Poker Hand Ignites Heated Discord Debate! What Happened?

[@CrushlivePoker]

What's your vote on best river action for max value?

[@travistowell7149]

check raise! folks arent checking back a flush lol

[@LeeSideSailing]

He played it like aces/kings- push all in in river….

[@qazzaqstan]

My default would be check-jam but a donk all-in looks so weird (particularly on the 9 high board) I can imagine every flush just not believing you and it being the more profitable play.

[@johningle1]

Well, based on his action, what do you think the villain bets if he checks (and then folds to a check raise?) He only has the Queen high flush. Probably similar to the $750. So worked out about the same.

[@mkader2494]

@@travistowell7149 totally. hero lost lots of value here.

[@MonkeyPunchZPoker]

In Vegas non-tourists will check back a flush there almost all the time.

[@davegriffen9720]

Regarding the villain having the Ace high flush - I ruled that out when the player tank called the flop check/raise. I would expect that call to be far less reticent for someone with the nut flush draw. For me, the tank in that spot showed that he had concern about being facing the nut flush draw.

[@LeeSideSailing]

I would not risk checking the river, unless i was 100 % sure the flush would bet into a paired board.

[@Jermo484]

No vaguely aware player is afraid to bet a flush on 83292 against the preflop raiser.

[@donnyd311]

That's exactly what I was thinking. Myself, I would have made a 3/4-pot sized bet. A paired board is the only threat to a regular flush. Altought it would have be a hero fold to muck a flush on the river.

[@TheTree1]

Who in the hell is checking back a flush here?

[@LeeSideSailing]

@@TheTree1 true, but we all have seen players be afraid of the two over flushes and the possible boats.

[@newstandardaccount]

@@TheTree1 yes but if you're villain you block flush draws, so what do you think hero is x-raising the flop with? There are a few other reasonable draws like wheel draws that might do this but villain would be thinking hero has a lot of sets which boat up on the river. EDIT: I suppose overpairs might x-raise here too, making villain less afraid of the boats

[@CaNtHoNY127]

I think I disagree with Bart here, I agree with the $750 lead. Maybe coulda gone slightly larger like $800-900, but I think non nut flush draws start to fold out at $1000+

[@Glitch47278]

Going 900 vs 750 is a large difference though in a spot where villain isn’t going to be folding much at all. I think a bet of 1100 or so is much better than 750

[@joeshab123]

That was my thought exactly. At some point they're not going to call and he tanked at $750, so $1000 might have been that breaking point.

[@meatman226]

I agree with you whole heartedly here. Definitely cannot check and have it check back and a giant bet will most of the time cause a fold. I think he played the river perfectly

[@EllieBanks333]

You think a jack high flush folds to $1000 here? Sounds like a player that can be bullied easily.

[@ThePatriots010304]

If hero bets $1,000-$1,100 I doubt the queen high flush is folding. He'd most likely tank and throw in the reluctant sigh call.

[@evadecaptcha]

I think our flop check-raise may make villain more weary of a flopped set when the board pairs. For this reason, I wouldn't check-raise river. I would lead for like 1100-1500 depending on how sticky villain is.

[@TheTree1]

That definitely does not feel like a flop flush the check raise it feels like an over pair. I never really see this done with a flopped set from the initial pf raiser. I would put my opponent on QQ-AA. On the river I think this is a clear check raise spot as no one with the flush is ever going to check back and you can get bluffs to fire one more time.

[@evadecaptcha]

@@TheTree1 I think an over pair is more often going to just c-bet the flop (even though he check-raises flop in this case). I would check-raise flop at least sometimes with sets and A5 & A4 of spades, as well as some other nut flush draws. This would be another thing for villain to be worried about and possibly check behind with a lower flush. I generally don't trust players at this level to bet river as much.

[@supersmoo7377]

On the flop I see players check-raising sets all the time, whether it’s the initial preflop raiser or not. 88, 33, or 22 would check-raise, especially with the flush draw possible.

[@TheTree1]

@@supersmoo7377 no you don't stop being a moron

[@zekebones34]

I’m leading the river. I’ll take the extra $750 assuming they call 90% of the time vs risking a check raise where you probably only play for stacks 10% of the time

[@kingpinballer242]

Fish

[@2wheelman]

you gotta know the player profile for this river bet action. i agree with better, bet your hand period most of the time.

[@TheDjcarter1966]

Before reveal: you cant check river, check/check would be disgusting. If he has a Q or J high flush he might get scared. If you bet say $ 500-750 he has to call. I understand you dream scenario is check, he puts in half pot or more and you jam then he calls but im not seeing that play out as much as you would hope, and if he does have A high flush he might still raise im taking my thin value versus risking getting nothing After; Lol, dude did just what I would do basically with same reasoning, I think it not as far out there or off base as people are suggesting...its the possibility of check check that is just too gross knowing he has a flush of some kind. The problem is he isnt worried aboutthe paired board he is thinking its a higher flush.

[@2wheelman]

💯

[@timbok83]

Agreed - I think hero could have bet a little larger -900 to pot but not a big deal. Even a jam is better than check cuz it looks bluffy and although it won’t get called as much it may be slightly more profitable long run than a 750 bet.

[@nickdukeman8503]

If you’re the villain with a Q high flush and you check back river on this board; that’s super Nitty. I also don’t think nut-flushes are ever checking this river, so if I’m checked to as the villain; I’m at least betting 1/3 pot to target calls from his overpairs.

[@Leo-wb2yh]

@@nickdukeman8503 what I dont understand is, if you bet with Q high flush on the river, who is going to call? Better flushes and Full House imo. So I dont really see the point why you would bet with Q high flush on this board.

[@captzachevil]

I think it's definitely a lead but the sizing can be tricky. It's hard to know where people start thinking about folding flushes. In practice though I figure that someone with a flush is generally not good enough to fold to a bet that's around pot size here.

[@mrraverse9870]

Either check or overbet jam on river. If we feel opponent is capable of making a hero fold on river to overbet, then i prefer a check. It’s player dependent

[@MichaelTilton]

I have similar thought process. I only add in the risk of it checking down at the end. That is a risk I don't think I would make. Shove seems like the best option here.

[@mrraverse9870]

Yeah agree - i think will mostly shove here.. only check exploitatively against a particular type of opponent who might hero fold against shove but would almost certainly bet a flush on river

[@mattm356]

Knowing the results, I actually don’t hate this play and think you were close to extracting max value. $800-$900 is probably the right sizing for him to tank call. $1000+ is where lower flushes start folding at a higher frequency. By the time you get to 5th street, I think villain has a pretty narrow range - nut flush draw isn’t tanking the flop like he did, and 88 33 are more than likely coming over the top on the flop in order to charge draws. AA - 1010 are not tanking either IMO. With 1/2 pot bet on the turn, it further decreases the chances he’s got the nut flush because he’s essentially charging As or Ks to see that last card, where nut flush prob slows down with a check back to let you catch up. So knowing 88, 33, AA - 1010, and nut flush are not in play there helps indicate mid level to lower level flush (QJ, Q10, J10, maybe 5,6?). All in all, I think the right play.

[@nohalfmeasures6]

Seems like fast playing his hand would have been more disguisable.

[@ThePatriots010304]

Betting the river was the right play but the sizing was too small. Should have been for $1,000-$1,100. I think $750 was exactly in the range ($600-$800) that you would expect villain to bet had hero checked if villain even bets the river at all.

[@Dexerion]

He got the max I think. QJs checks back a ton out of fear and bet folds for less a lot.

[@2wheelman]

does it change if ya up 2K or even??

[@DanielSong39]

@@2wheelman No unless the villain believes you're tilted

[@2wheelman]

@@DanielSong39 i meant in terms of your profit from the session.

[@alexleal8246]

Hero's check raise on the flop smelled like he flopped top set. Though he actually turned top set. Had he checked the river. Villain would most likely check it back. So betting big on the river allowed him to extract value that he would of missed out on

[@patrick_kyker]

I like the heroes thought about what would he without do with aces and the Ace of spades to get them to fold so you have to do that when you want him to call. By going all in.

[@durret]

I don't understand why Bart and a caller is not talking about the Villain's thinking process that he could be worried about hero having set of 8s. I mean, yes hero's hand is very disguised because he decided to check-raise on the flop as a initial open-raise aggressor on preflop, and happened to be having a turn top set, but it's still kind a same thing as just having set of 8s, and if you think it as set of 8s, it is not disguised anymore... Due to that unlikely weird type of flop check-raise "c-bet" action (lol), villain's thinking process could easily be like 'Oh shit this guy just check-raised on the flop when he is opener on pre. He might have overpair and over-playing little bit, but still he might've just flopped too strong so that's why he check-raised to get max value! It even makes more sense that he just suddenly passively check-called on the turn as soon as the spade comes! Plz don't pair the board on the river.. Oh no... it did get paired the board!! Oh Fxxx.' and start thinking about just checking back on the river, or just bet small for thin-value just in-case, and if he gets raised by hero, just take a descipline "bet-fold" line... Well, I take that back about bet-fold line, since this might be juicy private game, and I guess there is high chance HJ isn't the type of guy making "bet-fold", then I guess check-raise attempt from hero might work.. But thing is, still villain would just simply think of being afraid of board pair due to hero having 33 or 88 possibility because of that flop check-raise, so with that sense, 99 isn't really disguised at all, cuz either 88 or 99... it's just all same shit as a player who holds flush here. So I guess only option that would be perfectly balanced decision covering all kinda situation what villain would have, and villain's all kinda possible thinking process, just making leading out large size bet like $950 ~ $1150 would be a best choice. But turns out that Q high flush, he might've made a descipline hero-fold thinking he can't beat any value with that sizing, but again, it is juicy private game, people don't want to just make discipline fold on single-bet and give up the showdown value, so he would more likely to call almost any value hand. So I like making a leading big size river-bet, as same conclusion with Bart, but with little bit of different approach. I was waiting for Bart to say about that "worrying the 88s" kinda villain's thinking process, but he never mentioned it once....

[@JohnSmith-nx7zj]

Hero opened from LJ so a set of 3s also seems possible.

[@mjriemen]

Yeah, he c/r flop, hes basically only repping sets of 8’s (or 3’s) for value waaaay more than 9’s…

[@durret]

@@mjriemen Exactly. Not just 8s, but 3s or even 2s and river quad as well.this is just single open-raised pot with very deep stack meta, where effective stack size is $2600, like 520BB. It's almost impossible to erase the set possibility especially because of that "flop check-raise c-bet" which usually leads to exposure of strength... Unless you are playing super high knowledge reg-war meta, where they test each other by check-raising each other all the time, against light c-bet or something, but that doesn't even apply here at all, because it's private game, and also this is not targeting c-bet, but actually check-raising when you were the initial preflop aggressor, which makes his strength put in more exposure, atleast just by looking from outside not knowing he is doing with 9s on the flop. I actually changed my mind, that I like the half size bet on the river of what hero did, more than bigger size river bet. I made 2nd comment, why I changed my mind.

[@bigfatcody]

On the river, it does not matter how much the hero bet the villain would not raise no matter what especially since he didn’t have the ace of spades. No matter what happened to villain was only going to call on the river. if you went all in the villain would’ve folded, but that’s it. There’s no getting him to raise in that spot with the queen of spades not the king in the out there. And don’t think about the odds that they think about the last time that happened to them because it happened to all of us where we had a flush and somebody had a better one. I think you did the right play. I don’t believe you could’ve got any more money out of this guy at all.

[@DanielSong39]

The correct course of action is highly player dependent $750, $1000, $1200, overbet, jam, and check are probably all valid options depending on the villain If you get called on a jam or a checkraise jam though expect to lose a good % of the time

[@danielhurst8863]

I don't hate any of the potential listed actions. Trying for a River check raise, really risks it simply being checked behind by something that would call. A large bet may be called by the Nut Flush, but the way you played it, 88 is your mostly likely hand, followed by 99. Big enough bet may get a fold you don't want. Blocker bet might induce a raise, but also looks like that is what you want. Every action has the potential to earn you less or more, all very dependent of specific tendencies Foe has, and without really knowing those tendencies, your middle ground bet was good in my opinion. Seriously, I don't see why this was "fiercely divided" every options has about equal pluses and minuses.

[@fluffysheap]

Several roughly equal options is how you get divided opinions

[@DreamOfDyer]

@@fluffysheap Exactly

[@matthewmurphy7378]

I agree with the caller here also that a bit larger size on the river would’ve been optimal in hindsight. Villain can still have a lot of lower flushes too that may fold to larger than half pot. Some player profiles “never fold flushes” in that case obviously go pot or check raise. I don’t think villain raises many flushes against a block and if they do it probably would be small. And I can’t think of a single bluff villain would have in that line unless they were a maniac. Even then what would they be? As8x or 45d maybe but very doubtful. Don’t think you factor any bluffing frequency from villain so think reverse blocking is off the table.

[@leeumhopkins]

have to really think about what hands would be bluffing for that size in hero’s shoes on the river. what lesser hands would be betting half size pot? this is kind of a results oriented approach to the river where yes, “i got all the value i was likely to get from my opponents hand” but not considering his range of hands, many of which include combos of nut flushes and lesser boats. tunnel vision of selecting exact hands will get you in trouble. how often does villain have a 4-Q high flush here vs Ax or Kx flush or boat combos? you want to extract max value from these surprisingly more common combos of nutted hands by betting huge or risking the check raise then just bet half pot and hope that a middling flush just clicks the call button because you gave him a decent price. also could’ve scared off a nut flush from raising by taking this line. also-also have to consider what line villain would take with a bluff on the river. a half size pot bet does not scream “please fold”.

[@leeumhopkins]

of course, this is still live poker, so i can also understand justifications for any river action. maybe villain is a super nit, maybe he’s a punter, maybe he’s a super crusher. maybe hero had a read after playing with villain for hours about how he plays certain holdings and range of hands. all distinct possibilities.

[@lenspicks]

My thoughts on the hand were exactly like yours throughout the hand As a check raises is possible because he could have quads and watch how fast he beats it

[@moedanglez]

Just a thought, it me be a better visual if you have a poker tracker hand history as the focal point and you’re in the corner commenting on the hand.

[@benpage8413]

Flushes are heavily skewed towards broadway, so I think the river checkback is very low probability, especially measured against the higher potential to get it all in with the nut flush

[@newstandardaccount]

I see both options as pretty close in EV but some of it will be player dependent. I am probably closer to preferring the x-raise only because I think that is the underplayed line here - too many players are fearful of checking strong hands, and this helps our table image and will marginally dissuade people from going for thin value when we check on future rivers. On the other hand, given the way the hand was played pre-flop I think it is unlikely villain has an Ace-high flush, which makes them more likely to check back the river. Plus villain will recall our flop x-raise multiiway which speaks to a lot of strength. If I'm villain on that flop, I'm thinking hero is likely to have trip 8s, 3s, or deuces (but 8s in particular), which also makes villain more likely to just check it back. EDIT: I keep talking myself from one option to another - I can see why this generated a lot of discord heat!

[@1001fishvids]

I like the lead. I would have liked it more at 1000 like caller said. Nice hand and great video Bart, once again.💪

[@buggaboo2707]

Non nut flush Broadway combos would be: ( 4 choose 2 ) = 6 or the set { KQ, KJ, KT, QJ, QT, JT }

[@AlbinoMutant]

I don’t check raise rivers unless we’re really deep. It’s too hard to balance because at typical stack depths your bluffs are just going to get called most of the time because most everything that gets to the river is priced to call. You need to have a lot behind to get folds. So if you’re never check raising, there’s no point checking either. Just bet your strong hands and bluffs and don’t get fancy.

[@fluffysheap]

I probably would have done the reverse block but I think this line might be better. Opponent has to think we have more overpairs than full houses here to bet, I'm not sure I would think that, and non nut flushes will never bet, so I think the check raise fails most of the time. On top of that I think you will get bet-folds from flushes making the check raise not better than just a bet. It only really works well against worse full houses. Reverse block only works better if you can induce some raises. You will get fewer folds but probably not enough to make up for just being less value. But obviously you can get calls from even non nut flushes with a half pot bet. So really it's just, would you get more from betting bigger? Hard to say. I think this worked out close to optimal.

[@gertsteel1]

The optimal river play is based on the opponent. If he is a good player he will size his Q high flush when checked to to get a call from what looks like an overpair. With his hand nearly face up he cant go too big if he wants too get called, never above 60% pot. The problem with that is he will fold to the allin. So against a good pro i would say the 900-1100d lead is the best play. Against an average player, i think the 1000 - 1400 lead or the checkraise is the best option. I dont know why people mention that he may check behind with a flush on the river, that seems very unrealistic and more connected to the fear of not making more money with your nutted hand than making the best play.

[@joshramsey1680]

It’s a check raise every time. Our perceived range is over pairs. Any decent player is value betting that river.

[@Kingsfool]

The fact that he tanked before calling, he might have found the fold on the check raise. Max value might have been a $1K lead.

[@brianbasham3517]

I think this is highly opponent dependent. Against an aggressive player that might go nuts with any decent to middling flush, I would go for the check raise. They are more likely to turn their flush into a bluff and try to push off any bigger hands. Against a nit who would check back I would try to go the maximum of what they would call with a nut or K high flush, cuz they are more likely to check back. Against a thinking player, I would bet over pot to look polarized or go for a check raise jam depending on how aggressive I think they are in this spot.

[@mortalcombata123]

If I were villain here I would check back or fold to a bet on the river. If hero had a big overpair with a spade or a made flush I would assume he'd continue betting the turn after check-raising flop. That leaves hero with sets and 2pair on turn after check-calling. The only viable 2 pair hero could have is 89 maybe and I don't think that's ever going to lead and it will rarely flick in a call. So as played, I don't think hero will ever have bluffs or thin value hands on the river.

[@thaThRONe]

I'm ok with this sizing on the river. Like he said I can see a nitty player checking back with the river pairing. That sizing leaves the possibility of a raise from a more aggressive player while still creating good value that a nitter player has to call. To me it's the best of both worlds.

[@justinhart7172]

I think it’s a clear bet cuz of the fact that caller c/r flop. If caller bet flop c/c turn and then he could c/r river. But when he polarizes himself on flop with a c/r FOLLOWED by a c/c on turn his hand has sets

[@johnmaynard3463]

At these stakes with a table thats overcalling preflop, im 100% jamming here unless you have a very specific read. SO MANY guys will call with even just an over pair. People give way too much credit to peoples ability to fold at these stakes. At this stake...a very small amount of players will be able to call $750, but fold the same hand to a $1200 jam.

[@philip-op6de]

Your river bet really just depends on your opponent and how high level they are…I mean a novice might just call all in while a pro may check raise a bluffy block bet or you coulda check raised all in (probably the best choice) but you really have to mix up your game against pro’s

[@durret]

It's not even pre 3 bet pot. It's just single open raised pot, so flop check raise seems so strong. Actually, Bart and caller is talking in away that hero's hand is "disguised", but I completely think it opposite due to the fact that he did make a weird "check-raise c-bet". That just kinda exposed the ultimate strength (funny that he actually didn't have ultimate strength on a flop anyway, but still became ultimate on turn lol but still it's irrelevant since your putting villain has flushdraw and him having any lower set is cooler anyway), and no matter how juicy the game is, in game of NLH, if player is very experienced, you get cautious and try not to get ultimate cooler, so unless villains hand is close to nutty range hand, they are not gonna easily raise on you and make overplay or call your raise on the river in general NLH concept. So in that sense, I actually think that Hero made a right move about just betting half the pot to extract most amount of profit safely, which considering the given situation of how much you expose and gave your info to villain.. I just changed my mind! Lol Normally, I am also not fan of just going mediocre half size value bet myself too as a long time grinder $5-10 or higher grinder, who wants to put either maximum pressure and drive the mind game into certain intention in anyway, not going super standard half size value bet. I guess that's why I said I would choose the bigger size river bet on the first comment. BUT, when I think more and more about this hand deeply, I start thinking this is one of those spot where half bet makes more sense rather than trying to give certain type of strategical intention of trying to go either small or big or attempt check-raise, because of the fact that YOU EXPOSED YOUR STRENGTH BY CHECK-RAISING ON THE FLOP! (Even though it happened to be turn top set, not flop top set.. lol), and passively check-called right after that on turn, which is another exposure to information that villain can collect the piece of puzzles to kinda read what hero might have. If it was just standard flop c-bet, I would say THAT'S MORE DISGUISED, CUZ VILLAIN IS GONNA PUT YOU ON OVER PAIR or overpair with one spade, NOT A SET!. So standard c-bet would've had more chance to succeed river check-raise attempt acting like you just have Aces with Ace of Spade blocker and you checked the river, but villain makes value bet and you decided to turn your hand into a huge bluff kinda scenario. (Of course in that case, pot would not be that big anyway.). Or you just having A8 and, decide to rep the full house by blocking 8, and since river is paired And, and you were passive on the turn, you can "rep fullhouse with A8". I guess it would be even better if you have A8 with Ace of spade to turn your hand into a bluff, if you just made standard c-bet on the flop from the beginning. And opponent can be suspicious of THAT KINDA SITUATION AND NOT TRUSTING YOUR FULL HOUSE STORY! And you can guide that kinda thinking process to be happening to opponents head. Due to giving two piece of puzzle "Flop check raise", "Turn passive check-call" I would say that this is the strategically most exposed full house hand ever, so just going big size river would maybe lead opponent to make hyper discipline fold if he is really good reading player. So in that sense, you should just give him right amount price to make him not give up his "show-down value of his made hand flush" and make him do "agony call", which is half size value bet. Again, I am normally not fan of half size. But this is the unique rare situation that I would like that half size is the best option, where I would almost never face this situation anyway, cuz I simply almost never do what hero did on the flop, no matter what kinda juicy game I am in. Sorry for long comments guys.

[@LouieJV3]

I think the check raise is absolutely the best play. The way the hand is played and the board, hero is going to have so little full houses here. I think the villain would always bet the river and a good amount of the time call the all in. Think Bart is correct here

[@theryan244]

Gets the minimum from villains value (likely flushes as assessed from flop), and folds out bluffs. Prob two most important points here the way I see it.

[@armaansinha3360]

The player tanked on calling the flop bet which generally is taking the nut flush out of his range and if it was boat over boat the money was gonna get in no matter what so you could probably put the villain on either a bluff which is unlikely in that spot or a relatively strong flush but not the not flush and with that knowledge you have to evaluate if he’s checking behind with the board pair. If he tank called the $750 bet I think he would’ve folded any more than that but if the hero checked he possibly could’ve sniffed out the check raise and just checked behind so I think the hero made the right call betting with that sizing. The only other potential choice there was bet the reverse blocker for like $300 and hope for a raise and then jam to which the villain would probably be too proved in to fold. Or if the hero did check and the villain put out like $500-$600 the hero could min click and get a little more money in the pot because the villain would be pot committed but it’s probably not enough money to be worth the risk of the villain checking behind

[@gabrielrockman]

If you lead, he folds all his bluffs (unless you reverse block and provoke a bluff raise). If you check raise, he might bet fold a bluff. Does the villain have enough bluffs here to make checking the river (or reverse block betting) to induce a bluff factor into the decision?

[@nickdukeman8503]

With a check-raise on flop, Hero reps 88, flush draw semi-bluffs and overpairs. When Hero check-calls turn; I’d say he’s heavily weighted towards overpairs. With a river check, Hero can have Aces with ace of spades and AKo with ace of spades. If I’m villain and Hero check-jams with a Nut flush after playing the hand in this manner…. Congrats. You’re getting my whole stack every time. I never would check this back with a Q-high flush.

[@JohnSmith-nx7zj]

So you wouldn’t check back, but how much would you bet and would you call a raise?

[@Simon-nv5zj]

Overbet shoving river should fold out nearly all the flushes = CRIMINAL Betting 1k-1.2k should ensure most flushes can still call, and if villain has any boats, he jams over the top = PRAISE JESUS Check raising should ensure villain bets 1/3-1/2 pot with most flushes, but then fold to a jam. You get the $$ anyway if they have a boat = GOOD BEST LINE = Bet 1-1.2k

[@JMTavares7]

I'd lead for like $1200. A check raise might get a fold out which will yield even less than this and I strongly disagree hero's hand is disguised. He c/r preflop which in most players mind's is polarized. Theyre not even that wrong because for most players it is polarized. Villian is likely to be thinking Hero has 88/33

[@Paul_pp]

I think Q high flush will check that river a lot of times, or bet small and fold to any raise. If you think the villian has value then I think it's smart to lead out, if you think he is weak then you don't want to fold out any bluffs. Maybe Hero could have got called with a 3/4 or pot size bet on the river but when you are out of position there is only so much you can do. Damn if you do Damn if you don't. If the villian has AA KK or QQ with a spade then he might make a crying call for 750. I think winning 750 is better then getting greedy for an extra 200-300$ and folding out smaller flushes.

[@NealBurkard-ut1oo]

I like the check raise, i dont think a flush checks back

[@TheDjcarter1966]

a low flush like J or less does I think, Q is right on the edge.

[@alanmccormick6911]

But does a non-nut flush bet more than $750 and on a raise, call?

[@BigBadVVolf22]

The tank on the river seems like the villain contemplating a RAISE, not a FOLD.

[@terrysword7739]

My initial thought was block 150 to try to make it seem like I was scared w over pair. Then I thought actually lead large is probably better. But more I think about it Nate might have made the best play. If villain is playing scared he could think c/r on flop is 88, in which 150 gets just called and folds to a huge bet

[@terrysword7739]

Against a real tough player 150 lead would be my play

[@darylmixan8170]

Can't blame the guy... This hand has alot of emotion and twists... Its hard to know your best move without much experience... He is thinking what to do on the turn if no spade or spade... but its the Action card, so now what? He has to think of what to do on a river blank but hits the gin card... He should have tanked a little on the turn and thought of exactly what he is gonna do if the board pairs.... If it doesnt pair, his decison is easier... check and then evaluate a call or river fold.

[@JohnLewis-old]

I feel like here you're going to have to make it look like you're trying to bluff, whatever that looks like. I think the 750 bet does look like a bluff, so I think it was the right play. You could have sized up, potentially to All In, if you had that kind of reputation, IMHO

[@accessdeniedx2]

Dam Nate. I'd say to overbet river, but it's easy to say that in retrospect.

[@moedanglez]

This is easily a check raise. If you lead, you get non flush hands to fold and you get flushes to flat. If you check raise, flush is always going to bet (despite what the insane caller says) then you can check raise and depending on his sizing, you might price him in. If he bets $750 and folds to a check raise, you got the $750 with a chance at more. Its a check and it’s not even close

[@MrAgmoore]

I agree with squishy blue man.

[@justinhart7172]

Caller off. You c/c the turn buddy. Saying he only called turn w gutter sfd.. yeah that’s not correct

[@kinggrantking]

Why can't I just rip it on the river? Most of villain's range is calling. K and A high flushes aren't going to fold. QsJs might not fold.

[@patrick_kyker]

Give me an infinite number of hands I think going all in gives you your best chance of a return. Every action has a variable behind it. If you check he has to bet for you to raise. and then he has to call your check raise. If you go all in he either calls or folds. So he only has one decision point. If he's got a good enough flush he'll probably call. if he's got a lower flush he wouldn't call the check raise.

[@qsdailydose8970]

If you jam he may fold since he already tanked… if he checked back that would be a disaster and he would fold to a check raise… I think you got max value

[@colintimp1372]

Any hand that can call a good sized bet on the river is going to bet themselves if checked to.

[@dubszn1211]

Thought this hand was really well played. Max if not close to it.

[@WesBundy82]

I would check/ then jam 100.. The flush bets every time on the river..... I dont hate a block bet.. But it is a trajedy if he just called... This is interesting- Half pot value bet on the river.. It's definitely not the worst outcome-result..

[@EllieBanks333]

I did not really see a problem with the way Nate played this hand. I agree with Bart that his river sizing is small. I'd have probably gone $1000. As to the idea of check-raise or block-raise; I'd only go for that if I thought villain was a fish. In my mind, with serious $ action on this river, Nate's hand looks like 88. Now maybe a competent player has a hard time getting away from the nut flush, but lesser flushes should eject against that kind of river play here. Finally, granted I'm a bit nitty at times, but if I'm villain I check back a lot of hands on this river. Because I agree with Nate that many players who turned the flush absolutely hate this river card & they should bcuz it's literally the worst card in the deck.

[@JayKay-do1jv]

river jam seems like the play if you think hes gonna call with any flush thats 10+

[@whoknows4006]

I am betting the river under 1k - probably 900 or 950. 1k bet or bigger is a scary big bet in 5/5 game...if you check raise i think he folds & thus u lose out on a few hundred bucks unless u suspect he would bet big. Lastly, always a possibility of check check which is a disaster, although that probability is likely low. Interesting hand nonetheless.

[@darylmixan8170]

Now a days... players make big hero calls all day long... they do the head shake 1 chip throw in, The desperation "Have to call" Call... $750 in today's game is too low... He damn near has the NUTS and $750 is the same as jam.

[@danielmeuler2877]

I always enjoy the Tough Guys in the comment section that like to tell me what they would do to me "If", from behind a Keyboard and an Alias... Those guys are fun. Edit: Without sitting at the table with these guys and not knowing the flow of the game, it's impossible to know what I would have done. But the 750$ bet that Bart hated would probably be my most common move. Or I would over bet jam and try to make it look as Bluffy as possible. Great Spot to Be In!!

[@kingpinballer242]

You’re still a 🐱

[@dalewike856]

Ok, everyone in the comments is officially invited to my home game.....haha. Haa. Haha .

[@nickdukeman8503]

Check-Jam is the play; Bart’s on the money.

[@MichaelTilton]

Not sure how to Max value this. I'd be tempted to over bet shove here acting like I missed a spade draw with an AAs holding. But the hand didn't play out like that. My problem is that I look like OMC type, and that would induce a fold. I like the $750 bet after watching and evaluating the hand. I don't want the fold, so betting mid like that would seem about right. There is a Risk of Checking down on that paired board. Ultimately, it is about the type of player in the villain spot what I would do, and my reputation at the table at that time. I think all options are okay, if you get paid. I'd probably shove here at the river. I want all the $$$.

[@JohnnyUnrotten]

He played it right; why would you risk him checking back the river on a paired board?

[@320zippy]

Maybe go bigger, slighty you got paid its a good play... dont let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[@smokinjoe4709]

I would have jammed it all in on the river. Need to stay balanced so you can jam bluffs too.

[@ticenits1926]

River is a jam. Play it like a bluff.

[@WesBundy82]

I love check raising this river!!!!

[@charleslevy9305]

he should have checked raised wow

[@mattjones3103]

I’m betting at least pot here. Maybe shove

[@LeeSideSailing]

He played it like aces/kings- push all in overbet on river.

[@TomRauhe]

300 blocker bet river

[@jimmymason6893]

Represent Cincinnati.

[@Stoicmind89]

This guy doesn’t know what he’s doing obviously.

[@pot_kivach160]

This vid is good to learn how not to play!

[@stevenundisclosed6091]

This is an example of how to win the minimum.

[@Glitch47278]

lol how’s that? Imagine the guy has like 65ss and checks back lmao. Going for xr here is pretty bad imo, it’s gonna get a ton of folds from lower flushes

[@stevenundisclosed6091]

@@Glitch47278 the river bet size was far too small. Needs to at least pot sized.