No announcement yet.

$250 $10k guaranteed tourney, Majestic Star Gary Indiana

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • $250 $10k guaranteed tourney, Majestic Star Gary Indiana

    H- TsTd S-24k P-Co Blinds: 100-200

    Folds to me, I make it 600, SB and BB call. SB is an older asian guy seems competent and Laggy. BB middle-aged white guy in a hat also seems competent.

    Checked to me, I bet 900.... I need to really focus on getting away from my 1/2 pot default bet sizing. BB calls
    Turn- 8c
    BB checks, I bet 2k. Okay sizing?

  • #2
    it depends .. what u going to do on river

    what's the plan here


    • TAJ1827
      TAJ1827 commented
      Editing a comment

    • RealJPB
      RealJPB commented
      Editing a comment

    • CrazyEddie
      CrazyEddie commented
      Editing a comment
      TT bet 2 streets on Axx .. and he's asking "sizing okey ? "

      How is that insulting people ???

  • #3
    Preflop, your so deep I like making it 700 gets more money in the pot.

    Flop: you have to ask your self what you're trying to get called by? You're in a multiway pot, are you just blindly Cbeting? What is your plan for the Turn and river?
    On the flop the A94 does favor your range, you should bet more there is 1800 in the pot I think 1400 may be a good number.

    Turn:8c: this card is still isn't a bad card. some 2 pairs may have gotten there, yes, but it doesn't change much. It does add some strait draws, but I think that at this point if both players are still in the pot you need to start looking to pot control and get to showdown. If there is only 1 player left you can continue to bet. Like Eddie says what is your plan for the river? You've got to ask yourself what is your plan if the worst card in the deck comes for your range, or if the best card comes? do you want to give up? do you want to bet pot, 2x pot? what is your plan and why?


    • #4


      • RealJPB
        RealJPB commented
        Editing a comment
        9x, 4x, midpairs can all call a small bet but everything but 9x (and maybe even 9x) is folding to a large bet here

      • TAJ1827
        TAJ1827 commented
        Editing a comment
        I need to get out of the 1/2 pot bet syndrome. You are okay with checking turn with the amount of draws it added to the board?

      • RealJPB
        RealJPB commented
        Editing a comment

    • #5
      Originally posted by TAJ1827 View Post
      H- TsTd S-24k P-Co Blinds: 100-200

      Folds to me, I make it 600, SB and BB call. SB is an older asian guy seems competent and Laggy. BB middle-aged white guy in a hat also seems competent.

      Checked to me, I bet 900.... I need to really focus on getting away from my 1/2 pot default bet sizing. BB calls
      Turn- 8c
      BB checks, I bet 2k. Okay sizing?
      Open is fine, although it could be bigger since you are deep, I think 3x is always fine here.

      Your c-bet here needs some thought away from the table. Sorry if that sounds rude- I really don't mean it to- and you are doing it here and now. This is a really common spot- what to do on a dry ace high flop. In fact your observation about the 1/2 pot bet shows you understand this. So I did mean it in an encouraging way!

      What are you hoping your c-bet to achieve here?

      Let's be honest- you want them both to fold here. You get a call, and you really don't like it. That means your c-bet here is a bluff, not a value bet.

      I think you are asking the question to RealJPB backwards. It's not what they call with- it's what do they fold.

      A 1/3 pot bet and a 1/2 pot bet probably do exactly the same thing. Ax calls, 9x probably folds, anything else folds. Obviously this is a simplification, but is pretty close. So the difference between them is the price you are paying to achieve your goal. This is the reason 1/3 pot is better.

      The other complication here is that the pot is multi-way. You want to fold out 2 hands, not 1, which means you are more likely to get called. A 1/2 pot bet needs to work 33% of the time. If you make it 1/3 pot it only needs to work 25% of the time.

      You can play with Flopzilla and see how often various ranges hit these kinds of boards.

      There is an argument here for checking- you shouldn't blindly c-bet every hand- and especially not multi way. I think the c-bet is probably the best option in this case.

      In your example, when we get called by the BB, there is a pot of 3600.

      What are we trying to achieve here? We want to get to showdown as cheaply as possible. Our c-bet folded out the hand worse than ours, and probably got called by the one better than ours- although we might have a touch of showdown value.

      There are 2 options.

      The first is simply to give up and check behind. If you're lucky BB will also check the river (or it's a ten!) and you can cross your fingers you are good.

      The second is to bet again- but I would bet small here. I would bet 1500. You are hoping he will check river and you can check behind. This is a technique Alex Fitzgerald calls buying the show down. But you should expect to be beat very often in this spot.

      The 3rd option is to bet bigger, and really put weak aces under pressure- 2500 would be a decent size here, but be clear you have just turned your TT into a bluff. But remember your c-bet was designed to fold out the weak hands, so now you are trying to bluff out a range which is almost all top pairs.

      For this reason I think simply giving up on the turn is the best option.


      • TAJ1827
        TAJ1827 commented
        Editing a comment
        Andy, thank you so much for the detailed response. You are 100 percent accurate when you say my c-bet needs thought away from the table. I know you don't know me but I honestly learn best when people call me out, it sounds weird I'm sure but it gives me motivation for some reason. I'm not sure what my c-bet was trying to accomplish to be 100 percent honest with you. It seemed like a relatively safe board to c-bet but I didn't have a solid reason as to why I was doing it.

        You bring up another very valid point, it's not always what will they call with but what will they fold. I think this is something tangible that I will be able to easily remember and think about during my next session. I do think a bigger river bluff could've gotten the BB to fold weak aces like you mentioned, but I do think that is a spot I would check the majority if not all of the rivers.

        Random question: Does Flopzilla work on a mac?

        Thanks again for the detailed response.

    • #6
      Am I the only player not even C-betting the flop? I'm in position so I'm checking back. This will often induce a 9x hand to take
      a stab on any turn card 2-8.

      So I'm calling when they lead turn on any of those cards another Ace isn't terrible either. I'll fold if they lead on a J Q K.

      If they check turn I make a delayed C-bet.
      Last edited by kkep; 08-12-2019, 02:31 PM.


      • #7
        Originally posted by kkep View Post
        Am I the only player not even C-betting the flop? I'm in position so I'm checking back. This will often induce a 9x hand to take
        a stab on any turn card 2-8.

        So I'm calling when they lead turn on any of those cards another Ace isn't terrible either. I'll fold if they lead on a J Q K.

        If they check turn I make a delayed C-bet.
        I actually like the sounds of this line. Would your thought process change if there was two diamonds on the flop?


        • kkep
          kkep commented
          Editing a comment
          Probably not bc we are still getting called by any A and maybe c/r by an A with no diamonds as well as maybe c/r by a FD and
          the occasional set of 4's.

          When they show up with an Ace it's almost certainly going to be Ace rag. Depending on the player type that opens up
          opportunities to steal on some run outs too.
          Last edited by kkep; 08-13-2019, 06:16 AM.

      • #8
        Originally posted by TAJ1827 View Post

        I actually like the sounds of this line. Would your thought process change if there was two diamonds on the flop?
        Why the 2 of diamonds on the flop, your thought process should change for every flop. Are you asking if the flop was As4d2d?


        • TAJ1827
          TAJ1827 commented
          Editing a comment
          Sorry not the 2 of diamonds but two diamonds.

      • #9
        I actually think we need to do a lot more checking on this flop. ie If we bet our Ax hands what is going to call us? Next to nothing so -

        Flop Range

        I think we should bet our best Ax combos that unblock some draw type hands we want the V's to have. We are betting our best draws
        and some that have a bit of BD equity or our 'range advantage bluffs'

        TT isn't a bluff as it is often the best hand right now yet it's also not a value hand.

        Lets visualize what TT looks like in our range as a value hand -

        We don't have anywhere close to enough bluffs to try and balance this out even a little bit- which makes us super easy to play against

        We need to bet 100% of our range to get us there -

        So we bet and they call, turn is the 8c we bet.

        So I suppose the question is would you rather be barreling again on the turn with TT or a range that looks something along these lines?

        Suppose we checked flop and they lead on the turn. What might they be leading with?

        While they will have some A9 A8 A4 89 44 they are often going to have way more combos like these
        A2 A3 A5 A6 A7 TJ K9 Q9 J9 T9 sometimes K8 Q8 J8 T8 and club flush draws even a pure bluff or two.

        *i don't think* better players will start leading with marginal made hands but in low stakes with bad recs this happens frequently.

        You may chose to raise the top of your range here or call. I think I do to much calling and that a 1/2 pot raise with my premium
        hands is probably best.

        We have a ton of hands that are ahead and plenty that can make the nuts.

        vs those players that aren't leading with marginal hands (they should start betting their weak Ax) our TT is most certainly good and we can start
        betting it for value and protection now giving us the opportunity to pick up some extra chips when they defend 9x 8x and draws.

        Turn range that checked flop

        When they lead I'm not calling the bottom of my marginal made range, 86 97sdh etc (I didn't change the image).

        Last edited by kkep; 08-13-2019, 10:33 AM.


        • RealJPB
          RealJPB commented
          Editing a comment

        • TAJ1827
          TAJ1827 commented
          Editing a comment
          I think what you said makes complete sense. I guess my next question would be are we checking with the intent of calling a bet on the turn? It did seem like a good board to c-bet on, although with one opponent it would have been better. I have a fear of being a calling station, I'm trying to not get into a check/call, check/call, check/call mindset but I do think there are boards where this is the right play.

          I also need to get out and mess around with that range analyzer and understand what we are going for in regards to the percentages for our hands.

        • kkep
          kkep commented
          Editing a comment
          I would call with some of my checking hands and fold others.
          TT would be in my calling range on the turn but not necessarily again on the river.
          It's to good to fold to one bet.

      • #10
        The main infliction points to take away from this hand seems to be the c-bet decision and sizing on the flop if we go that route.

        Firing 2 barrels (flop and turn) here is often a mistake against unknowns as we are taking a marginal hand and putting a decent amount of money in the pot when getting called by worse is going to be rare. The exception would be if this specific villain was a huge station (but that does not seem to be the case).

        As for the c-bet decision, lets first look at our range.

        In the early pre-ante stages my range looks very similar to a cash game. So I am opening around 25% of hands or so. We get called by both the SB and BB and we get an A94r flop.

        It checks to us.

        We are multi-way so we should be cutting down on our bluff attempts and only using bluffs that present multi-street opportunities on various turn cards . My range might look something like this:

        Click image for larger version  Name:	Screen Shot 2019-08-13 at 1.33.12 PM.png Views:	0 Size:	306.6 KB ID:	22598

        I am betting a large percentage of my Ax hands for value and checking back some of the weaker ones to protect my range.

        I am also checking QQ and KK, but betting TT and JJ. TT and JJ are vulnerable to both a K and Q on the turn. Many may wonder why we should bet the TT and JJ if they are not "premium value hands", but my reasoning is for both protection and to get some money in the pot if we are ahead. Both of these villains probably have pretty wide ranges at these stakes.

        With our position and range advantage, we can control the pot on the turn and get to showdown cheaper by betting TT and JJ on this flop opposed to checking back and calling one or two streets. In combination with that, this board is dry (really no draws), so we don't have to worry about getting x/r often on this flop when we bet.

        Now the sizing.

        When sizing is a question I often review an excellent article that Ryan Laplante wrote on C-betting for Cardplayer magazine.

        He goes over a few questions to ask to help determine your c-bet sizing:

        1. Stack Depth = Here we are very deep which favors a larger sizing. Shorter stacks favor smaller sizing.

        2. Position = We are in position, so we can use a either a smaller or larger sizing. Being oop often favors larger sizing.

        3. Static Board = This board is very static which favors small sizings. Meaning very few if any turn cards will change our relative hand strength. Dynamic boards or boards where turn cards can greatly change the hand strengths favor larger sizings.

        4. Ranges = This board hits our range with the A on the board as we have all the Ax suited combos, but villains can also have several two pair combos and middling Ax hands. This slightly favors a larger sizing.

        5. Range Advantage = We are at a range advantage as we have all the strong Ax combos where villains likely 3-bet AA and AK some percentage of the time. We can bet smaller because of this or bluff more often (more so in heads up pots).

        6. Ability = It sounds like these players for the most part are fairly unknown with no known areas to exploit, which should lead us to developing a balanced betting range and sizing.

        7. ICM = No ICM

        This is impossible to go over at the table, but the more you go through these points in your reviews at home, the more they become natural. The only issue is that they sometimes do not work well for multi-way pots as other factors need to be considered.

        All in all I like the smaller sizing here. The main reasons being how static this board is and our position which allows us to control the pot so often on the turn.

        We can accomplish everything we need to with a small sizing. Smaller sizing also tempts worse hands to call that we can get value from with our TT.

        With our stronger Ax hands we can size up on the turn along with our bluffs for max pressure.

        All in all, I probably go somewhere around 650-750. My plan is for this to be a 1 or at max 2 street hand depending on the runout.

        Now if the flop was AK4 or AQ5, then checking TT and JJ is the route I am taking.

        Last edited by JredA; 08-13-2019, 02:04 PM.


        • jamtay317
          jamtay317 commented
          Editing a comment
          Thank you for the in-depth analysis. I have a few questions about your answer.
          1. If this was a bit more draw heavy, like Ac9c8h would you bet larger?
          2. You say if it was AK4 you're checking is this because there are 2 overs to your TT?
          3. If you check AK4 and your opponent bets lets say 700 here, what is your plan?
          4. What if he overbets like 4K what is your plan?

          Sorry, I just think that this is a very good learning hand, and I know that I'm still learning.

        • kkep
          kkep commented
          Editing a comment
          I don't know dude. I suppose my flop range should have more value hands and less bluffs multi-way but that's not going to get me down to betting TT. I certainly need to start studying that aspect of my game tho.

          Regardless TT is a marginal made hand in my mind and nothing more. My bluffs are always going to be hands that can improve. I suppose there will be an occasion on some rivers where I will turn marginal made hands into bluffs but never on the flop.

          This feels like you constructed a range to justify turning TT into a value hand which it is not in way shape or form with an Ace on the board.

          It's a marginal hand to start just the same as KK is.

          Why would you not protect QQ instead of TT? KQo could easily peel when we believe the H C-bets to often or if we are just a bit to sticky.

          Why would you try to get value from TT JJ but not a bunch of Ax hands? They clearly have more value.

          You don't have to bet TT JJ to protect your checking range either. You have 15 pretty bad bluffs there IMO too. I'm all for bluffing the bottom of my range but on the river, not the flop.

          Ks7s can still make the nuts and has an over card to 9TJQ which is important when they do get sticky but your checking that and betting 75s?

          What can possibly call a set of aces? Sure a set of 9's 4's and 94 but really how may Ax hands are left?

          I don't like that range at all, sorry man.

          All due respect bro I think you know a lot more about this game than me but I can't get behind this one unless we are making the argument we don't want to play post flop with a marginal hand vs those two V's. So we take our one stab and give up.

          I have to much confidence in my post flop game to play that way tho...

          Some of you are suggesting we take two stabs at this as well, I suppose we're praying they fold on the second barrel well they will, sometimes.
          But when they don't we will often have our lunch money stolen on the river, sometimes even when we still have the best hand.

          I feel like this is one of those entitlement examples where we opened pre-flop with a good hand so we MUST win this pot.
          Last edited by kkep; 08-13-2019, 04:38 PM.

      • #11
        So I decided to start looking at multi way flops. My first stop was to go through old HW assignments (I've been on here 4 months.)

        I think this one is relevant enough to look at, BTW JL bet his set of Aces haha
        Last edited by kkep; 08-13-2019, 09:20 PM.


        • #12

          Before I begin, I have no problem when people respectfully disagreeing with what I post as poker is a complex game. And my goal when posting is not to prove I am right or even claim that I am right. My goal is to dissect hands for my own good, learn in the process and maybe what I say will help someone along the way.

          I am still learning and always will, as this game has so much to offer.

          I have learned a ton from JL and his info, the one area I have thought a ton about is the whole classification and association of what to do with the classification system in regards to our actions.

          We bet premium value hands.
          We check marginal hands.
          We bet semi bluffs.
          We check junk.

          When I first learned JL's methods, it was very helpful, but I noticed myself getting robotic in certain spots. If my hand was marginal, I would check..always, if it was "premium made" I would bet. That was the end of my reasoning and thinking. And at the time, against the marginal (at best) competition I was playing against I don't think it was the best way to approach the game. I was missing some value and becoming very robotic with my play. I was not exploiting the exploitable as I was too worried about balancing and protecting myself from being exploited.

          Don't get me wrong, this method is a great way to establish learning about the game and developing a solid base. But I think labeling a hand as either a value or bluff and that's it, is really limiting a poker player's thinking over the long run. Now don't mistake this as me advocating for something other than JL's methods, it's just my progression as a player and where I am currently.

          As I moved up in stakes playing cash and starting playing against tougher competition, I started studying a ton more. One book that really opened my eyes was Matthew Janda's Hold'em for Advanced Players.

          As Janda goes on to explain, the 2 main reasons for betting are:

          1. We bet to make the pot bigger in case we win
          2. We bet or raise to deny our opponent the ability to realize his equity

          This made a ton of sense to me and if you think about it, betting w/ TT here accomplishes both. Betting a hand such as KK and QQ to deny equity has much less merit on such a dry board. If villains do not have an A they are drawing to very few outs against our KK and even QQ.

          I am not taking a "bluff" or "marginal hand" and betting it just to bet it. TT is not a bluff here. I am also not just "stabbing" and hoping. I am denying equity against the wide ranges that villains have.

          Think about villains ranges. We are super deep, where players are more splashy in these low stakes tournaments than normal and we have both players in the blinds (the widest ranges on the table) against our LP open. The ranges are soo wide.

          Think of all the broadway combos and equity they have here against our TT. KQ, KJ, Kx, QJ, Qx, Jx. I bet TT and JJ to protect against all of those broadway combo's and Kx, Qx hands. I check with KK and QQ because I am not worried about protecting.

          As far as the bluffs, that is certainly up for debate. I chose and much prefer the small suited connectors due to the multiple turn cards that allow us to double barrel with equity. A hand like 75s offers more possibilities than a hand like K7s. Any 3, any 6, any 8 and any 2nd suited card keeps the door open for us to bluff with added equity. If we fire with K7 suited we have to bank on the same suit or give up unless we want to fire 0 equity bluffs. Some may even argue K high has showdown value here.

          Same goes for my other bluffs. Not only do I have the flush outs on certain turns, but most of my semi-bluffs also contain combos that allow us to fire with added equity on the turn. A hand like JTs for example provides us with additional equity on an 8, any Q or any K. Again, I don't like taking hands like K7 or K8 here (especially in this exact multi-way spot) as we are so often left barreling with 0 equity. Since we are super deep, I want to be able to fire two streets with some equity.

          For me, this has nothing to do with "entitlement" or having to win. And it most certainly as nothing to do with "not wanting to play post flop" against 2 villains. It's about protecting our equity against these two very wide ranges.
          Last edited by JredA; 08-14-2019, 05:48 AM.


          • kkep
            kkep commented
            Editing a comment
            I hope I didn't come across has disrespectful.

            Developing and playing well constructed ranges is GTO. I suppose c-betting TT into a multi-way pot on an ace high board is exploitative, That's not what I'm here to learn from JL. Other coaches here teach that and I've been avoiding their content for the past 4-6 weeks or so.

            In GTO playing this deep the SB should have a zero calling range vs a CO open. I play close to that but I still haven't gone all in so to speak so I have a tight calling range from the SB. By tight I mean about 10% of hands but not the top 10%. Unless I'm up against an aggro in which case I am playing 100% raise or fold. I also realize many players do splash around from the SB but shouldn't assume the SB has an incredibly wide calling range from the worst position in poker.

            So now lets consider the SB is a LAG as noted. We should be expecting him to raise a bunch of Ax hands as well as many Broadway hands out of the SB so we aren't particularly worried about him to much.

            The BB is competent so we should also expect him to be raising his best hands for value and calling fairly wide. He's has about IDK 100 combos of Ax hands in his calling range or something along the lines of 20% - 25% of his calling range

            Now lets consider there are 12 cards remaining that are bad for us JKQ. Lets also assume they each have 1 random combo like K9s.
            Now we are down to 10 cards in the deck.

            The odds of one of those cards hitting the turn is about 20%. The odds of one of the V's hitting precisely the right card is even less.

            So the chances that one of the V's already having an ace is (I believe) greater than the odds of a bad card for us hitting the turn.

            Now we C-bet the SB mucks and the BB calls. What is he calling with? Ax 9x set of 4's, maybe they got sticky with 77 88 78 JT maybe even QJ or JJ. JJ BTW is one of the few pairs I cold call with from the SB.

            Do we have any idea where we are in this hand now? I think not.

            The turn is the 8c

            If the V donk bets whats our plan?

            If the V checks whats are plan? Are we going to bet again to protect our TT from an over card?

            Suppose we check and the river is a 2x and the V leads. Whats are plan?

            Suppose the turn goes check check the river is a 2x the V checks river

            Are we checking are value betting?

            Now lets say we check flop. If we have developed a well constructed range through the course of the day the blinds will be less likely to just stab at the turn with air.

            Keep in mind we actually have more Broadway hands than they do since they will have 3-bet many of them. So they can't necessarily be loving JQK either.

            The turn is the 8c
            SB checks
            BB bets
            H calls
            SB folds

            I can comfortably call IP as the BB is now just has likely to have a 9x maybe an 8x as they are to have Ax.
            When that's the case they often check the river especially if an over card hits that didn't improve their
            hand getting us to showdown after only putting 1 bet in the pot post flop.

            But lets continue with the 2x on the river.

            BB? can they keep betting a 9x or 8x into a range that looks something like this?
            Some marginal Ax TT JJ QQ KK K9 Q9 J9 T9 K8 Q8 J8 T8 TJ , and about 10 FD combos

            I think the answer is no. So having taken this line I can feel better about folding TT when they bet river.

            In fact if we have developed some decent reads vs this V we can even make a thin value bet on the river when they check it to us and get called by some 9x combos.

            When I c-bet flop then check back turn folding river makes me feel exploited but what are beating. We let them bluff us unless we are calling stations.

            Betting the turn after getting called on the flop is pretty bad IMO.

        • #13

          No need to apologize, we are all here to learn.

          1. If the board was more draw heavy, my decision would come down to what I thought about villains as players. If they were very good, solid and aggressive players, I am most likely just checking back as we will face a x/r here so often against their ranges.

          But against lower level players who are calling so wide here, I probably bet larger to protect my equity with the plan of folding to any raises.

          2. If the flop is AK4, then yes I am checking here because this flop hits villains ranges often and the board has 2 overs to my hand.

          3. I am folding to most turn bets by villains on this board AK4 when I hold TT.

          4. I think you are referring to the AK4 board and an opponent over bets? See answer #3.


          • #14
            JRedA's advice is always worth considering. I agree with everything he wrote above.

            I was interested to read you (JredA) came up with similar conclusions to myself re. JLs methodology. I went a slightly different route to you though. Janda is a fantastic teacher, and brilliant- but quite honestly I found it above my ability to incorporate into the game. I found Alex Fitzgerald to be the perfect "second string" to my bow. If I am playing someone who I feel is exploitable (normal in my games), then I use Alex's plays. If I am up against someone I classify as a good player (they do exist at low stakes), then I adopt the defensive position of JLs teachings.

            Again, to back up something JredA said above- this is my response to what I am sure is my misapplication/less than perfect understanding of JLs system. However I believe AF gets me 80% of the way there with 20% of the work, so it is a system I can actually implement within the limits of my game.


            • JredA
              JredA commented
              Editing a comment
              Different teachers work for different students as it is all about connecting with the reader. And this is completely fine.

              I tend to find nuggets from each and develop my own strategy and thought process.

              Janda's book is advanced and it fits its title for sure and it is not for everybody. But there are some very valuable teachings in there. It is not the bible by any means, and it is not for lower level tournament play. However, when we want to take a theoretical approach in a spot its great to have that knowledge. Janda has also done a ton of solver work as well which is something I am learning more about.

          • #15

            Do we have any idea where we are in this hand now? I think not.
            This is where you and I disagree.

            If I bet the flop here small w/ TT and we get called by only the BB we ABSOLUTELY have more information about villains range that we do if we check it back on the flop. We also get the SB out of the hand...This is HUGE!

            Now we don't know exactly where we stand, but we do have more information in a game of incomplete information.

            I am not sure how you can advocate that checking helps us know where we are in the hand more so than betting. But that is another entirely different conversation.

            By him calling our bet, it gives us significantly more info.

            In your first hypothetical turn - the 8c and action - the villain leading into us a few things come to mind:

            1. First what is his sizing (VERY important)
            2. Let's develop him a range to decide our action

            We DO NOT have the Tc which is very important.

            So he can have a decent number of semi-bluffs here with basically all the club draw combos and a decent amount of 2 pair combo's he is doing this with for value. So depending on the sizing and read on the player, I would lean towards a call and see what develops since we are so deep.

            I think it is also important to note that from villains eyes we can have a TON of Ax combos in our range as well - if villain is thinking on that level.

            If the villain checks the turn with the 8c. I will go the pot control route and check the turn back. Since he called the flop c-bet, he is more likely now to have an Ax type hand than before the flop (this info we gathered with our c-bet). Our hand is only good for 2 streets max of value. And this is runout dependent.

            You then provide a hypothetical 2x river (is it a club, because that is a pretty important thing?). If villain checks a non-club river after the turn goes ch/ch, then I most likely bet small to target all his non Ax pairs. If he leads river on a non-club it depends on his sizing as all the draws missed.

            Again, we are discussing small nuances of this hand as we are both advocating not playing a huge pot, which I feel is correct. I approach this differently than you do.

            I prefer to keep the initiative and have some protection with a small bet. I also think by betting flop we get to a cheaper showdown as the turn is SO likely to go ch/ch. I also prefer possibly trimming the field down to heads up. You prefer checking and playing defensive which may or may not involve a small bet from villain(s) on turns. Which is fine.

            This is just a spot where we can respectfully disagree which is fine, especially in poker. We could ask 10 of the best players on earth about this spot and I would bet we would get multiple lines and suggestions. Its just one of those spots.
            Last edited by JredA; 08-14-2019, 09:00 AM.