Got myself in a jackpot with Big Papa

Against these types of V's, I'm not looking to take aggro lines and bloat pots with speculative hands OOP. I'm just checking my option or limping from the blinds, and only putting money in when I have decent equity.

So a few things:

1. Description of villain wasn't just that he was a good reg. that played higher but: "House LAG. Really good player according to the people I consider good players. He has no problem putting in stacks."

2. Not sure how many people you've played with that play significantly higher, and sometimes even just normally plays 2-5 but are now at 1-2, but they mostly fall into two categories: a) Super solid disciplined regs. playing similar games everywhere based on big blinds (very few). b) I don't care about money here, so who cares if I punt call/bluff 200bb. To be fair the second group isn't always as bad as that implies, some might be just a bit too loose everywhere and bluff a bit too much.

3. If someone is used to playing 5-10+ with timed rake then playing 1-3 with pot rake their normal ranges are too loose/cally anyway.

Pretty much all of which would push me towards playing more defensively OOP and not trying to bluff bare gutter ball draws on a paired board.

ok but the wider you think he is pre the more pressure you should put on him postflop. you can't just really try to logic random heuristics in wide range spots (ie im never going to bluff). most of the thread is making really weird assumptions about the villain that aren't included anywhere in the op. either people think hes under 3betting the spot by 80+% because obviously players get much more loose passive when they move down in stakes (one guy confusing bb 3b ranges vs positions other than bvb), or he's going to defend with 100% of hands preflop and never fold any of them after the flop at any point (because obviously players turn into hyper aggro whales when they move down in stakes??). neither of those really make sense for someone described as a very good player. even you're i think projecting that the guy doesn't care about money and is here to just donk off his stack with air which isn't implied anywhere in the description. people who are good at poker don't randomly lose their knowledge and minds and decide lol it would be really fun to run bad bluffs vs low stakes players to stroke my ego or wow it would be fun to burn money. i don't know anyone that thinks like that to be honest. the entire description ive seen of villain is lag and that he can 4b light and put in his stack. if you think he randomly turns into a whale when playing lower entirely based on that, theres a chance you're right but (much) more likely you're going to adjust in a way where you lose a significant amount of ev against him.

dunno its a weird forum where everyone seems to want to post really lengthy replies based on very little while absolutely refusing to look at what the right answer is in a vacuum. consequently any time a hand is posted vs someone described as good everyone just wants to avoid him / completely alter strategy / leave the game. i just don't really understand how you think that leads to any kind of actual improvement.

You do a lot of criticizing of the advice other people give, but you're not really giving advice on how you think the hand should have been played.

How would you play this hand pre? Limp? Fold? Raise?

How would you play the flop? The turn? The river?

i answered that earlier man. its a pure open pre (or at least can be simplified to such), its a mix otf between small and x, and (having decided to bet the flop) its a pure bet for ~2/3 pot ott. i dont really see any reason to deviate from any of this, and really all of the assumptions you guys are making (defends way too much pre, over defends flop) should make you want to bet the flop and turn more, not less. the hand is mostly a follow through on a brick q river. if somehow you check the turn and he checks, you always bluff this combo on this river

the hand isnt really complicated or note worthy but if you dont study / play online you probably have extremely minimal experience in bvb spots and they play much different than any other dynamic because both players are so wide

Okay. I'm not arguing with you. Just the opposite. Going back and thinking about the hand more, I like your line here better.

I'm okay admitting I was wrong when I thought he wouldn't be calling flop as wide as A5o. I would guess he'd fold to the turn bet you're advising.

How are you playing the river Q once turn checks through? Are we going to bet with J8s here, or are we giving up and checking?

If we give him credit for being good enough to be playing close to equilibrium, is he supposed to call a river bet with A5o?

~almost pure folds turn facing barrel.

if turn goes x/x, mixes otr facing half pot

im not trying to be mean or combatitive. im assuming things in a public setting are open to feedback (even the responses to the op). the actual hand, when its vs someone good, you really need to start from the lens of what does the solver do here. good people are going to play well enough that you're going to be unable to default to binary strategies that work well vs fish - im never going to bluff, if he calls he must have it, this guy will never fold ace high to me, my value bets should be smaller than my bluffs bc his range is weak, whatever.

the big thing in this hand is bvb ip is probably going to defend every ax otf, and like every kxss and qxss and jxss bd, most of which are not going to be able to do much facing a turn bet. also some gutters. then he basically has to pure defend underpairs / 4x / some random mid ace highs

Most player playing 1/3 (much less 2/5 or 5/T) have access to a $500 solver, and dont often deal with anyone who plays anywhere near solver level, and almost never play BvB.

There is some level of blind leading the blind here, and it sounds like you have a better understanding of solver answers than the rest of us. As someone who has a huge % of my hands played live, i will admit i have little experience facing anywhere close to gto level aggression, and it really is as simple as table changing even at 2/5. Theres absolutely no reason to play with this guy directly IP to you other than ego, the games are simply too soft.

you get one free solve a day on gtow! also like maybe thats the practical answer but do you think a guy with ~100 threads started here who's clearly looking to improve to some extent out of game is looking to be told sit out or to totally avoid the opposition, or for the "actual answer" / how to improve his thought process about the spot? i just dont see how the refrain of run away from good people and game select / valuebet fish actually leads to any kind of realistic path to improvement, and if thats the only answer whats the point of talking about poker / strategy at all?

Table and seat selection is one of most important parts of the game at live poker. My local casino regularly will have 4+ 2/5 tables running, and one of them will be 6+ big ego pros battling each other, with the others having maybe 1 pro a table. Its clearly this sort of “how else could i possibly improve?” Mentality that causes them to play at these sorts of tables, and its absolutely hurting their winrate, and im not convinced its helping them move up.

Theres a difference between having a pro at your table, and having a 10/20+ hyper aggressive pro playing way below where he usually does, directly IP to you. The latter is so ridiculously rare of a situation to deal with at 1/3 that you wont realistically learn anything you will still remember by the next time you play.

There isnt much of any reason to play against players like this unless either youre a pro, or you think its fun (cuz im all for maximizing fun for players who arent pros).