A4s

It is well played.

The flop bet is a must really. You have 9 nut outs + 3 more and should build the pot. This would be true even if you don't have the rundown equity (the number Equilab would give) necessary for a value bet, but I think you are close have to it. In essence, you make the bet to increase your winnings when you hit. It is much easier to win a big pot with initiative. By contrast, if checking and calling, or worse, if it goes check-check-check, do you think you would get paid a single dime when the board shows a 4-straight and you come out betting?

To reiterate, a flop bet makes the final pot double or triple in size compared to if it goes round-check. That big final pot you almost always win because you have nut outs. So those 6 bb is an investment. Effectively, it much less than 6 bb you invest since you'll have to call a bet anyway and you have equity in the pot. In isolation (say you'd be all in with the bet), it might have an EV of minus a fraction of a bb. Here, we get paid big dividends by betting and increasing the final pot size.

The exception to betting flop would be only if the button is likely to fire flop and turn whatever peels off. I don't see that happening.

***

Originally posted by nitrol
Still push on river has max EV.

On the river, it is not the time to make an overbet. All draws got there and we can't trust villain to be an idiot. There's no room for him to have a decent hand. Overbets with nuts are best when we make unexpected nuts, like backdooring a straight on a 2-flush flop + turn.

The reasoning you have presented on this issue may work at playmoney tables, and maybe, just maybe, at an unusually fishy NL2 table.

How do you plan to make draws pay?

Originally posted by nitrol
How do you plan to make draws pay?

By making an assessment of villains range based on the action and the board, and an assessment of villains willingness to pay off different bet sizes. Your assessment is different from mine.

Your assessment is usually very different if we are on the other end. That is, if this hand was posted from the perspective of the SB, then I bet a million that your advice would be to fold on the river to every bet greater than 5 bb. You'd probably say that there is a straight and a flush on the board, and in case we have a flush, it isn't the nuts. Thus fold. I'd actually say the same, but I'd call a larger bet than you with a mini-flush. (Granted, I'd not draw to that, but that is besides the point.) What makes you think villain is a mega-idiot calling a huge bet often enough? It is simply the wrong board texture for it. The natural target is sets that missed their FH draw.

How much would you pay with a set if you were SB? AI = some 150 bb? That would be the day:)

We are not targeting the thinking good players.

We are targeting the average player as well as the good and bad ones that gets to the river. But even fish will be troubled with whatever they are holding when facing a 150 bb bet. I fully agree that massive all ins with nuts can be optimal sometimes. But not just always. I try to read the board a little bit.

I think that when sets, straights and flushes can call an AI we should push.

Imo sets won't call and straights have a hard time when flush is completed.

Originally posted by nitrol
I think that when sets, straights and flushes can call an AI we should push.

Do you always push river with nuts? Regardless?

No but on such a board when we can get calls from those hands - yes.

Must agree that on this board we do get those 'tanking' calls from sets. Remember, people at NL2-5 suck at folding

btw, these are not my words

Cheers,

Hesticus

I remember w34z3l saying this too.

Right. Like I said before, might work at playmoney and bad NL2 tables.

Never falling on your back....

Really think you won this discussion?

I am not fighting so I cannot win.
Just giving an opinion and trying to correct if any leaks appear.

Not fighting either.

Question: Since you claim to not go AI every time, which of the two general boards (very scary, harmless) types do you move in on expecting to be called by worse? Boards which are really scary or those that are harmless, or both? For a harmless board that is the opposite of the board in OP, take this one:

K♥:4♦:9♥:5♣:8♣:

You hold 7♥:6♥:

You moving in?

Another example: K♥:4♦:9♥:2♣:8♥:

You hold A♥:6♥:

You moving in?

1. Move in
2. Not moving in.

Same here.

But the board in OP is, I think, worse than board 2 for moving in. Sets should be worried about the obvious flush (even measly straights beat them), and I don't think a mini-flush is checking when it his. Our own flush is also blocking his flushes.