Straight on river on flushy board

[Bombjack]

Do you call?
Opponent is 51/17/1.3

Seat 1: Bombjack_x [ , ] ($75.85 in chips)
Seat 3: apuva75 ($48.75 in chips)
Seat 5: ReVeN69 ($12.10 in chips)
Seat 8: Villain ($49.25 in chips)
ANTES/BLINDS
ReVeN69 posts blind ($0.25), Villain posts blind ($0.50).

PRE-FLOP
Bombjack_x bets $2, apuva75 folds, ReVeN69 folds, Villain calls $1.50.

FLOP [,, ]
Villain bets $1.50, Bombjack_x has been watching too many Green Plastic videos and bets $7, Villain calls $5.50.

TURN [ ]
Villain checks, Bombjack_x checks.

RIVER []
Villain bets $40.25 and is all-in, Bombjack_x...

 

[PopDog60]

i would call, put him on 66 or QK
i dont think hes got flush..... although "51/17/1.3" might means something i dont use those poker programs or w/e and dunno what the means.. but most people would have bet at the turn with a low flush.. checked to you, like he did if he had a set.. hoping for you to bet, took a free card and prob made best hand...."i think" --- famous last words

 

[blankoblanco]

i would call, put him on 66 or QK

What about the hand makes you even consider KQ or any Kx that doesn't make 2 pair? That is probably the absolute last thing I put him on. This would be an incredibly bizarre way to play top pair. Almost unfathomable.

I strongly think villain has the flush, but given the play in these, I don't think you can rule out two pair or some set.

Here's how I look at it: if he doesn't have the flush, but some other good hand, his reason to check the turn is probably fear that you check-raised him on a flush draw and hit it on the turn. So if he doesn't have the flush, this action indicates he fears it from you. Now you check behind. This certainly makes it less likely that you have the flush, but given that you have position and the pot is decently sized, it's certainly possible you can check behind with the nuts here. If he was scared of the flush on the turn, I can't think he's going to see your check behind and think, "Oh, he for sure, 100% doesn't have it, so I'll just push all-in". The turn and river action just don't seem to be consistent with 2 pair or a set.

It just looks pretty consistent with how I see a turned flush played at this level (and not just any flush... I'd guess he has the nuts), but then again, online donks always manage to surprise me

 

[Dingodaddy23]

wow this is very close. I would probably timebank all the way down and fold, 1.3 is a very low aggression factor. Also, why didnt you bet the turn? On the flop you bluffed, where you just giving up on this turn?

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

I time bank it and eventually call on the basis that villain's stats are indicative of a horrible player, and horrible players will do this silly overbet shove thing here with anything from a flush to K3o, maybe worse.

Oh and what's with the flop bluff-raise against a calling station? Seems very spewy.

 

[Bombjack]

Well, betting into the raiser often indicates something less than top pair. I hadn't really checked his stats so I didn't take his calling station tendencies into account. I was definitely firing again on the Turn if it hadn't been a heart... but a flush draw was definitely a possibility and it seemed a bit risky. Maybe a small information bet would have been appropriate, but really I felt I was pretty much done with the hand after he called the flop raise. If he checks the river as well, I can probably knock him off a Jack with a reasonable bet.

 

[Bombjack]

I called and he had . So I was right that he didn't have a King - good raise on the flop. I was also right not to follow through on the Turn. Just wrong to not follow my read and fold second best on the river.

On second thoughts though, maybe an "information" bet on the turn would have been appropriate to see if I get raised.