Slowplaying to trap your opponent is one of the finest arts in poker. My opponent in this hand from a 7$ 27-180 man turbo SnG on PokerStars illustrate, how it should be done.

CardsChat Poker Hands Converter

Poor guy one question though. Why didn't you 3 bet the river? Flush on flush is very rare, this is a hand where you squeeze him into a tight spot in case he has an overpair, 2 pair and so on. Am I wrong?

Originally Posted by Badday94

Poor guy one question though. Why didn't you 3 bet the river? Flush on flush is very rare, this is a hand where you squeeze him into a tight spot in case he has an overpair, 2 pair and so on. Am I wrong?

I did not have a strong read on the guy, and when he raised the river, he was kind of saying, he also had a flush, or maybe once in a while he was bluffing. He really never should be raising with a hand like the one, he had, and I have no idea, what his logic was. With my specific hand it was much more likely for him to have a better flush than a worse flush, and therefore I felt, 3-betting would be an overplay. I actually did not even love the fact, he raised, so it was kind of a crying call. But as the outcome show, folding would have been to tight.

Theres also more to this hand than just slowplaying, its also bad playing. I almost never (cant get myself to use always or never when talking poker) limp in with a big hand in hopes for a limp re raise but if people do it Im fine with it... occasionally and not the default play. However, its criminally bad to slowplay pre and then also slow play on a flop where there is a draw. Then EVEN WORSE to only call your bet when there are two flush draws out there that they could get value from with a raise.

Slowplaying is not the devil, it has its places but people need to realize its something you cant do for multiple streets. I slowplay a street all the time to try to induce bluffs but if I dont get them then I am firing usually the next street, especially when draws come. Also if you are slowplaying and you get a bet from your opponent, normally you should raise it as your hand looks weaker than what it is and if your villain is bluffing you wont get any more anyway. Just rambling there but writing that we cant hate slowplaying or checking when we have it at times. We just need to capitalize on that play when we get villain to bet and if they dont, we need to start getting busy on the next street.

Originally Posted by fundiver199

I did not have a strong read on the guy, and when he raised the river, he was kind of saying, he also had a flush, or maybe once in a while he was bluffing. He really never should be raising with a hand like the one, he had, and I have no idea, what his logic was. With my specific hand it was much more likely for him to have a better flush than a worse flush, and therefore I felt, 3-betting would be an overplay. I actually did not even love the fact, he raised, so it was kind of a crying call. But as the outcome show, folding would have been to tight.

I agree and also the fact that with the cards on the board plus our 10 and 7 how many worse flushes could villain have that they opened limped? We are hoping they are 9x hearts but the 10,8,7, and 6 are all accounted for leaving 95, 94 etc that we beat or hoping they open limped with 54 hearts which I think is unlikely. Add to that, that if we re raise here should 2 pair be calling us (I agree that two pair should not be raising this river to begin with) or any one pair hand be calling us? They shouldnt be so its really a bet that you would make against a bad player (which we dont know as of now) or its a bet that is going to get a fold from all hands we beat and only get called by Ax and Kx of hearts (highly doubt villain would have Jx and check behind that flop).

Originally Posted by fundiver199

I did not have a strong read on the guy, and when he raised the river, he was kind of saying, he also had a flush, or maybe once in a while he was bluffing. He really never should be raising with a hand like the one, he had, and I have no idea, what his logic was. With my specific hand it was much more likely for him to have a better flush than a worse flush, and therefore I felt, 3-betting would be an overplay. I actually did not even love the fact, he raised, so it was kind of a crying call. But as the outcome show, folding would have been to tight.

I understand your thought process. You are right, he could have had a better flush by the way he played the hand overall. Flush on flush is pretty rare but happened to me multiple times and lost with king high flush against ace high flush. It's better to just call here since the pot is big enough already, no need to be greedy when you don't have a read on the guy.

Originally Posted by Badday94

I understand your thought process. You are right, he could have had a better flush by the way he played the hand overall. Flush on flush is pretty rare but happened to me multiple times and lost with king high flush against ace high flush. It's better to just call here since the pot is big enough already, no need to be greedy when you don't have a read on the guy.

In fairness since the pot was still so small, it was not totally unreasonable for him to raise some hands worse than a flush for value, like maybe the rivered straight or some weird two pair hands. But as HP300GOD says, in order to profitably 3-bet, we need him to not only have those non-flush value hands in his range, but also be willing to call a 3-bet with them. Which he will only do, if he is totally clueless.