AQo flop ace flush draw, A and A on turn and river vs. shove on river

Originally posted by nickycakes
So I'm confused here. Do I call? I don't think he has the flush based on him check/calling the flop. If he has the other ace, we'll split or I probably win with decent kicker, he probably doesn't have AK cause he would probably raise preflop.

So why are you confused? It seems to me you've answered your own question.

SB probably calls many hands preflop. I believe he has flushes and 3x hands in his range. We block Ax hands and river makes it even less likely that he is holding an A. Would he x/r turn with lower ace or pocket pair? I think not. We should really consider folding OTT and river is a clear fold imo. I think there is a lot more flushes, straights, full houses and 2 pairs in villains range than lower Ax and lower pocket pairs which we beat.

Originally posted by Lathdari

Originally posted by nickycakes
So I'm confused here. Do I call? I don't think he has the flush based on him check/calling the flop. If he has the other ace, we'll split or I probably win with decent kicker, he probably doesn't have AK cause he would probably raise preflop.

So why are you confused? It seems to me you've answered your own question.

Because I've only been playing for a couple weeks. Often my instincts are wrong and so I'm posting here to see if there are ways to improve my play.

If he's flopped a (necessarily non-nut) flush or a set, why would he x/c the flop? He can only do this if he's totally passive, but then he won't x/r the turn. It's true he might have a 2P or straight, but we're offered odds of 1:2.5.

Above comment is directly at la55i, of course.

To OP, I believe this hand was well played (assuming you called the river) and that your reasons in this instance are sound (except I suppose that you ought to have considered and dismissed the possibility that villain flopped a set and you should be aware that there's a risk he has 2 pairs or a straight here, which you haven't mentioned, but I guess you probably did think of).

Originally posted by Lathdari
If he's flopped a (necessarily non-nut) flush or a set, why would he x/c the flop? He can only do this if he's totally passive, but then he won't x/r the turn. It's true he might have a 2P or straight, but we're offered odds of 1:2.5.

We are pre flop aggressor. If he flops a flush or a set I think it is pretty standard not to donk but x/c and maybe raise on a later street? If villain donks wouldn't we fold a big portion of our range?

If he flops a set his problem is that any spade gives Hero a strong draw to beat him, so he needs to protect. Standard line should be to donk large enough to force FDs to fold (or pay over the odds for another card) or x/r if he's confident Hero will bet. Similarly if he has a non-nut flush: he's very likely ahead but any higher spade can suck him out so he shouldn't be giving a free card here.

Yes that is what villain should do but it doesn't necessarily mean that he will do it. You believe that villain doesn't have flush or full house based on his flop play. So do you think villain will x/r turn and shove river with a hand that we beat? I think that villain would have to be stupid to x/r OTT when there is flush and straight possibility and we are clearly showing aggression? OTR there is third ace which decreases the probability of villain having a lower Ax. It would also be very weird for him to x/r TT or JJ OTT, he probably doesn't have QQ or KK since he didn't 3bet. So do we still think that he probably doesn't have a flush or full house and we should call OTR? We don't have to pay much compared to pot but do we have equity? What can villain have that we beat?

A set can frequently xc flop on mono boards. He has outs to improve but do not want to face flushes only.

1) I do not believe the line suggested by nitrol would be correct (for a villain flopping a set on a monochrome board). Hero has one spade more often than he has two spades. However, it's probably best if we wait for someone to post the hand that way round before we discuss this further, because this is going to get confusing. I'll post it next time it comes up if nobody else gets there first.

2) Nevertheless, I'm not denying that there are plenty of villains at NL5 who x/c this flop with a set. What I don't expect is for such a villain to suddenly get active on that turn, because it contradicts the logic of calling OTF. It looks to me more like villain puts hero on a FD, he's hit TP so he attempts to protect (albeit his bet sizing is daft).

This is a spot where I find it hard to imagine enough bluffs in his range to make a call profitable. He easily has 55/44/33/22 and 3-4 or more flush combos for value. Is he really raising AJ- for value on the turn? This is really hard to crack without going to Equilab.

Originally posted by Lathdari
1) I do not believe the line suggested by nitrol would be correct (for a villain flopping a set on a monochrome board). Hero has one spade more often than he has two spades. However, it's probably best if we wait for someone to post the hand that way round before we discuss this further, because this is going to get confusing. I'll post it next time it comes up if nobody else gets there first.

2) Nevertheless, I'm not denying that there are plenty of villains at NL5 who x/c this flop with a set. What I don't expect is for such a villain to suddenly get active on that turn, because it contradicts the logic of calling OTF. It looks to me more like villain puts hero on a FD, he's hit TP so he attempts to protect (albeit his bet sizing is daft).

I know that field and they are calling as mono board is scary.

Originally posted by nitrol

Originally posted by Lathdari
1) I do not believe the line suggested by nitrol would be correct (for a villain flopping a set on a monochrome board). Hero has one spade more often than he has two spades. However, it's probably best if we wait for someone to post the hand that way round before we discuss this further, because this is going to get confusing. I'll post it next time it comes up if nobody else gets there first.

2) Nevertheless, I'm not denying that there are plenty of villains at NL5 who x/c this flop with a set. What I don't expect is for such a villain to suddenly get active on that turn, because it contradicts the logic of calling OTF. It looks to me more like villain puts hero on a FD, he's hit TP so he attempts to protect (albeit his bet sizing is daft).

I know that field and they are calling as mono board is scary.

You may be right about the population, but it is a horrible play to slowplay a set on mono boards. Just so so bad:f_biggrin:

I know but players at that level do it...

Yeah most bad/nitreg players will play a set somewhat cautiously on that texture until they boat up. Decent regs will obviously try and get the chips in as fast as they can.

BTW I think river is a fold here though I'm probably calling in-game because folding trips sucks.

If villain has a set and donks, it makes us to fold most of the hands that he beats (we will still continue with nut FD). If we raise, he would probably have to fold? If we call he can't be sure if we already have a flush and he checks turn giving us a free card. Villains x/c might not be optimal but I'm not sure if it's so horrible.

Xc with a set is not horrible but cautious.