and hero tries to bluff catch with 2 pair or villain has the higher straight and hero tries to bluff catch with the lower straight, etc.
It also makes no sense to show folds like this for at least 2 other reasons off the top of my head. 1. why give them any free info? 2. why educate the loose fish that big hands don't automatically have to go broke? Just learn to muck your hand and move on. Poker games would be so much better if all the regs had always just done this instead of trying to show how smart they are. And definitely don't ever show big laydowns.
It should be a conversation between calling and shoving, but about calling or folding…😂if villain is a capable opponent and he check shove on river, that would be a way more disgusting spot
This is precisely why you want to underbet on wet boards, you need to keep your opponents range wider than just the nuts. It also has the added benefit of forcing them to raise to get value from their nutted hands.
I'm 100% trying to tilt dudes by showing them how bad they play lol, I've folded a flopped nut straight face up to a guy who donked into me on the river after the flush came in which was the only hand he could have as played and he lost his mind then lost his stack over the next 90 mins
The showing the hand wasn't the problem, it was spouting about how you should have folded which you are never going to do....ever. So why say it. And then when the dude says oh stop it, you say now it proves how bad he is? Come on.
Bart - “you’re a for-profit player” Why would Bart even say that?.. we don’t know if he is for-profit or not. Perhaps just to make people think that every person who follows CPL regularly will be for-profit. To me, by the way caller talks about the game, I think he is a losing player.
