So, I flopped the nut low

[CardSharpCook]

[ QUOTE ]
You think UTG+1, described by OP as such:
[ QUOTE ]
UTG+1 in this hand seems pretty standard. I haven't seen him in too many pots, and haven't seen anything special out of him.

[/ QUOTE ]
bets the numerous no pair+no draw hands you listed into a field of 6 on the flop, then 4 on the turn, and 3 on the river? I don't get how you think that's possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, do the math. Put your opponent on a range of hands, and assign % to each those probabilities based on the likelyhood of that hand existing.

Group 1:67,78,89,9t,jt,kt,k9s,k8s,k7s,k6s,k5s,j9,j8s,t8s ,86s
Group 2: 22-TT, k4s,54s,k3s,k2s, qt,qj,q9s
Group 3:JJ-AA, AK, AQ.

Group 1 makes about about 65% of the total, group 2 about 30%, group 3 about 5%, but is discounted to 2% because he is more likely to raise these hands.

He bets the flop. This makes group 1 far less likely than groups 2 and 3. I'd say the probs are now G1:35% G2:60% G3:5%

He bets a turn that pairs the board. This doesn't effect the probabilities very much, but lets say he gives up his overcard bluff 1 in 7 times. G1:30% G2: 65% G3:5%

He bets the flush river. Well, he will slow down with many hands here. However, he HAS to bet with G1 hands if he has any hope of winning with these holdings. G1:35% G2:60% G3:5%

Obviously these are all guestimated numbers. Come up with your own numbers if you like, but no more "you are on crack". Think about your answer before you reply. Almost every poker player will do this with G1 hands some of the time on this flop. True, some players won't, but people play poker because they like to bluff and outwit their opponents.

[Stork]

I didn't say you were on crack.

Anyway, I think you're way overestimating the probability of a G1 hand after his flop bet. I don't think he's betting the flop with most of those, except for maybe the ones that have straight and flush draws. In a field of 6, the weaker draws and 1 card draws are more apt to check and call, particularly the ones without high card strength.

I have some serious sleep to catch up on, but will get back to this tomorrow if you still disagree...

[CardSharpCook]

it has nothing to do with disagree/agree, it has to do with how you analyze a hand. you can't simply say, "he'd never do that," you have to put your opponent on a range of hands given how he played each street AND considering the likelyhood of each hand (if AK73 is on the board, there are only 3 combos of AA, but 12combos of AK = likelyhood of each, both of which would be played the same way to a point.) In this hand, we know he has a limping hand and that he bet every street while encountering no resistance. For many players (and given the turn card) his play is as consistant with JT as it is with 55. The question is, how often does he play a hand like JT this way? How often does he play 77 this way? You can then discount the G1, G2, G3 percentages, which are relatively fixed (these ARE the hands he limps), by the guestimates of how often he plays G1,2,3 hands this way.

If I can get you to accept this foundation for the argument, then you can argue that he plays a G2 hand like this 80% of the time (Maybe he checks the river with K2, or hopes for a chk/rz with a flopped set) and plays a G1 hand like this less than about 30% of the time. I think that would get you under the required 22% success rate for this bluff.

Not sure how coherent this post is....

[jogumon]

When I raised the river, I felt his most likely holding was a medium pocket pair. I felt there was enough chance that he would fold it to my raise, that I made the play at the pot. I did also have the benefit that he would clearly fold any busted draw, which still had me beat at the time.

[Subfallen]

What hand are you representing here besides a busted straight draw?!?

[CardSharpCook]

[ QUOTE ]
When I raised the river, I felt his most likely holding was a medium pocket pair. I felt there was enough chance that he would fold it to my raise, that I made the play at the pot. I did also have the benefit that he would clearly fold any busted draw, which still had me beat at the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, that's a really bad reason to raise the river. While you will find people who will fold a pair on the river, it is wrong for them to do so, and also very unlikely that they will do so. Basically, they'd have to announce, "I AM GORMIET!!" before I would try to river bluff to get them to fold a pair.

[Stork]

[ QUOTE ]
If I can get you to accept this foundation for the argument,

[/ QUOTE ]

The foundation is not the issue.

[ QUOTE ]
you have to put your opponent on a range of hands given how he played each street AND considering the likelyhood of each hand

[/ QUOTE ]

The issue is that you think he has a group 1 hand and plays it this way 35% of the time, I think it is <5%, more like 1% unless he is tilting.

[Stork]

[ QUOTE ]
I felt there was enough chance that he would fold [a medium pp] to my raise, that I made the play at the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're lying to yourself here. Replace 'felt' with 'hoped'. This is an extremely favorable board for a middle pp, and you haven't shown any aggression up until now, which makes no sense considering that any good hand you had would've raised earlier because of all the players in. Basically you're trying to rep AQ, but there is no way 88 is folding on a 2343Q board in a pot this size. Also, you're investing two bets into it.

[elindauer]

Particularly in a live game, this is an excellent bluff. The river may be an overcard to his pair too, so he has lots of ways to decide he's beaten and give up a made hand, not to mention the possibility that he is bluffing all the way.

For whatever reason, live players in Vegas seem particularly likely to laydown a made hand on the river. Take advantage and steal this pot.

good luck.
eric

[AffleckKGB]

[ QUOTE ]
9BBs, you're investing 2BBs, so he has to fold twice in 9 times.for this to be profitable or 22% of the time. I

[/ QUOTE ]

Replace 9 times with 11 times and 22% with 18.2% and I agree completely.