$1.65 NLHE MTT: Fold the Nuts Flush?

[sundizzel]

Any thoughts here on how easy you'd find it to fold the nuts flush in this spot? I talked myself into calling down the full house...

I guess what it came down to is, in the end, I was thinking he's likely got 7 combos of 55, 77, QQ; and maybe some Q10 (I wasn't sure about this). I felt like it was hard for him to have 55 because we're blocking it a bit, and I felt like it's really hard for him to call my big turn bet clearly representing a flush when he simply has the set (all of which 55, 77, and QQ he literally cannot have a club for any type of backdoor). The Q10 combos would have felt even less plausible, as they couldn't be clubs either after the turn and, given the betting, a simple top two pair (top pair, fourth kicker at the flop) seems unlikely. Therefore, they're left with a lot of flush combinations that we beat or a Kc missed backdoor...

Once that river drops pairing the board, though, and they lead shove the rest of their stack, my stomach drops. It seemed obvious they had the full house, but I call to beat the worse flush draw thinking it was too hard for them to through the turn (which you can see is a 1:4 dog for the set) with the set.

Anyways, I'm looking for any input as to how the hand could have been played better at any point throughout the hand. Thanks in advance for any advice!

Winning Poker, Hold'em No Limit - 1,500/3,000 (375 ante) - 8 players
Replay this hand on CardsChat - https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/5qPRUmq

UTG (Hero): 322,367 (107 bb)
UTG+1: 250,995 (84 bb)
MP: 467,232 (156 bb)
MP+1: 274,730 (92 bb)
CO: 250,000 (83 bb)
BU: 342,770 (114 bb)
SB: 105,958 (35 bb)
BB: 264,070 (88 bb)

Pre-Flop: (7,500) Hero is UTG with 5♣ A♣
Hero raises to 7,500, 2 players fold, MP+1 calls 7,500, 3 players fold, BB calls 4,500

Flop: (27,000) 5♥ 7♣ Q♣ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets 6,750, MP+1 calls 6,750, BB raises to 42,188, Hero calls 35,438, MP+1 calls 35,438

Turn: (153,564) T♣ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets 76,782, MP+1 folds, BB calls 76,782

River: (307,128) T♥ (2 players)
BB bets 137,225 (all-in), Hero calls 137,225

Total pot: 581,578

Showdown:
BB shows 7♠ 7♥ (a full house, Sevens full of Tens)
(equity - Pre-Flop: 66%, Flop: 71%, Turn: 20%, River: 100%)

UTG (Hero) shows 5♣ A♣ (a flush, Ace high)
(Equity - Pre-Flop: 34%, Flop: 29%, Turn: 80%, River: 0%)

BB wins 581,578

 

[Sbrzz]

I know it sounds easy, but it was a fold on that river.

On the flop he checks raise against two players, on the turn he calls and bets on the river.


What hand do you think he does this after all this action on the previous streets and this board with flush and folded cards ??

 

[eetenor]

Any thoughts here on how easy you'd find it to fold the nuts flush in this spot? I talked myself into calling down the full house...

I guess what it came down to is, in the end, I was thinking he's likely got 7 combos of 55, 77, QQ; and maybe some Q10 (I wasn't sure about this). I felt like it was hard for him to have 55 because we're blocking it a bit, and I felt like it's really hard for him to call my big turn bet clearly representing a flush when he simply has the set (all of which 55, 77, and QQ he literally cannot have a club for any type of backdoor). The Q10 combos would have felt even less plausible, as they couldn't be clubs either after the turn and, given the betting, a simple top two pair (top pair, fourth kicker at the flop) seems unlikely. Therefore, they're left with a lot of flush combinations that we beat or a Kc missed backdoor...

Once that river drops pairing the board, though, and they lead shove the rest of their stack, my stomach drops. It seemed obvious they had the full house, but I call to beat the worse flush draw thinking it was too hard for them to through the turn (which you can see is a 1:4 dog for the set) with the set.

Anyways, I'm looking for any input as to how the hand could have been played better at any point throughout the hand. Thanks in advance for any advice!

Winning Poker, Hold'em No Limit - 1,500/3,000 (375 ante) - 8 players
Replay this hand on CardsChat - https://www.cardschat.com/replayer/5qPRUmq

UTG (Hero): 322,367 (107 bb)
UTG+1: 250,995 (84 bb)
MP: 467,232 (156 bb)
MP+1: 274,730 (92 bb)
CO: 250,000 (83 bb)
BU: 342,770 (114 bb)
SB: 105,958 (35 bb)
BB: 264,070 (88 bb)

Pre-Flop: (7,500) Hero is UTG with 5♣ A♣
Hero raises to 7,500, 2 players fold, MP+1 calls 7,500, 3 players fold, BB calls 4,500

Flop: (27,000) 5♥ 7♣ Q♣ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets 6,750, MP+1 calls 6,750, BB raises to 42,188, Hero calls 35,438, MP+1 calls 35,438

Turn: (153,564) T♣ (3 players)
BB checks, Hero bets 76,782, MP+1 folds, BB calls 76,782

River: (307,128) T♥ (2 players)
BB bets 137,225 (all-in), Hero calls 137,225

Total pot: 581,578

Showdown:
BB shows 7♠ 7♥ (a full house, Sevens full of Tens)
(Equity - Pre-Flop: 66%, Flop: 71%, Turn: 20%, River: 100%)

UTG (Hero) shows 5♣ A♣ (a flush, Ace high)
(Equity - Pre-Flop: 34%, Flop: 29%, Turn: 80%, River: 0%)

BB wins 581,578

Thank U 4 Posting

The action on the flop suggests 2 pair+ this is a huge raise into the UTG bettor and a second caller not often done at this stake without 2 pair +.
If you have a read that this player will play AQ KQ QJ this way then u can not just think 2 pair + but it is that holding often at this stake.


With that in mind we have to not want the board to pair and we have to know that our A is live but could become a possible second best hand 2 pair vs set for example.



We make the flush on the turn and bet half pot which is 76k 1/3+ of the Villains stack leaving them and easy call turn -fold river situation unimproved- as you stated that it was an obvious flush sized bet. So we did not force our V to make a much of a mistake we gave them a simple easy play with their set. Maybe their is a better way to think about our turn sizing?

So on the turn our sizing vs a set could be protective of our stack small turn sizing larger bluffy looking river bet on unpaired boards

We could also make a much bigger bet on the turn if we think the V is going to give us credit for a flush and not stack off on the river. So we get more value when we are ahead and we know they are not going to fold a big hand on the turn.

As played on the river your thoughts seem correct- that this river shove was exactly what it was. So we have to fold when we know we are right.

Hope this helps

 

[300HPGOD]

The key to this hand is ranging the villain after they check raise on the flop. Their bet is 6x in size and is against two opponents. We have the nut flush draw so we know the villain cant have this. Would they be doing this with a Kx flush draw? I doubt it and it is almost never a bluff so that leaves a big hand of some sort. The weakest it could possibly be is a Qx where the x is a club and more that likely it is a set. Two pair goes out a bit because it would take Q7, Q5, 75 which are not hands that are always even calling pre flop. This makes the raise lean way more towards a set. We do have a set blocker which helps and I think QQ 3 bets pre so that makes sets harder but this still screams sets. I am not saying I am folding because I would have to be playing well at the time to fold and would depend on what I think of the villain and if they would be doing this with AQ. Even though sets are rare here due what is mentioned previously, if you are playing well this is a fold.

 

[fundiver199]

Preflop
I am fine opening any suited ace UTG, when stacks are a bit deep, like they are here. Sizing is fine as well, but you could also use 3BB with this stack size.

Flop
You flopped bottom pair with the nut flushdraw, and this is a really great hand. Not only can you improve to the nut flush, but you can also improve to a very well disguised trips or top and bottom pair. I like C-betting here, but I dont like this really small sizing. Even though you have a made hand, your goal is to get people to fold and/or build the pot for, when you improve. Your sizing looks more like a block bet, where you are trying to see the next card cheaply, and this is not the way, I am thinking about your hand. When you get raised, it is just a call though, because if you put in a 3-bet, you likely only get action from hands, that have you in bad shape.

Turn
You improve to the nut flush, and he check to you. Totally on board with betting, and also your half pot size. There is not much stack behind, so pretty easy to get it in on the river.

River
The board paired, and he donk-shoved. I am not loving this, but I am going to go against the majority here and say, that this is a mandatory call, and folding would be a huge mistake. First of all when facing a river bet the goal is not to win the hand, when we call. the goal is to win it often enough. So price is a crucial factor, which stangely everyone else have completely ignored. Here you have to call 137k to win 581k, so you only need to win somewhere between 1 out of 4 and 1 out of 5. This mean, that if you can find just 1 combo, you beat, for every 3 combos you lose to, then this is a call.

So with that out of the way lets try to put this guy on a range. First there are the hands, you lose to, which is obviously boats. And sure this is mainly, what he is representing. But people dont always have, what they represent. People bluff, or people just play poorly or weird. Especially in a micro tournament like this. And moreover there are not that many realistic boats, he can have.

Here it matters, that it was turn and river, that paired the board, because this mean, that none of the flopped two pair boated up. People are typically not checkraising second or third pair, and QQ would usually 3-bet preflop. Which leave 55 (1 combo), 77 (3 combos) and maybe now and then QT, but that hand would usually just call on the flop rather than checkraise. So maybe we add 2 combos of QT just to be fair and round it out. Thats a total of 6 realistic combos, we lose to, so now we need to find 2 combos, we beat.

Could he have a worse flush and play it this way? I think so. Heros block-bet on the flop looked really weak, and the guy behind just called, so he also look really weak. For me any decend draw would be check-raised on the flop in this situation. Then he hits his flush on the turn and decide to check-call to play a little bit tricky. I do that also sometimes, because it can be difficult to get 2 streets of value with a turned flush. And then on the river, he is kind of confused with the situation, so he just move all in. KJ, K9, J9 are 3 potential combos of flushes already.

And then there are bluffs. This is for sure an underbluffed line, but that does not mean, people are NEVER bluffing. So we still need to look at, which hands could potentially be turned into bluffs. If he is bad, then maybe he check-call the turn with his OESD´s, even though the board is now monotone. Wont say this happen very often, but there are potentially 32 combos of 86 and 64, that could be played (badly) this way. So even if he only does this 5% of the time, then we are already close to be good enough to call. Or he could be turning 75 into a bluff, since it got counterfeited on the river. This is actually a hand, which is probably supposed to be played this way, since it block a lot of the full houses. Maybe not very likely to be happening in the micros, but still not impossible.

Conclusion
The only thing, I would do different in this hand, was to bet larger on the flop. This might actually also have made this entire discussion obsolete, because then the check-raise comes in larger, and you simply jam the turn with the nuts. On the river its one of those spots, where I am not happy about the runout or the action, but your hand is simply to good to fold to a small river bet, especially when your opponent can realistical only have a few different combos, that beat you.

 

[fundiver199]

By the way I recommend to not share the results, when you post a hand like this. Just stop the action at Villain donk-shoving and then ask people, what they would do facing that action. The reason is, it can be very difficult for people to abstact from the results, when they know them, and especially when the opponent turns over a very obvious hand.

If I was to guess his hand based on the action, and I could only guess one particular hand, I would have guessed 77. But just because this is, what he actually had, does not mean, its his entire range. It just mean, he had it this time. Its just the same as, if we call a 3-bet, and then at showdown our opponent shows us AA. That does not mean, he always have AA, when he 3-bets us. It just mean, he had it this time. So if for instance we had KK, and the board ran out low rags, and we got stacked, we probably played perfectly fine.

 

[7CardKillR]

Im not down sizing my c bet on the flop here. there are two players both of whom have shown a willingness to Play. if anything Im up sizing to the point where a turn Jam is a viable option if he now decides to check the turn with is a fairly uncommon line.
.

 

[andrestc]

By the way I recommend to not share the results, when you post a hand like this. Just stop the action at Villain donk-shoving and then ask people, what they would do facing that action. The reason is, it can be very difficult for people to abstact from the results, when they know them, and especially when the opponent turns over a very obvious hand.

If I was to guess his hand based on the action, and I could only guess one particular hand, I would have guessed 77. But just because this is, what he actually had, does not mean, its his entire range. It just mean, he had it this time. Its just the same as, if we call a 3-bet, and then at showdown our opponent shows us AA. That does not mean, he always have AA, when he 3-bets us. It just mean, he had it this time. So if for instance we had KK, and the board ran out low rags, and we got stacked, we probably played perfectly fine.

I agree with everything that Fundiver said, specially this bit. We all get a bit result oriented when those are included and I'd never fold here, specially on micro stakes.

 

[sundizzel]

Thanks to everyone for the input--it was a tough spot! It sounds like it ultimately is a call because we beat many more combinations than we lose to, even if we feel like there's a good chance they have the boat, not to mention the possibility of a bluff. Furthermore, the 4:1 odds on that river shove were more than enough to justify a nut flush call.

The primary improvement that could be made would be the flop bet sizing--it should have been bigger it seems. My go-to is generally a quarter-pot on the flop, proceeding geometrically to half-pots on the turn and river. However, this is the second post Fundiver has commented on (and I know he knows what he's talking about xD) regarding how strong flush draws should be playing more aggressively than I have been playing them. I'm not entirely sure, though, because I somewhat feel that the consistency of my 1/4, 1/2, 1/2 betting pattern in some ways disguises my hand strength, as I am able to do it both speculatively and for value. But I imagine I should be learning how to make more nuanced bets that more closely match my hand/range and/or target the villain's range.

I didn't know about showing the results--I only figured out about the CardsChat Hand Replayer yesterday, and I wasn't exactly sure what excluding the results would do. Going forward, I'll make sure to exclude the results.

Cheers all, and thanks again for the input!