Trip Aces with low kicker vs shove on river from x/c

You could consider checking back flop but that's neither here or there. Betting is obviously fine.

River is pretty disgusting. Probably has to be a fold; we only beat A3, A4, A7, A8 in his value range. He could easily play AT-AQ, 66, 22 or even 55 this way. There's also not a lot of room for bluffs in his range.

Originally posted by MJPerry
You could consider checking back flop but that's neither here or there. Betting is obviously fine.

Thanks for the help! Could you tell my why checking back the flop here might be good?

Because there are not buch of hands that would pay all three barrels - only these 4 mentioned lower aces. And flush also completes on the river, perfectly hitting villains flop and turn calling range. So I'd say, checking should be a preffered move there.

Originally posted by nickycakes

River
Beginners strategy tells me i now have a monster hand, bet 2/3 pot. Villain shoves. What do I do here? If he's still in, he's got an ace and likely higher kicker than I have if he didn't fold preflop right?

You should try to play one level higher than others on your limit. So, not only think about what hand you do have, but also try to find out, what villains can have according to their play.

Originally posted by nickycakes

Originally posted by MJPerry
You could consider checking back flop but that's neither here or there. Betting is obviously fine.

Thanks for the help! Could you tell my why checking back the flop here might be good?

The board is super dry and it is hardly to extract value from weaker hands.
As played, river is a fold.

Originally posted by VTomukas
Because there are not buch of hands that would pay all three barrels - only these 4 mentioned lower aces. And flush also completes on the river, perfectly hitting villains flop and turn calling range. So I'd say, checking should be a preffered move there.

First sentence is it. The second doesn't really apply - we can't know on the flop that the backdoor flush will complete on the river!

Most of villain's range is hands worse than Ax that will nevertheless call a bet or two. Checking flop lulls a hand like 99 into a false sense of security and may make them more inclined to call two bets, whereas they'd likely call flop and check/call turn facing two barrels. Also, this flop is quite dry and gives us a backdoor flush draw which are other reasons why checking could be nice. As I said, though, betting is also fine.

Having bet the flop, should we not being checking back the turn? We shouldn't be looking for three streets of value on a weak TP. I know 5♦ makes some draws possible, but I would have thought they'd be a pretty small part of villain's range at this point.

As everyone's said, unfortunately this has to be a fold at the end. I actually doubt that he does this with a worse A so we're almost guaranteed to be behind.

We cannot search 3 streets of value here...

Thanks everyone, you're a huge help. Seems like I have a lot to learn!

tough one

What is wrong with playing the first 2 streets the way he did and then checking on the river.
With that board how many hands that he beats will call his river bet?
Not many I would assume.
I would play it by betting the flop and turn and then checking the river.
This guards against the check-raise as you really can not call a check-raise with your hand bur you do have show down power so checking back on the river would be my play.
For what it is worth I really doubt he has a flush here

With the paired board and possible flush xb seems fine play.

Betting river (and even turn) is pushing small edges. Nothing wrong with that in principle, but if it is done, the bets should be smaller (easier to call with worse hands and easier to get away from facing a raise)

Originally posted by nitrol
With the paired board and possible flush xb seems fine play.

Ah come on b/f river is massively more +EV than checking back. River as played is a sizing issue; no need for 2/3 pot with the range we're targeting.

b/f vs a passive guy.

Originally posted by MJPerry

Originally posted by nitrol
With the paired board and possible flush xb seems fine play.

Ah come on b/f river is massively more +EV than checking back. River as played is a sizing issue; no need for 2/3 pot with the range we're targeting.

IMHO checking back the river is +EV.
Bet/fold to raise loses way to often here as your hand cannot call.

Originally posted by TheMarxBros3
IMHO checking back the river is +EV.

Well, it's not -EV at least. That doesn't mean that betting isn't +EV. The mistake here was electing to bet 2/3 pot, which is a size that no worse hands (besides the unlikely A8/A7) can call.

Originally posted by MJPerry

Originally posted by TheMarxBros3
IMHO checking back the river is +EV.

Well, it's not -EV at least. That doesn't mean that betting isn't +EV. The mistake here was electing to bet 2/3 pot, which is a size that no worse hands (besides the unlikely A8/A7) can call.

My sentiments exactly. The only (theoretical) downside to betting small when value betting thin OTR is that it opens up for a bluff. I usually claim that people do bluff, even tight players, and even at NL5, but here I don't think the average of the population have the balls to check-raise bluff on the river.

We can make it 1/2 pot and not fear that much of facing a bluff.

Check flop or bet flop, I think there's not that much of a difference. If he would be a thinking player, he would call your bet on flop with any ok hand, like pocket T's. Checking lets you control the pot with relatively weak hand, so it's okay, too. Especially when the board is so dry. But this ofc depends on your villain.

River is a bet/fold as played. You bet 3 streets here and he ch/raises you. That's never a bluff on this kind of board (and actually almost never a bluff on Nl5 - unbalanced ch/raise ranges on river), so you shouldn't call. He has plenty of better Ax, and some Full houses.