-
Great hand to pull @yamel ! Replying to @SteveFredlund first – I think you are correct that you should be bet/folding thin value because your foes are under-raising with bluffs. Slam dunk there. Plus you get the value paid when they call instead, which as you point out happens quite a bit relative to how often they would bet instead of checking behind for instance. So I think unless you are being bluff-raised enough to make it a factor (and none of us are in our player pools) then even if they are rarely bluffing you in this spot, if the sizing was bigger like a shove, you can theoretically exploitably fold to their unbalanced-strong range. That being said, the pot odds on this sizing are such that you almost have to ask yourself, as Steve does – is it simply always a Jack?
Now, if you know something about this opponent that makes you think they will raise with a marginal holding on this board, then of course it’s a different story. They aren’t bluffing, they’re just (poorly) value-raising in a bad spot without a clear idea of their value-target.
As for the rest of the hand, I think in a vacuum the turn bet is too big to accomplish your goals, as it seems to me that many of the hands you describe are folding to a pot-sized bet multiway on that runout, but you do describe them as sticky, so not sure about my take on that. But a smaller bet would likely get called at a higher frequency by the kinds of hands that you want to be getting money in against here – your King feels like it’s too strong to bluff with but not strong enough to get two streets of value on this runout in this limped pot multiway. Great hand!
