Real opponent read · name changed

Mara · NLHE cash

One pair. Two river-bet receipts.

One was a recorded bluff. The evidence widens the river range without pretending two hands reveal the frequency.

Privacy receipt: real opponent file, anonymized. The raw dossier below is unchanged apart from the name.

2River receipts
2Configurations
UnknownFrequency
RetestArchived evidence

River range

One pair in both river-bet receipts.

HAND 2One pair

NLHE · SRP · multiway · in position

HAND 33One-pair bluff

NLHE · 3BP · multiway

What it proves

One pair reached both cited river-bet branches.

What it does not prove

No bluff frequency, calling threshold, position effect, or sizing response.

Next proof

Capture the next river bet with its branch, position, sizing, full line, and showdown status.

User hypothesis: “He can so easily have a flush here” remains a note, not a shown holding.

Evidence window: 35 checked NLHE cash hands, November 2017 through July 2019. The newest evidence is more than six months old, so this is Archived evidence: retest live.

Show the untouched synthesis output

The untouched raw read

Key Read

Range floor, not a frequency: one NLHE river bet included one pair in a multiway SRP while IP (Hand 2); another NLHE river bet included a one-pair bluff in a multiway 3BP (Hand 33).

Evidence window: 35 checked hands, Nov 2017-Jul 2019. STALE: newest evidence is more than six months old.

User Notes

  • User note: He can so easily have a flush here (Hand 33).

Counterexample

No cited hand directly contradicts the Key Read in the checked set.

Confidence

These outcomes prove range breadth in the cited lines. They do not establish frequency, position effects, or sizing response.

The two receipts

  1. Hand 2: one pair reached a river bet in a multiway NLHE single-raised pot while Mara was in position.
  2. Hand 33: a one-pair bluff reached a river bet in a multiway NLHE three-bet pot.

The user's note, kept in its lane

The source note says, “He can so easily have a flush here.” PokerReads preserves that as the user's hypothesis. It is not displayed as a shown flush, a confirmed holding, or proof of Mara's frequency.

Counterexample and limits

No cited hand directly contradicts the narrow range-floor conclusion. These outcomes prove range breadth in the cited lines. They do not establish frequency, position effects, sizing response, or a default Hero action.

Why this is worth saving

A range floor is not a solver output. It is a durable opponent memory: this player has arrived at a river bet with one pair in two different multiway configurations, including one recorded bluff. PokerReads keeps that fact available without inflating it into a tendency the file has not earned.

Start freeWhy PokerReads