Calling turn with decent sdv then fold river , is it a flaw?

you don't understand it because it doesn't make sense ♦ it's good that you are thinking for yourself.

I think the expectation here (the call-call-fold play) is that the opponent is familiar with pot control principles, and he shouldn't be pot-size betting with something worse than your TPGK (it's a bad board to bluff three streets too). Which is a decent expectation, if you ask me.

If the opponent is a fish that we know tends to overplay his hands I would make a crying call on the river, but mostly I would play exactly the way you did.

But if it's still all too confusing, just use math Your pot odds are 2:1, so you have to win the showdown at least in 33% cases. Put him on a range, consider his betting line, and see if there is at least 33% chance that he can have something worse than you do.

Originally posted by Suboptimal88
Lets say im on Button , a unknown villain raises from MP and i call with KTs , flop is 3-7-10 , he bets i call , turn is 2 , he bets again i call , he makes a potsized bet on river and i fold , is this play a flaw? most people seem to call rivers a lot after they call turn but shouldnt we consider villain's range to become even stronger when he bets river? everyone thinks that you should either fold turn or call river , i dont really understand this logic.

IF you plan to fold such hand on the turn against aggression then whats the difference between KTs or 27o? both win when the opponent give up and both lose when the opponent is aggresive therefore i see no real difference.

Well, Suboptimal88, I had a couple of thoughts when I read this.

♦  If you plan to fold OTT, fold on the flop, and save a few BB. If you call a flop, you need to do so with a plan for the rest of the hand.
♦  Passive lines when in position erase the value of having the position in the first place. You could raise the turn (or even the flop) and get HIM to fold instead. If he shoves over you, then fold. If you do this on the flop, you may still lose, you may even lose less. If you have stats on the opponent (and a decent sample), then you could check to see if this aggression is unusual, or if he always is so aggro, and make a decision based on that.

Best of luck,
--VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
♦  Passive lines when in position erase the value of having the position in the first place. You could raise the turn (or even the flop) and get HIM to fold instead. If he shoves over you, then fold. If you do this on the flop, you may still lose, you may even lose less.

Passive lines may (or may not) erase the value of having the position, but it doesn't mean that you shouldn't play passively in position, at all, does it? You may have other considerations why to play passively, and the position alone doesn't change much. In this case, the reason to play passively is pot control, and I don't really see the point of raising: we'll just turn a hand with good showdown value into a bluff.

Just a thought of mine

Originally posted by Th334
Passive lines may (or may not) erase the value of having the position, but it doesn't mean that you shouldn't play passively in position, at all, does it? You may have other considerations why to play passively, and the position alone doesn't change much. In this case, the reason to play passively is pot control, and I don't really see the point of raising: we'll just turn a hand with good showdown value into a bluff.

Just a thought of mine

Good point.
So if you DO decide to play for pot control, the original question returns:
At what point to you say, "Enough" and fold?

--VS

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
So if you DO decide to play for pot control, the original question returns:
At what point to you say, "Enough" and fold?

At the point when another call will be -EV When the price to stay in the pot is higher than the possible winnings of your hand. When the villain bets pot-size on river it is both too expensive for us to call, AND suggests that he is more likely to have a stronger hand than we do. So I still believe that call-call-fold is a solid line here

@TS, I don't think you can break poker down to rules of thumb. They do it in beginner articles here, but it's only a temporary measure to help out new players. So eventually you should aim to forget all the "You should call river if you called turn" or "You should never bluff in two opponents" type of statements and think about each hand individually

It is a flaw the fact that you're thinking to allways do this or that...

I have a default of playing for two streets with top pair: either calling two bets or betting myself twice. But this might change with more informations I gather about my opponent, for example if I see someone triple barrel a lot (being fishy aggresive) I'm calling 3 streets.
With top pair I rarely fold to a turn bet as many players have draws or weaker hands that they double barrel with and then give up on the river.