AQ - nut flush on paired board

It's tough but against unknown I would probably fold; against aggressive players definitely call. Generally fold if you don't like variance.
I don't think he's bluffing with this shove. 77 and 66 have you beat, JT too of course, but he can also play any other Jx like that or float you with sth like 98s that hit on OTR.

My preferred line would be check/call OTR (~up to potsize) to still get some value from weaker hands (and sometimes bluffs) without getting in such a difficult spot where you have to invest your complete stack.

I`m not folding nut flush although it`s really possible to lose here

Why do you donk river? What bluffs do you have when taking this line?

Originally posted by kfcsekirata
I`m not folding nut flush although it`s really possible to lose here
Question is: How probable is "really possible"? What kind of hand is Villain going to play like this?
Let's give him a range:
66-77,TT,AJ,KJ,JTs,98s --> With this range it would be an easy call (>60% equity)
I actually don't think he will shove with just Jx trips, so:
66-77,TT, JTs,98s --> 27% equity and you need 77,5/200BB=38% (+X for the rake) --> not an easy call

Originally posted by Swish29
Why do you donk river? What bluffs do you have when taking this line?

For value obviously. If villain checks behind that would be terrible, IMO.
I rarely if ever bluff here.

Your decision I guess, but nut flush on a paired board is a great opportunity to let villain bluff his sets and straights (and worse flushes)
River is check/call IMO

If he checks behind it is no tragedy.
If he shoves it most likely is one.

I can think of very, very few times when someone shoved in such a situation when they didn't have it.
Esp at NL 2

Originally posted by monteCarlol

Originally posted by Swish29
Why do you donk river? What bluffs do you have when taking this line?

For value obviously. If villain checks behind that would be terrible, IMO.
I rarely if ever bluff here.

It's obvious for me as well that you are value-betting, that's not what I was trying to ask.

I meant it more like "What do you think betting here accomplishes for your range?", why lead with nut flush here when you would never want to lead with QQ+? It's a disaster if villain check backs when you have JT or TT, do you also lead these hands? What do you think calls a bet that would check behind otherwise?

Originally posted by Swish29
I meant it more like "What do you think betting here accomplishes for your range?", why lead with nut flush here when you would never want to lead with QQ+? It's a disaster if villain check backs when you have JT or TT, do you also lead these hands? What do you think calls a bet that would check behind otherwise?

I know it is a weird line. With QQ+ I would bet on the turn. I guess I am hoping that villain calls with any 2pair or trips and worse flushes. 99-77, A6, AT, QT, KT etc...

Flushes and trips bet river themselves so betting here to value these hands does not accomplish very much. Also, do you realize how out of line a villain would have to be to show up with A6 river? Why would someone call 88 or QT? What do you represent?

If you think villain has A6 when he calls flop, then he could have A5-A2, A8-A9, and by betting you lose a lot vs these hands. If you think he has KT flop, he likely has KQ as well, if you bet he will likely fold.

Seems to me that when you bet, to don't take more money vs hands you beat than when you check. Some part of his calling range bets for value anyway, and he will not bluff you as much as if you had checked

I think, you are right. Haven't thought about villain's range well enough.
I heard the other day from a pro on some podcast that river decisions are the ones that effect the overall EV the most.
River skills relativize your skills on all the other streets potentially in both a positive and a negative way.

Originally posted by monteCarlol
I heard the other day from a pro on some podcast that river decisions are the ones that effect the overall EV the most.

Interesting, I heard a pro say the opposite. His reasoning was that the river spots are mostly very specific and often close, but since these spots overall don't occur often, it is far most costly to make small (in $/hand) mistakes that occur frequently. For instance, if you fold too much your blinds, or don't steal enough, or fold to 3bet too much, fold to cbet too much in general etc. it will cost you much more than check/calling or bet/folding this river.

Originally posted by TheDudeRoyale
Generally fold if you don't like variance.I

I think that's is also crucial. What type of "investor" you are.
The fact that you checked the turn, puts me on a more check/call mode.

Ugly spot, but with your 38% pot odds, I find it hard to believe that in NL2 there are 2 bluffs for every 1 value shove he does (unless you are up against a maniac gambling)

Originally posted by Swish29

Originally posted by monteCarlol
I heard the other day from a pro on some podcast that river decisions are the ones that effect the overall EV the most.

Interesting, I heard a pro say the opposite. His reasoning was that the river spots are mostly very specific and often close, but since these spots overall don't occur often, it is far most costly to make small (in $/hand) mistakes that occur frequently. For instance, if you fold too much your blinds, or don't steal enough, or fold to 3bet too much, fold to cbet too much in general etc. it will cost you much more than check/calling or bet/folding this river.

That sounds reasonable, too. Anyway, here is the reference: https://thepokergrid.com/2020/04/15/the-grid-034-ft-matt-hunt-ten-six-offsuit/ (starting from min 25:45)