1/3NL: Villain's Tentative Call Turns into a Snap Shove; Shall We Bluff-Catch?

It's about dinner time, weekday, local card room. Stacks have been flying all across the table left and right, but it seems to mostly be because the dealer's dealing hot cards and not because I'm at a table of maniacs. I'm the only one consistently on the winning end.

Hero sits on $2k. I've raised 4 or 5 times already this orbit, and it has notably affected the number of cold callers I'm getting and how quickly they're coming along.

Villain (~$260) in this hand has been at the table for an hour, maybe two. He kinda seems like your stereotypical casino rat; late 50s-early 60s, mustache, balding, kevlar jacket, smelled like cigars when he first sat down. The type of person I'd imagine is usually there to bet on the horsies. I haven't seen him before. He's already over-committed to Kings at one point this session and has been way more tilted over a fairly standard spot than the more competent live regs would. I don't expect him to play super predictably, but I'd be surprised if his idea of spew is anything other than over-committing to a pair. Which might make the title of this thread a bit of a head-scratcher ...

OTTH:

Hero is dealt ThTc in EP. Villain limps to us, and we make it $15. 4 players snap call.

The flop ($72) comes Jh 3s 2h. It checks to hero who makes it $45. I could maybe check a street and vbet a blank turn for fatter value, especially since I have the Th redraw, but the players left to act were capable of stabbing at the pot and I expected to get a lot of calls with random pairs and draws.

It folds to villain (we're now HU), who almost folds without much thought. Then, he reconsiders, looks out of the corner of his eye to notice it's me who's betting, and goes into the tank. Nothing about his tank is exaggerated or showy. He doesn't at any point seem to be considering a raise. If he's Hollywooding, then he's doing it with a subtlety that is unprecedented among his demographic. Villain finally puts $45 in the middle and checks dark. For this thread to go anywhere, you'll have to trust my very strong read that villain's first instinct was to fold.

The turn ($162) is the 7s. I make it $54, and villain immediately announces "All-in." I bet the turn figuring his range is pretty much exclusively second pairs, whiffed overs, some 7x gutshots and maybe a smattering of FDs, so I can either string him along a bit more or make him surrender his equity.

It's $153 more to call. Hero fold or calls?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surviva316

Villain (~$260) in this hand has been at the table for an hour, maybe two. He kinda seems like your stereotypical casino rat; late 50s-early 60s, mustache, balding, kevlar jacket, smelled like cigars when he first sat down. The type of person I'd imagine is usually there to bet on the horsies. I haven't seen him before. He's already over-committed to Kings at one point this session and has been way more tilted over a fairly standard spot than the more competent live regs would. I don't expect him to play super predictably, but I'd be surprised if his idea of spew is anything other than over-committing to a pair. Which might make the title of this thread a bit of a head-scratcher ...

It folds to villain (we're now HU), who almost folds without much thought. Then, he reconsiders, looks out of the corner of his eye to notice it's me who's betting, and goes into the tank. Nothing about his tank is exaggerated or showy. He doesn't at any point seem to be considering a raise. If he's Hollywooding, then he's doing it with a subtlety that is unprecedented among his demographic. Villain finally puts $45 in the middle and checks dark.

The turn ($162) is the 7s. I make it $54, and villain immediately announces "All-in." I bet the turn figuring his range is pretty much exclusively second pairs, whiffed overs, some 7x gutshots and maybe a smattering of FDs, so I can either string him along a bit more or make him surrender his equity.

It's $153 more to call. Hero fold or calls?

---

I think the problem here is that this type of player's game may be built almost exclusively on Hollywooding, because that's what poker is to him.

Quote:

---

For this thread to go anywhere, you'll have to trust my very strong read that villain's first instinct was to fold.

---

I mean, ok. I feel you. I'll go with your read here.

And yes his range is almost exclusively 2nd pairs and some draws. Your turn bet is fine, targeting those hands. The problem is that you've made it so easy for him to call down with 99- that you have to seriously reconsider what his range is when he ships instead.

(the truth is I don't see this type of player really folding 99 or whatnot on the flop either so once again I want to lean toward a Hollywood, but I guess I already agreed to not give up that fight)

yes you're getting a good price, yes he'll show up with some random junk and no, he's not repping much of anything. I still want to fold the turn. I've made plenty of hero calls in similar spots because "lol u rep like 3 combos" and he shows me 77.

Also I feel you're going to get so much value out of this type of player, either when you crack his overpair or when he limp-calls, check-folds flop or when you have him outkicked that I am certain you can fold here and actually realize your edge over him in the span of a session.

I mean, it'd be boring for me to blanket forbid any discussion of any possibility of a strong flopped hand, and I appreciate your input on that front. What I meant is that while I riddle most of my live HHs with 100 soft reads and tells that make me lean slightly one way or the other that I felt very strongly about this one and was willing to bet a lot of money on it.

I feel near certain he wasn't Hollywooding; all of his actions were furtive, and as far as he could tell, I didn't notice anything other than it took a bit of time. He didn't sigh; he didn't take his chip protector off his cards and poise his cards to flick them across the table only to pull them back; he didn't count out $45 and slam them in frustration; he didn't do any of that. Even him noticing that I was the bettor was done out of the corner of his eyes instead of him turning his head.

All that being said, you can absolutely still feel that it's more likely that he put on an Oscar Award Winning performance iwth 33 than it is that he's going bananas with ATss or KQo or whatever.

BTW, just to push you even further to fold, about 30 seconds into my tank villain gave me permission to call with my hearts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surviva316

BTW, just to push you even further to fold, about 30 seconds into my tank villain gave me permission to call with my hearts.

---

yeah wtf, hand over IMO

in b4 he had 76hh

i mean no, he doesn't have that. i'm folding.

Betting turn is pretty thin because you're likely to win a bluff from the flush draws when they miss if you check. In a way you make more money from those hands because you don't have to give them 20% of your turn bet as equity. You safely fold when they improve and call when they don't.

Similarly, you're unlikely to win more than one additional bet from the second pair type hands. If you check turn and get a decent river, you'll be able to bet against them and they'll likely call. Moreso, you'll be able to bet larger into a more capped range.

I bet a bit smaller on the flop as well. As played when he shoves it's a really gross spot. As baudib said, his worse made hands are a lot more likely to call than raise. So you're basically drawing to 2 outs a lot or he has some sort of 12+ out draw.

A note on your flop read. Suppose a normal players calling range to a bet into a 5 way pot has top pair or better 30% of the time. And suppose your read on him was 80% accurate. That would leave him with 6% of top pair and better hands. Suppose that when facing your bet on the turn, he's only shoving 20% of his range. This would have you drawing to two outs 40% of the time. Just sayin'.