$2 NL HE 6-max: Was I wrong to call on the river here? Should I have bet on the turn ? Was the C-Bet wrong ?

Was I wrong to call on the river here? Should I have bet on the turn ? And if yes how much ?

Also confused about c-betting on flop. People always say to C-Bet after raising pre-flop but it felt like burning money when I did it. When do you c-bet on a flop and when do you avoid it ? Against what kind of player do you do it versus avoid it ?













Poker Hand #HD2959448908: Hold'em No Limit ($0.01/$0.02) - 2026/07/19 06:34:57
Table 'NLHWhite53' 6-max Seat #3 is the button
Seat 1: ec52d2b3 ($3.01 in chips)
Seat 2: f41b355 ($2.31 in chips)
Seat 3: d6361c9 ($1.5 in chips)
Seat 4: ac6ecab4 ($2 in chips)
Seat 5: Hero ($2.02 in chips)
ac6ecab4: posts small blind $0.01
Hero: posts big blind $0.02
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to ec52d2b3
Dealt to f41b355
Dealt to d6361c9
Dealt to ac6ecab4
Dealt to Hero [Jd Js]
ec52d2b3: folds
f41b355: raises $0.04 to $0.06
d6361c9: folds
ac6ecab4: folds
Hero: raises $0.12 to $0.18
f41b355: calls $0.12
*** FLOP *** [Kc 7h Ah]
Hero: bets $0.19
f41b355: calls $0.19
*** TURN *** [Kc 7h Ah] [Th]
Hero: checks
f41b355: checks
*** RIVER *** [Kc 7h Ah Th] [Jh]
Hero: checks
f41b355: bets $0.22
Hero: calls $0.22
f41b355: shows [Qh Ad] (a flush Ace high)
Hero: shows [Jd Js] (three of a kind, Jacks)
*** SHOWDOWN ***
f41b355 collected $1.12 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot $1.19 | Rake $0.05 | Jackpot $0.02 | Bingo $0 | Fortune $0 | Tax $0
Board [Kc 7h Ah Th Jh]
Seat 1: ec52d2b3 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 2: f41b355 showed [Qh Ad] and won ($1.12) with a flush Ace high
Seat 3: d6361c9 (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 4: ac6ecab4 (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 5: Hero (big blind) showed [Jd Js] and lost with three of a kind, Jacks

Preflop
As I have said before, you are 3-betting to small out of position. Go to at least 4x or in this case $0.24 to get some fold equity. You can also choose to just flat JJ from time to time even against a CO open.

Flop
A solver is likely "range betting" this flop, because its so good for your range. But if you are ever going to check, this hand is a good candidate, since its one of the worst possible flops for JJ. You dont even have a heart to give you a BDFD.

Turn
As played a clear check with intention to fold, if he bet.

River
Now you have a set, but there are 4 cards to both a straight and a flush. The opponent bet really small, and getting this good a price I think, I would also stick in the call, but pretty much hating the situation. Once in a while he might be betting an in between hand like two pair, which he should check, and we generally cant fold hands on the river to tiny bets, if they have just a sliver of showdown value. It is close though, and I dont think, it would be a significant mistake to fold either.

I ran a solver different variables as neither of you played GTO CO 2.5 bb--you 13.5 bb is GTO size
check 83% with the Jh. 97% no heart---exploit play would be 100% check vs a passive player which this player is when they flat AQo preflop.
GTO play CO folds A2- A9s- Exploit vs your sizing expect many of those hands to continue, as well as off suit Ax combos that is why we are 100% check.
Your sizing is fine on flop just not this hand- why? AA KK check so we have nuts in our check range which means no easy bluffs for the V and we check to protect the JJ equity on this board.
Luckily the solver does bet sometimes so we can solve this hand on flop.
On the turn is when solver bets 82% of range for half pot -JJ only checks one combo JhJc 15%

We cannot solve the river for JJ but solver is calling mostly straights because it expects bluffs to be balanced.

Exploit vs passive players = fold river. If they bluffed you, it would still not be a mistake to fold as their bluff frequency need only be slightly lower than GTO to make this a long-term losing call.

People often make that mistake about being bluffed- they assume catching bluffs has more value than folding in low frequency bluff spots-it does not.

Lol, don't listen to all the solver blah blah for 1c/2c. It's just recreational players having fun, and most decisions are going to be far from GTO. Just use your logic. 😄

When you 3-bet and get called, you'll sometimes be up against small pairs set-mining or suited connectors, but very often it's hands like KJ, KQ, AT+, etc. You're not even holding a heart, so I definitely think this flop is a check-call, depending on his sizing, and then an easy check-fold on the turn.

If I evaluate how the hand played out, I think that even if you were ever ahead on the turn, you're basically never ahead anymore on the river. He played his range pretty face-up and was clearly looking to get called there. You're not beating any queen, or any heart.

Easy fold at these stakes.

eetenor said:

I ran a solver different variables as neither of you played GTO CO 2.5 bb--you 13.5 bb is GTO size
check 83% with the Jh. 97% no heart---exploit play would be 100% check vs a passive player which this player is when they flat AQo preflop.
GTO play CO folds A2- A9s- Exploit vs your sizing expect many of those hands to continue, as well as off suit Ax combos that is why we are 100% check.
Your sizing is fine on flop just not this hand- why? AA KK check so we have nuts in our check range which means no easy bluffs for the V and we check to protect the JJ equity on this board.
Luckily the solver does bet sometimes so we can solve this hand on flop.
On the turn is when solver bets 82% of range for half pot -JJ only checks one combo JhJc 15%

We cannot solve the river for JJ but solver is calling mostly straights because it expects bluffs to be balanced.

Exploit vs passive players = fold river. If they bluffed you, it would still not be a mistake to fold as their bluff frequency need only be slightly lower than GTO to make this a long-term losing call.

People often make that mistake about being bluffed- they assume catching bluffs has more value than folding in low frequency bluff spots-it does not.

Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing this analysis. Its interesting, that the old school approach of checking JJ on this terrible flop is actually confirmed by the solver. Also that when the solver occationally bet JJ, then it continue betting the turn basically turning third pair into a bluff, because now some better hands might actually begin to fold. But of course we dont need to make that decision, if we check the flop, as the solver recommends.

As for the river I dont think, it matters to much in the long run, if we call or fold to this sizing. My main reason for calling would not even so much be, that I expect to see a lot of bluffs betting 30% pot. Its more, that maybe the opponent is so bad, that he bet a hand like AK, because he has no idea, what he is doing, and I dont want to get "value bluffed". Anything much larger than those 30% pot and I just snap fold though.

The reason we study solver solutions is not to look at what solver does and replicate it vs non-solver Villains. There is a why behind the actions that why, which is math based, can be adapted for and applied to any player. You study the solve to find the why, that is your solid base from which you then use table dynamics and player pool data to determine your best action. You cannot exploit from no base.

As @fundiver199 stated JJ bets the turn to bluff better hands-as well as that we also achieve equity denial.

Frequency of success not occurrence of success is why we study solvers and that is what the solver told us. Our frequency of success (winning the pot) by betting JJ on flop is low. We do it only 15% of the time. Therefore, our frequency of winning pot on turn is also low. That is our why!