If you believe this player is enough of a button clicker to shove the river with any pair then the decision you're wondering about otr is a clear call. You mentioned something when discussing betting the flop about trying to hit an ace (which you'll miss 7 times out of 8) so that you can stack him. Well, you binked an ace, so stack him . With a range of pocket pair hands (including sets), Ax hands that beat you (AT+ and 2 pair hands), and even if you throw in stuff like 54s and 43s on top of that, you still have the odds
to call this off. That doesn't even include unpaired hole cards like Kx that hit something. I don't like a call there much however since I strongly disagree that he's going to make a nonsensical play like that often enough. If he plays anything at all resembling the 75/7/0.9 you have on him so far then it's hard for me to imagine him turning a TT or w/e type hand into a bluff by shoving the river oop on a KxxxA board after checking twice.
Anyway, call in that spot if that's your interpretation of his line, since by counting card combinations (river play is fairly easy in that regard as you don't need to stove anything) you'll know you're doing better than the 2:1 you need.
Let's go back to the flop then now that I have a better inkling of what you think his range otr might be, (he has to actually get to the river in order to shove his pairs there). How wide do you feel he's calling your flop bet? I feel it's probably going to be pretty wide, as I mentioned before, and I'm inclined to think you agree with me if he could be shoving the river with any pair (and not necessarily Kx or better). If we suppose he peels with pocket pairs in which there's only one overcard to the board and folds everything that whiffs, then it's impossible to try and construct a range for him where betting the flop shows an immediate profit. Nothing better will fold except perhaps AT AJ and AQ (that aren't diamonds)... maybe 22... but this is a small part of his possible range just giving him most pairs and decent aces (and we can safely assume IMO he's at least that wide and probably wider).
I'm not saying don't bet the flop (although given things like effective stacks, villain's profile, his reraise, etc an argument can be made for taking the card and seeing if he checks a second time) and I'm not saying it's all that bad. I don't believe it's profitable though by itself so if the idea was to give up afterward unimproved you may just want to save yourself the bet. Stacks are such that you obv don't need 3 streets to make a play at this pot if you're intent on winning it anyway. Betting the flop makes more sense to me if you're going to shove the turn. Your notion that you're going to stack this player if an ace appears suggests taking the free card IMO since you still have two streets to stack him if you bink.
Originally Posted by LD1977
Half pot needs folds only 33% of the time so this can't be too bad. Besides, this is my usual cbet size if I have something since this way I get short stacks committed and stack them easily.
Well, the 33% thing would be more accurate if the street was otr, and that you knew for certain villain's hand was best. If your cbet sizing gets short stacks committed to the pot so you can stack them, then I suggest a different sizing here, or not cbetting at all, as you have A9o on a flop that missed you by a country mile. Don't worry about a superfish who likely thinks on about the zeroth level exploiting you until it actually happens.
I wasn't being critical of the bet sizing otf at all in my other post btw I just don't think betting there is going to get many folds. You knew already I can get quite long winded over relatively minor things, so I won't apologize for it this time. I will apologize to everyone else though who tried to read though this thinking there was anything good in here lol. Suckers.