Big Pots, No Smiles: This Home Game Is NOT Friendly!

We have a tense competitive home game hand review in our latest video, "Big Pots, No Smiles: This Home Game Is NOT Friendly!" Our caller faces a high pressure decision, possibly being bluffed by his opponent due to his perceived inexperience. We dissect each critical moment, providing you with insights for live cash game players seeking to improve their edge.
🔔 Subscribe for more poker coaching videos filled with advanced strategies and tips to enhance your game in live settings. Like, share, and comment to join the conversation-tell us about your toughest home game moment!
📈 Checkout our latest Crush Live Poker Free Training videos and podcasts here: bit.ly/FREE-CL...
To submit a hand for consideration for the call-in show read instructions here: crushlivepoker....
Join the CLP Discord community and follow our socials:
► / discord
► / crushlivepoker
► / crushlivepoker
► / crushlivepoker

[@CrushlivePoker]

How many times a year would you say you see a river bet/3bet bluff?

[@jgod9788]

rarely in 1/3 or 2/5, but in higher stakes it happens quite a lot when players turn a pair into a bluff

[@atfti]

My home game has those more often than you'd think. I made the unfortunate mistake of teaching my friends how to play

[@brianpotter2812]

In live poker at low stakes, next to never. Online, I see it a lot from LAGs when they have top pair on boards where the turn gets checked back to them.

[@kittyislandadventure]

I think the key point that explains Villians bluff was at the end the hero says, [paraphrased] "Earlier in the night, I had done some tight folds" - He was playing exploitative poker and almost got him to fold the flush.

[@lizh8245]

Stopped at 7.45 Bart said, "You sound like a young guy" "You haven't played much live poker". By the details that the caller saying this move is weird and that is weird, and by Bart's understanding of the caller, if the villain tries to bluff the caller off nut flush, he is definitely gonna fail. No matter what reasoning the caller gives for calling, he just can't let go of his flush. No matter how hard he (or other relatively inexperienced players) make it sounds like to make a decision, they will always call.

[@mrhumble2937]

That check was terrible

[@nicholas7525]

Lol

[@Ajitspayday123]

it got him paid.

[@Jermo484]

@@Ajitspayday123 Because a villain he doesn't know at all punted in horrific fashion. Against any semi-competent player with AA, KK or AQ, this line makes him just the $175 and maybe on a good day the $500. Simply betting turn and river would get you more money than that. Plus he makes literally nothing if another club rolls off on the river.

[@Ajitspayday123]

@@Jermo484 true

[@2wheelman]

bet your hand period. its 5-10 not some nitty game......

[@hsubox]

People mad about his turn check. But that's the reason villain jams river because it's so rare to not bet with the made flush on turn.

[@pot_kivach160]

good point. In small stakes a lot of people play erroneous; (checking when clearly ahead on a connected dangerous board, calling huge bets with gut shot, raising with garbage hand...), so that action entice opponent to make mistake, falsely believing that the opp would not played that way with that particular hand. My stat says the result usually favours the culprit!!? Crazy, but almost this suggests: for the best result, play erroneous!

[@manu1444]

I think I would fold the river here close to 90% of the time. Sick hand!

[@benjamintaylor8665]

wish it was more of yous in my games. nits folding nut flushes. like what beats you. 5 or 6 hands? and way hand was played i can eliminate every single one of them

[@manu1444]

@@benjamintaylor8665 I just have rarely seen 3-bet river bluffs. Limp/raise definetly doesn‘t eliminate QQ and TT. It depends on the opponent if I am folding or calling though.

[@benjamintaylor8665]

@@manu1444 why would qq and tt check on the turn? to give a free card to the countless number of flush draws that exists in hero's range? .also it doesnt make sense to bet a 25% river bet lead sizing with a full house. those hands bet much bigger to target hero's calling range. plus you have the nut flush and dont block smaller flushes that play this way 56clubs, kjclubs,97clubs or any missed straight draws ak, kj etc...you just beat so much and villains play doesnt lead me to.believe he has the goods. i definitely snap call here with nut flush. 95% of the time with this action youll be good

[@losyart]

@@benjamintaylor8665 Uhave no idea what u r talking about other than being results-oriented and far from being objective

[@hoodwiser7652]

If you folding nut flushes you losing money like 95% of the time. Like from preflop alone you can rule out most hands, worst case in this scenario is like villain got pocket Ts, Qs, or 3s, like they’ll be almost zero Q4 in any opponents range, T4 even less, maybe occasionally 34s, 34os pretty much never, but there are so few hands that make sense that you have to call. If you can’t ignore the size of the bet, which is what it sounds like, then you’ll be exploited by good players. Only way i’m even considering folding the nut flush is if there’s some goofy ass run out like 8898K or some shit, where there’s a decent amount of hands likely to be played that beat you, otherwise you have to play it and on the rare occasion it is beat shrug your shoulders and move on.

[@imyiwin]

Old guy… probably around 40-50…. Lol

[@beatingu8347]

lol old for a 20 year old maybe but that’s a wide range.

[@velvetpunch]

This guy is 12 yrs old lol

[@captzachevil]

I must say I'd have a hard time folding this. There's a few nuances to the villain's betting pattern that left me unconvinced that it was a flopped set. I think there's a real danger of seeing boats everywhere when the board pairs. If you're not going to call any aggression after slow playing a flush on a board pair you shouldn't be slow playing a flush at all IMO. The whole point of it is to look weak and induce marginal hands to chuck money in.

[@afwaller]

Agree completely

[@josheisert8380]

Dude was a mad genius. Got money in pre ahead. Money in flop ahead. Checked turn when fell behind, jammed river when he took back the lead with his now realized boat. Hero just made a bad call and admitted to it by saying he thought he was beat but called anyway just cause the air conditioner stopped working. Villains only mistake was he might of put him on K-J of clubs as a possibility giving him an extra hand he beats but he definitely read heros flush getting there. Way to wreckless for me but I give them both credit. Villain for reading him like a book. Seemed to know he knew hero would fold. And hero for having the balls to call, even though he thought he was never good there. Another weird one ...

[@supersmoo7377]

Seems like most people in the comments would fold the river as hero. If that’s the case, everyone here should be 3-bet bluffing the river WAY more often.

[@pot_kivach160]

I don't think so. V did not play bad. (one just cannot bluff a CS!). He took control of the hand pre and on flop; checked turn, and bluffed H on river, knowing that anything less than nut flush would've folded. H turned himself into a CS...being too weak to fold a monster hand when made sense (3,4 were limp/3-bet range hands).

[@josheisert8380]

@@supersmoo7377 exactly correct, however the players today are growing up on solvers and they don't teach the most important thing which is table dynamics. Kids are playing like robots. When you run into the type that talks all the lingo, the gto gang, their check raises will be a weak draw, they will 3 bet fold and if they are arrogant they will even 4 bet fold to a jam just so they can tell their friends they have 4 bet folds in their arsenal. But yeah pretty easy reads. Here sometime soon it's gonna be 2005 all over again. Get the majority playing a certain way and then switch to start picking them apart. That's what I believe anyway.

[@DonTrump-sv1si]

Theres still a lot of people that like playing poker but have zero concept of how the game has evolved. Like this guy probably has never heard of the term "polarizing" or "value bet". Theres still a chunk of players that watched "Rounders", the 2003 WSOP and read Doyles "Super System" and thats where they stopped in their understanding of the game

[@andrewdinns1746]

12:45 eh this is actually wrong. If you study solver outputs, a rule is that when you're choosing to 3b bluff the river you pick your bluffs from initial vbs. so yes you will bluff with showdown value against polarized ranges.

[@weston9106]

I’ll listen to Bart

[@danielhurst8863]

Stopped 11:45. Note, I've seen way too many 3bet Rivers where their hand is no good, unsure if this was poorly run bluffs, or just misunderstanding of hand dynamics. Foe here has a hand, but the only hand you really need to worry about is QQ. Even 33 and 44 can be heavily discounted. I'd also rule out TT, because the turn was the Tc. When you check the Turn with the nuts, that needs to be part of a plan, because what you are hoping for is to underrepresent your hand and hope Foe bets, so when foe beats, you need to be more willing to call that would otherwise be the case, otherwise checking the Turn is throwing away money. Note, the only real boat you have is QQ is well, and this is important. If Foe has AQ or KQ, your Boat is blocked, so it those are better hands to bluff with. In isolation, that River 3 bet seems really strong, but if Foe has any Q, it is both a good hand to Bluff with, and maybe even be good. I would have bet the Turn, but as played, I make a crying call on the River, because the entire point of checking the Turn, is to get Foe to over bet on the River. When you get the reaction you want, you shouldn't fold as any default position.

[@tom-qj6uw]

Why do you rule out TT? QQ and TT basically are the same hand (i.e. Non-flush nuts) on the turn since it is very unlikely that hero only calls QQ pre-flop.

[@danielhurst8863]

@@tom-qj6uw Because Foe can't have have the Tc in their hand. Every card that increases equity, including backdoor equity, matters. Someone is more likely to take that play on the flop with TT if they have the TC, because of the backdoor flush draw. Rule out may have been too strong a term, and discount is better, but it would be a weird play with a naked second pair. Another reason to discount the not Tc TT is that on the turn Foe has a set, but a vulnerable set. Any other Club means realizing equity will be difficult. The TT set really has to donk into the aggressor, otherwise aggressor can play perfectly. Imagine Hero had AcJd on the Turn. Foe has TT, but not the TC. Foe checks, and Hero with the worse hand, checks behind, the River is a Club, Foe's hand is dead, and if Foe bets and the flush doesn't hit, unlikely to get called.

[@efg1311]

I think 1010 is the most likely made hand the villain can have. This happens all the time with rec players when they’re raising/3-betting pre with a higher pocket pair and c-betting the flop that seems relatively safe (1 over card). Normally if you call them in that spot they’ll shut down on the turn and give up. But when they hit their miracle set on the turn they just lose their minds and totally change strategy and check to try to show weakness (looking to check raise). In this particular hand the board pairs on the river which is dangerous/lucky if he did have 1010 but every other time the board doesn’t pair they’ll get it all-in on the river anyways because they don’t even realize the magic 10 on the turn completed a flush; they don’t even see it because they’re just so excited they hit their set. At small stakes and home games this is an incredibly common mistake rec players make. They are never ever folding a turned set regardless of what the rest of the board is.

[@hoodwiser7652]

@@efg1311with action preflop Ts or Qs most likely, but given everyone else folded out could prob even play 34s, but I mean these are hyper specific hands, once in a blue moon opponent will turn stone cold nuts but mostly they won’t have it. The River all in is kinda telling as well, if you got a boat you’re prob going to want to get value, and you will fold out a lot of the opponents beaten hands with a jam. Unless you have a super accurate read on other players and all in here looks increasingly suspect, and how it played out I just don’t think a nut flush is behind anywhere near enough to ever consider a fold. If opponents bet the turn, then lead out all in on the River it gets much harder, but they were a bit passive then really aggressive, which doesn’t really tell the story or having a boat that convincingly. In a rec game it’s incredibly difficult to get any nut flush to fold as well, so yeah villains play is very high risk/low yield.

[@losyart]

Yeah im snap folding river expecting to see QQ or TT. It wasnt easy game if ppl finding 3bet river bluffs i assume. Wow

[@Getnodrama]

The dude might have thought you checked the turn because you were scared of the flush like him, then you could have raised on the river to try to throw him out with a weaker hand, but another voice in his head felt unsure about it so he jams as a protection thinking he can make you fold 2 pairs with the flush draws and pair board... Good call even bold, that check of you actually made him wanna tilt the river.

[@astikixrewsi]

The best hand the villain has according to his line is pocket tens. If you're half decent with pocket aces or kings on the SB you raise, cause you can barely rely on the BB to give you the limp-reraise line. Queens down to nines or eights you raise from the SB for value. The bottom of the Blinds' range could be reraised to get pot control and that would leave villain only with tens, nines and eights. With nut flush you don't have an insta-call, but you have a disciplined call after much sweating...

[@ZacharyBrasel]

Isn’t AQ (or A4s, not sure if he limp reraises QT) a good 3b river bluff candidate for the villain to have? I don’t know why we are ridiculing the villains play here. If he’s going to b/3b the river with QQ/TT for value, what hand should he bluff with? It makes sense to bet for value then 3b bluff AQ since you block QQ

[@losyart]

Yeah indeed . Villain will be super-crusher soon with such sort of unorthodox very strong looking river 3bet jams

[@jasonprice1906]

Wakes up with A8 suited 😂

[@scrubfive9239]

A8s in position is a raise first in all day 6 handed.

[@TheStayFlyGuy]

Do the hands that beat us on the river, check the turn? It’s bvb 6 handed home game, sets aren’t checking that turn as PF3b IMO

[@17zipping]

My first thought 2, discount sets to very unlikely given turn chk HU BvB

[@checkmugged]

From the comments so far, including Bart’s, it seems like nobody understands what is part of the home game package. I’d have snapped this river given all the details.

[@MrLuvmusl]

I don’t really get Bart saying the villain doesn’t want to turn a bluff catcher into a bluff against a polarized range. It seems unlikely the high end of heroes “polarized” range is better than a flush, so the whole point of bluff 3betting the river is to try to get hero to fold the top end of his range in addition to obviously any bluffs, right? And it almost worked…. I feel like just calling there with AQ is lighting money on fire. The small river raise from hero also seems like it’s rarely an airball bluff anyway (which is the only thing villain beats). I would also think hero probably would need to have gone bigger with river raise to really be polarized in my mind to begin with.

[@SFreedberg1]

What's a whipper snapper guy? Do whipper snapper's fold more to large bets?

[@EllieBanks333]

The comments section is interesting on this one. It just feels so results oriented to me. I think the reveal here does a disservice to the analysis. Especially given there quite a bit of love for villain. However, I will say that they are correct that villains AQ has no showdown value. But Bart is right that it is a bluff catcher. As usual for me though; I'm just never in hero's spot. I did not love pre-flop, but it's not horrible. Checking the turn was a clear cut mistake though.

[@danradke98275]

AQ does have showdown value. it's a bluff catcher on this board, but it's not like 65hh which truly has no showdown value

[@EllieBanks333]

@@danradke98275 Did you miss the part of my post where I said it was a bluff catcher?

[@danradke98275]

@@EllieBanks333 Obviously not when I agree that it is a bluff catcher 🧠 My comment was pointing out that you are incorrectly saying that AQ has no showdown value, which Bart never claimed in the video.

[@EllieBanks333]

@@danradke98275 My point is that the way this hand went down AQ has no practical showdown value. Meaning you are never beating any real hand. The opponent is never turning over KQ. I think you are being too technical. You seem to think that since it does technically have some value - top pair, top kicker, that is the same thing as real showdown value. You're going win a showdown against air only.

[@danradke98275]

@@EllieBanks333 I can agree with that breakdown! Fair enough 👍🏻

[@St3.]

So obviously checking on the turn doesn't make any sense, as everyone rightly pointed out, But honestly when considering whether to call or not on that river you have to know the player. I think 90% of people would never even think of making such a play. And in that case it's just a fold. But this time it worked out, and to be honest I don't think the bluff attempt was that bad. It's just that in the long term if you always flick in the call in spots like that I think you're losing.

[@benjamintaylor8665]

its never a fold as played. when hero checks back the turn (weirdly) the trap is set. villian has no idea he is sitting with nut flush so could be making this move with more value hands that dont include full houses

[@St3.]

@@benjamintaylor8665 which value hands don't contain full houses after hero raises the river? 🤣🤣

[@qlow5956]

If we're only reasonably losing to QQ, we have to call. The live tells sound scary here, plus the river 3 bet, but it's soooo hard to be losing here.

[@ismaelgonzalez9515]

Before he said way he was goin to do I was 100% certain this was a bluff. He figures hero is never I mean never checking a set or flush on turn so he under repped his hand which caused this. On river when hero raises villian thinks he can get him off a4 or q10 . Maybe small flush. I wouldn’t even tank honestly. If he plays 10s like that good for him but that’s one combo. I’m calling. Villian can easily have KJ clubs also raising for value on river.

[@qazzaqstan]

Truthfully as rare as I think the bluff is here I don't see myself folding this though I probably should. I just don't believe villain has that many boats here that limp raise pre-flop. Yeah I kind of expect to be shown QQ but the hand has gone so far off the rails at this point I'm just not convinced they have enough value.

[@UberFubar75]

Ok I was wrong. I would've bet the turn though, 44 on the board a good reason to bet turn. I'll just keep practicing lol Thanks again Bart

[@MichaelJamesActually]

Do you tank for 2 minutes with a full house?

[@Trust_but_Verify]

act weakness?

[@UberFubar75]

I'm at 7:22 and gonna guess the villain has pocket ladies, so the board pairing with 4c 4d gives him the boat.

[@mrraverse9870]

Think it's a decent play by villain actually. The only boats hero could have is QQ or TT - as 44, 33 likely just check behind preflop to set mine). Hero's check on the turn and raise on the river felt like a flush but skewed toward a small flush - which most likely folds to the large river 3-bet

[@Jermo484]

Those pairs aren't checks after a SB limp unless you know the SB only limps to trap - the hero absolutely has more 33, 44, 43 suited and TT than the villain and can even have some QQ himself. The villain basically has QQ or nothing. This was an atrocious play from a villain who absolutely didn't think he was bluffing. The only thought that he had in his head was "well if I got sucked out on then you're just a little lucksack, so let's go with it." Also, the turn check is far more likely a nut flush than a small flush - checking there with any flush is not ideal, but with a small flush it's a tremendously massive punt. The nut flush isn't thrilled with another club cause it's hard to get paid, but at least he doesn't lose. A small flush not only will have a tough time getting called by worse, but gives his opponent a free card with AA, KK, AQ, AK, JJ with a club to beat him.

[@losyart]

Lol check behind to set mine lol . Its better to raise it build the pot if u hit or barreling good boards or good cards on turn or river in position to give you more ways to win than just hitting

[@Jermo484]

@@pot_kivach160 uh SB vs BB those are very obvious raise and likely defends in position deep

[@newstandardaccount]

I'm not sure I follow the point about not bluffing with a bluff catcher. Isn't that always going to be the case when we 3-bet the river as a bluff? We took a hand with marginal value and bet, which then got raised. We now realize our marginal value is losing to opponent's rep'd value, and so if we're going to bluff it is with a hand that was previously a bluff catcher. Or no?

[@donchedelnirvana2261]

In villain's perspective, there is no point in turning AQ into a bluff, because the situation is either: a 45% Hero is bluffing, and will fold to a raise, b 45% Hero is raising for value, unlikely to fold to a raise (TT, 44, 33, QQ) c 10 % Hero is value raising but will fold to a raise (AA, KK, flush?) By far the majority of hands that raise are in category a or b, so unless villain is very certain hero will fold flushes, 33 and maybe even TT there is very little point in turning a bluff catcher into a bluff. It seems villain (and maybe you too?) thought more hands were in category c than there actually were.

[@newstandardaccount]

@@donchedelnirvana2261 Thanks for the breakdown and you raise good points, but it's not really related to my point. As I understood Bart's point, he wasn't simply saying that it would be a bad thing to do in this particular hand - instead, he was claiming that it is ALWAYS a bad idea to turn a bluff catcher into a bluff. My point is that I assume most 3-bet river bluffs are hands that went for thin value and found out they were behind, and decided to go for gold.

[@MrLuvmusl]

@@newstandardaccount yeah I agree with your confusion about Barts comment about not wanting to turn a bluff catcher into a bluff. Made another comment about the same thing before I saw yours. And I also don’t think the top end of hero’s “polarized” range is mostly boats. Flushes seem much more likely as I would expect QQ to possibly 4b pf or raise flop, 33 and 44 to raise flop (and quads is unlikely anyway). The only real boat I’d expect hero to have here with much frequency is TT…I’d be putting him much more squarely on a flush, which it seems like is exactly what the Villian did here

[@cmc0605]

I don’t mind villains bluff, I disagree AQ has any showdown value after the hero raise. It only beats bluffs, but I think hero has enough better value that has to fold to the jam such that jam is higher EV than call

[@sololegit]

Respectfully disagree. I think hero has way more air in his range that raises against the small sizing than value hands that raise fold to the shove. Also then we lose when he calls which he will clearly do sometimes.

[@Jesters_Thorny_Crown]

That check, as unconventional as it was, got him paid. Villain assumed a flush bets the turn, can’t put him on a 4 or 2 pair, or overs. He shoved for value.

[@tuomashanninen184]

I Honestly think that the villain value owned himself

[@Jermo484]

Yeah there's simply no chance the villain thought he was bluffing.

[@nuklearwinter2892]

No, villain wasn’t thinking on that level. This is simply the V having a strong hand and his brain short circuiting not knowing what to do.

[@ticenits1926]

​@@nuklearwinter2892 otherwise known as a valuebluff. Villain was happy if he was winning and sad if he loses, Schrodinger 's value.

[@lordtraxx4217]

Yeah the guy was trying to exploit you because you had been making tight folds. Easy call when you know your image and know your opponent

[@C-Gan1970]

Enducing a raise

[@330miggs]

Can I play at this home game ??? 15" POKER HAAAAARRRRDDD ♠️

[@ablair2794]

Ugly hand. They both messed up by checking the turn. It seems like the villain was ignorantly 3 betting for value on the river because of the hero’s turn check. I would have called because the villain’s line made no sense for Q-Q and 10-10, but it seems like the hero got lucky that the villain made a bigger mistake than he did on the turn. The villain needed to bet for info and ended up getting confused.

[@flybone100]

Whipersnapper :D

[@SFreedberg1]

whip·per·snap·per nounINFORMAL noun: whipper-snapper a young and inexperienced person considered to be presumptuous or overconfident. Should have googled first.

[@sethshapiro5973]

Caller played it terribly. Opponent played it even worse. Nice hand, caller.

[@pot_kivach160]

I'd reversed it: V played terribly, H played even worse.

[@stevenundisclosed6091]

WTF is he checking the turn for?

[@oldterry9476]

an older guy I guess that's a sign your getting older bart

[@velvetpunch]

About your age Bart lol

[@benjamintaylor8665]

bart always scared. why tpu scared with nut flush after checking back the turn? its a snap call.. nobody limp raising qqs and 10s in that spot and you have the nut flush. sheesh. stop being so gd nitty with your analysis

[@travisspates4421]

If you don’t enjoy his analysis, then why are you continuing to watch?

[@ChrisM-wv4gs]

I like listening to Bart talk about poker but he does see monsters under the bed alot of the time

[@pot_kivach160]

b/c a set of 3,3, or two pairs (3,4) would've checked turn.

[@AV-cc5wl]

First!