After cbet F+T in position, missed nut flush draw, bluff on R?

We have just a 19.6% chance of hitting our nut flush on the river, so we need quite a lot of fold equity from our turn bet for it to be +EV. I think I’d prefer to check behind here, keeping the pot smaller and taking a free card.

Villain called a pretty big turn bet from you, so I’m not convinced he would fold to a bluff on the river. I think it was best to give up, as you did.

Yeah, I also think that checking the turn would be fine here.

Also, on the flop I think it is enough to bet about 30-35% of the pot.

Agree here, don't think a bluff would be good OTR. I'd probably also bet OTT.

OTF I would bet 1/3, OTT I would bet big. Checking isnt bad either, but I prefer betting because you have a fold equity, you build up the pot in case you hit and if you miss its more likely he will check OTR so you can check behind. Bluffing is pointless here as he called a huge bet OTT.

I'm sure that if he had anything less then a 9 he would have folded either otf or ott, so the only thing you might fold out on the river is perhaps 9 with a weak kicker. And it's an unknown at NL2, so don't think bluffing is the best idea.

♦
Actually no need for betting at all. In this hand.

No need in betting so big on flop an turn
You are just isolating yourself vs better hands

I guess here you can try just to check it down or bet once but small

I will not cbet the flop too...

Thanks for all the replies! There are some different opinions it seems.
I played it like this because I read that a dry board is very good to bet on, especially when checked to you, as villain will have missed the flop often. So that combined with the flush draw and the 2 overcards seemed a no-brainer to me but I will try to go with 1/3 instead of 2/3.

Maybe I should also mention that It is my goal to be a LAG, not a TAG.
Could this play be more acceptable in that playbook or is it just bad play, period? It's just that when I want to represent something I don't want to back down. But that has cost me many a pot, I do admit. But also won me some pots I didn't deserve.

Originally posted by petshark
It's just that when I want to represent something I don't want to back down. But that has cost me many a pot, I do admit. But also won me some pots I didn't deserve.

The problem with trying to represent something at NL2 is that many opponents aren’t even thinking about your hand, just their own, so bluffing can be quite dangerous.

I think everything is pretty much already said. I like the flop bet because 1) villain limp called pre = he is likely folding way too often 2) the board is paired and dry = we have even more fold equity. However the sizing was wrong. Because villain should fold very often we can get a lot better risk-reward ratio with a smaller bet. So my bet size would have been that 1/3 that was suggested above.

OTT You have that flush draw but because your equity is just about that 20% you need to have quite a lot of fold equity to make the EV higher than you would have with a check. So check OTT. The problem there is also that you bet very big OTF on a situation where I would expect to get a looot of folds, so you might have isolated yourself against stronger range.
After villain calls OTF and OTT I would say you have very little fold equity vs this guy. And as lfcmichael mentioned players at NL2 only look at their own cards and for them a top pair with 9 can be the nuts.

Maybe I should also mention that It is my goal to be a LAG, not a TAG.
Could this play be more acceptable in that playbook or is it just bad play, period?

I think you shouldn't put yourself into these categories. Your goal is to make the best plays possible and always go for the max EV. You should adapt and change your playing style whenever you think changing it gets you more money. If betting OTR would lose you money it doesn't matter what your strategy is, it would still be a bad play, period. This "My strategy is to play LAG/TAG" is something people used to think 8 years ago. Your goal is to play perfectly and your stats/strategy is a byproduct of that perfect play.

Thank you for such an elaborate explanation! I really appreciate it.

Originally posted by la55i
This "My strategy is to play LAG/TAG" is something people used to think 8 years ago. Your goal is to play perfectly and your stats/strategy is a byproduct of that perfect play.

Is this GTO? I'm only a month in studying hard but it's hard to filter information. Should I only watch/read anything from 2017/2018 perhaps?

No, it’s not GTO at this level. At microstakes, exploitative play is generally more profitable, because players aren’t as skilled. So it is better to be unbalanced in certain ways that would be punished by villains at higher stakes.

Originally posted by lfcmichael
The problem with trying to represent something at NL2 is that many opponents aren’t even thinking about your hand, just their own, so bluffing can be quite dangerous.

Everytime I hear this I want to move up the stakes, but since I've only been playing for a month and have just 5000 hands (multi-tabeling is too stressful still), I don't think I'm ready. But at the same time I'm overthinking for NL2 it seems.
Should I stop trying to think in ranges and use the tools I have until I crush NL2 and leave higher level thinking for higher levels? Or go up to NL5 now?
Something is not working, I was crushing NL2 more with ballsy gut-plays and less knowledge.

Originally posted by petshark

Originally posted by lfcmichael
The problem with trying to represent something at NL2 is that many opponents aren’t even thinking about your hand, just their own, so bluffing can be quite dangerous.

Everytime I hear this I want to move up the stakes, but since I've only been playing for a month and have just 5000 hands (multi-tabeling is too stressful still), I don't think I'm ready. But at the same time I'm overthinking for NL2 it seems.
Should I stop trying to think in ranges and use the tools I have until I crush NL2 and leave higher level thinking for higher levels? Or go up to NL5 now?
Something is not working, I was crushing NL2 more with ballsy gut-plays and less knowledge.

5000 hands isn't actually a big enough sample to know whether or not your strategy is successful in the long run, because there can be so much variance (random chance) involved over a small sample that will skew your results. Like, if I flip a coin 10 times, I wouldn't necessarily expect to get 5 heads and 5 tails, because it's a small sample. Getting 8 heads and 2 tails is not THAT unlikely. But I would expect to have roughly 50-50 if I flipped a coin 10,000 times. It's a bit like that with poker results: you need a large sample to see the true picture.

And you should definitely be thinking about the ranges that your villains might have, even at NL2, but just be aware that it's pretty likely that they are not thinking about yours! This can mean that villains will show up with 'stupid' hands that beat you on the river, but you will win against such bad players in the long run if you play good poker.

Ok, I will. Thank you!

Originally posted by petshark
Is this GTO? I'm only a month in studying hard but it's hard to filter information. Should I only watch/read anything from 2017/2018 perhaps?

Basically it was just a statement that you shouldn't necessarily put yourself in a category and try to play like that (have a fixed playing style). The best players are able to adapt to different situations and change their playing style. For example I usually play like a LAG but in certain situations I might tighten up a lot or be complete maniac if I think it gets me the most money
With that "perfect play" I didn't mean GTO. I meant you should do what ever is the most profitable thing to do. Vs some villains that can be GTO but at the micros most likely the best approach is exploitative.

Ok, that makes sense. Thank you!