$10 NLHE 6-max: Pocket Q's on a monotone board

This hand happened on my first venture to $10 NL:

No real reads on villain; I think I should have checked this flop. We're either BA or WB, IMO. Decided to bet turn, but when that card came, I almost gave up on the hand.

Full Tilt - $0.05/$0.10 No Limit Hold'em (6 players)
Full Tilt Hand Converter Tool from CardsChat.com

SB: $10.05
BB: $20.20
UTG Hero: $10.15
MP villain: $14.81
CO: $10.07
BTN: $12.51

Pre-flop: ($0.15) Hero is UTG and dealt
Hero raises to $0.35, villain calls $0.35, 3 folds, BB calls $0.25

Flop: ($1.10) (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $0.90, villain calls $0.90, BB folds

Turn: ($2.90) (2 players)
Hero checks, villain checks

River: ($2.90) (2 players)
Hero checks, villain bets $1.99, Hero???

The river is a trivial fold.

We can bet the turn here almost against everyone. Its a good spot to apply the The Clarkmeister Theorem

Bet the turn. As played, the river is a fold.

tenbob said:

The river is a trivial fold.

We can bet the turn here almost against everyone. Its a good spot to apply the The Clarkmeister Theorem

Click to expand...

CT doesnt really apply here because the 4th flush card came on the turn and he won't necessarily fold if he doesn't have a flush. This is because if he flopped a set he can still boat up so he still could call

tenbob said:

The river is a trivial fold.

We can bet the turn here almost against everyone. Its a good spot to apply the The Clarkmeister Theorem

Click to expand...

Yeah, river is a somewhat obvious fold. I was more concerned with how I played flop and turn. Clerkmeister theorem is interesting, but, as bgomez89 said, the fourth flush card came on the turn. I don't think it makes that much a difference if the river wasn't an Ace. Isn't Clerkmeister == Merge with a few conditions?

I dont see the point in betting the turn with QQ. We just turn the situation into WA/WB.

I can see the merit in betting the turn with air but if villian is passive and unlikley to stab at this pot then there are very few river cards that improve villian if he is behind.

I dont know if the Clerkmeister theorem would work in this case unless you know the player is really tight passive since the flop is really wet with straight and flush draws with a straight flush. I think checking the flop may have been better in this case and betting solely on the turn based on the theorem if you feel you can bluff the villain. Fold the river.

not betting the flop is killing value Arrow, if you don't bet it that's a pretty bad leak imo

he could have been holding 88, possibly 99? maybe even floating?

although your bet on the flop was pretty substantial, checking twice in a row is pretty much saying 'i give up'. the ace is a great bluff card. even if the ace didn't come, you're still scared of the flush. i'm still betting big to represent the flush if you check twice. say the river was a blank, are you still folding to a similar bet?

MOZZLA415 said:

he could have been holding 88, possibly 99? maybe even floating?

although your bet on the flop was pretty substantial, checking twice in a row is pretty much saying 'i give up'. the ace is a great bluff card. even if the ace didn't come, you're still scared of the flush. i'm still betting big to represent the flush if you check twice. say the river was a blank, are you still folding to a similar bet?

Click to expand...

My hands are pretty much tied here. I am OOP with a bluff catcher. I'm pretty sure he had an Ace, because of his turn check. Or maybe he was inducing with a flush, idk. Either way, it's a very tough hand to play, especially OOP.

There are just some boards on which you have to give up. Can't win 'em all