re: Poker & $50 NLHE 6-max: K9s flops flush draw + second pair with action
Apologies for being so slow getting back to this but moving house will do that to you.
I'm surprised that most of the discussion has been about the turn seeing as to me - aside perhaps from preflop - that was the most straightforward part of the hand and I don't really see the need to talk about it as I can summarise my thoughts with "What Zybomb said".
The flop, with hindsight especially, is really bad. Assume that we're going to take the line of calling the flop raise and then call-calling turn-river (which wasn't my plan at the outset of the hand, of course, which is why I say with hindsight), there's basically no reason for us to not just go crazy on the flop and at least almost guarantee we're getting money in with a fair amount of equity, or ideally getting a fold and going away happy.
River is a fold - everything but a bluff beats us, stuff like JT got there in terms of beating our hand at least, although I think JT is a little too marginal for most people to bet the river with. My thoughts at the time were "His bet sizing is weird - he's likely to be bluffing
", which is clearly a horrifically basic and contrived way of thinking.
More than one player played this hand horribly though, seeing as villain had K9 of diamonds and we bizarrely split the pot. Any thoughts on villain's play given his holding? I don't really tend to bother with appraisal of the quality of my opponents play, preferring of course just to use statistics and patterns as a basis for reads rather than littering my notes with hundreds of "HE GOOD" or "HE BAD" etchings, but given that we both had similar hands (I say similar seeing as we flopped a flush draw and he didn't), this would be an opportune moment for an edition of "Who butchered the hand the most?"