$1.50 NLHE STT: Final three - how would you have played this hand?

Villian Stats (VPIP/PFR/AF): 32/14/1

HUD stats over 109. Villain has been fairly tight/cautious.
I think I was fine up to the river but then I'm not sure. What do you think?


pokerstars, $1.29 + $0.21 - Hold'em No Limit - 100/200 (25 ante) - 3 players
Replay this hand on Upswing Poker

BU: 3,362 (17 bb)
SB: 4,992 (25 bb)
BB (Hero): 5,146 (26 bb)

Pre-Flop: (375) Hero is BB with 3♣ 8♣
BTN calls 200, SB calls 100, Hero checks

Flop: (675) A♣ J♦ 7♦ (3 players)
SB checks, Hero checks, BTN checks

Turn: (675) 3♠ (3 players)
SB checks, Hero checks, BTN checks

River: (675) 8♥ (3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets 300, BTN raises to 600, SB folds, Hero raises to 4,921 (all-in), BTN calls 2,537 (all-in)

check, check,check
as played fold river. he wont call any weaker hand

Just call river bet, he can have a lot of hands that beat you.

I think I like a lead out on the flop for about 400. We've picked up equity and with everyone limping preflop and us checking our range is literally ATC so we could very easily represent a lot of weird stuff here and no one else seems to want the pot.

As played on the turn I like the river bet, but I',m just flatting the minraise and hoping to bluffcatch.

Almost bottom two is not awesome

In the end you have 3rd and 5th two pair. Not great. You have to KNOW villain is bluffing but you said he's been playing tight, so why the shove? That is poker zero-oh-one (001) - don't shove into someone who only calls with a better hand if your holding is midland. It has showdown value but not a lot.

Final table, three players, 83s is not the hand with which you want two players in the pot (lipmers), you don't want play with 83s really, check is pretty good in this situation, you don't incur additional costs, watch flop for free but if you would bet I'm sure you will win pot in around 45% situation, it's enough. Let's focus on the hand, if you check and see draws to flush or straight...check is good, behind you is an only one player who didin't bet preflop, so, what can he have? not Ax because raise preflop is obvious, preium hands fall away, suited connectors are probably, you don't want bet on this board why? nobody belives you, you were limped. next>>> only call on the river, you should be very happy if you win this pot. 8 with weak kicker and you push all-in? irresponsibility.

I would have played similar but the villain river min raise tells us it's a value raise he must have flopped something nice and waited for someone to get a piece so he can get a little value. So i would just flat the min raise instead of going all in on the river. I'm not good at folding even when i know i should.

Can you tell us why you chose to rrai on the river in this spot?

As played, just call the river. No need to jam there. I think I'm putting in a 1/2-2/3 pot size bet on the turn though. You picked up a pair, nobody has shown interest in the pot, and as another poster noted...you can have literally ATC. You probably take it down with a turn bet. I feel like villain probably had 78 or 9 10. 78 might not fold on the turn but 9 10 would very likely fold and not hit his straight.

just call the re-raise on the river, cause opp can has 9T or J8 as an example.

no doubt I would have played check check check call ... you have a couple very weak pairs and he does not stop very often an attack if he did not have a middle hand, for example Jx instead if you play check, he will bet with weaker hands and with all his lanterns.

Bet turn small, our 1st river bet should be for 500, when we get raised we should just call.

Turn you must bet. You dont need good hand to bet turn. River 3bet-push complete nonsense.

Who won hand

LuisBoaC said:

River: (675) 8¢¾ (3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets 300, BTN raises to 600, SB folds, Hero raises to 4,921 (all-in), BTN calls 2,537 (all-in)

Click to expand...

I'd be interested in knowing who won hand in the end. I wouldn't put him on better 2 pair or trips cause why would he slow play to river like that. I'm thinking he only had pair aces. Who won?

Slow play gets a stack!

MiCephia said:

I'd be interested in knowing who won hand in the end. I wouldn't put him on better 2 pair or trips cause why would he slow play to river like that. I'm thinking he only had pair aces. Who won?

Click to expand...

Thank you for posting.

You ask why slow play? 83 goes for stacks! I would slow play too. Adjusting to your opponents is a winning strategy. Final 3 means I have played you for a while and I know your weaknesses.

83 going for stacks is a weakness.
Unless it is a soul read where the poster knew villain will call off with AK or AQ and only has AK or AQ

Hope this helps

I think the all-in is unnecessary. Would they call that with a single pair? Re-raising to a smaller sum saves chips, but even then, it is hard to imagine a call with a worse hand. Probably just best to call their raise.

Hi all, thanks for the input everyone. I was disappointed with my shove on the river. To answer a couple of questions; I can't say why I shoved, other than lack of concentration now that we were in the money and not thinking past my 2-pair. Villain had 9T for the straight. Looking back I think I should have called the river, the pot odds are too good to fold with 2-pair but a re-raise is probably only being called by better.

Yeah I think everyone collectively hit the nail on the head here. Even with the small raise, villain is representing only hands that beat us on this runout. And even if he can have some bluffs... he's never calling with those when we jam. The term for this is that he's "polarized" (yes, even with his small sizing) because people just don't take this line with one pair, and ALL his two pairs or better beat us.

Now, I don't expect to run into bluffs here too often either, but that's okay at this sizing - we don't have to win too often. So we've removed jam, and removed fold, which only leaves call. Pretty easy call on river imo, and the stack sizes are such that we can still battle it out 3 handed here after losing this pot. But after jamming... not so much.