$5/10/20 KdJd OOP with top pair

Like I said to mlark, I admit it's been a while since I reviewed a lot of spots and I shouldn't be shot taking without reviewing a lot more spots.

whats the spr in your sim? what the spr in this hand? (it wont fold kx at this spr unless the river is real real bad).

SPR in the sim I think was about 1 on the river. Sim was 1/3 flop, 3/4 turn, all in river for about pot size if I recall. I'll double check when I'm at my computer later.

Hand I played I think river spr is about .75 if I made the turn call

i mean overall. if you're looking at 100bb sims, the spr is going to be like 5.5 which is going to lead to u playing too passively when the spr is actually 3 (like in this hand)

i would be very hesitant to approach a euro who has come to the usa to play midstakes professionally as a nit who never bluffs even if people are needling him about being tight. being too tight in the context of a midstakes reg is very different than never bluffing

You would have to look at the sim to see what villain's range looks like. A lot of times AsXs is going to give up river while a hand like Ah5h, Ah4h, Ah9h (probably whichever A suit is the same suit as the K and therefore blocking AKo is going to be important). But these hands will not arive to the river pure, they will either not 3bet pre pure or they won't bet turn pure, and some will give up river too.

The other thing that is important is that you are simming relevant ranges and stack depths. The SPR is lower like submersible said. However, where I would really go back to is preflop and I would really consider folding our hand. For reference, at 125bb 8 handed, when KJs gets faces 3b when we open UTG or UTG+1 to 3bb, we fold to 3b from next to act 3b to 9bb. Our iso range should be stronger than our normal open raise range from the CO, IE closer to an UTG open. And villain's 3b range is going to be tighter after we iso to 5bb than if we open raised from CO. If KJs opens to 3bb and is not even wanting to put in 9bb from that tighter range, then KJs might not want to be putting 16.25bb in the pot after we iso to 5bb and get 3b.

When you sim for lower SPR, you end up needing to stack off lighter. But preflop, you are still dealing with 125bb facing a tight 3b range. Postflop if you hit top pair with a K you may end up needing to stack off a lot. So preflop is really a big decision point where we should consider dumping KJs.

i don't think you should look at a 125bb pre solve given the open size / 3b size and what the spr will be if we call pre.

it seems more analogous to me to like idk 60 or 70 bb solve? which is going to have both parties playing way more aggro. the reg may not adjust to that but we probably should

Yes for postflop you need a lower SPR, but for preflop you should be considering different ranges and the full stack depth. I am running a preflop sim where a fish limps and it folds to CO at 2.5k effective 5/10/20. Here is the range I gave fish:

Here is the range solver gives CO for isoing to 100 (note it says 10bb because it considers 10 to be the BB since 20 is the straddle):

Here I nodelocked the pros 3b range in red, solver came up with his calling range. Note I used my default 3b size of 3.3x so it is actually to 330 and not 325 but that shouldn't matter:

Here is the solver's response in CO. I gave it a 2.5x 4b size and an all-in 4b size. I probably could have gone smaller on the 4b size because of how shallow we are after the 5x iso and 3.3x 3b, but it's probably not a big deal:

Solver is actually never calling KJs, but using it as a 4b bluff most of the time. I have been running the solve for about an hour now, and it started out saying calling KJs was negative EV, but now saying it has 0.03bb of EV (.0015 straddles). 4betting KJs is 0.71bb of EV. Note, I also ran this sim in a no rake environment. In a raked environment, I can only imagine it leans harder towards 4bet or fold there.

I do like the idea of 4betting KJs as a bluff here, but that assumes v will appropriately fold AQo and AJs, which I would expect a pro to do, especially because he probably doubts we would be 4betting him light if he has not played a ton with us and sees us as shot taking.

Also this depends on how accurate my 3b range for villain is. I gave him a really linear 3b range, all the KQs+, AQs+, AQo+, most of the AJs and KJs, half of the KTs and ATs, etc. I also gave him 50% of AJo, but he might actually just fold AJo. The more agro pros would 3b AJo though, so I thought giving him 50% would be reasonable. Similar sentiment with KQo but I gave him it at full frequency because that is much more common as a pure 3b from aggressive pros. Giving him these hands obviously makes calling KJs much worse, but makes 4betting better since there are so many offsuit combinations he could have and it gives you a chance to fold out hands that dominate you.

IDK if OP's game is raked, but he should definitely consider that as well. And also should consider who has the postflop edge. You would think it is probably the pro here, so even if calling was break even in theory, it's not unreasonable to think it would be losing in practice.

I think there is an important underlying concept to takeaway. Solver continues a lot vs 3b with ranges that are meant to play against more polar 3b strategies. Even though aggressive pros will 3b with A5s, A4s type hands, they are tending to 3b linearly with the high card portion of their range where solver is more apt to have some frequency of calls or folds. Aggressive pros rarely cold call hands like AQs, QQ, JJ, TT, where solver often mixes calling with these hands. They 3b KQo and AQo in spots where solver may actually fold these hands a lot. Our continue range vs this linear range should be way different from what solver does at equilibrium. Note QJs and ATs pure folding and clearly losing calls in the nodelocked sim. And A5s mainly folding here where at equilibrium it might be more of a 4b than anything. There are a lot of spots in live poker where we should be continuing vs 3b more like the nodelocked sim and less like equilibrium. A perfect example of this would be opening the button or SB and getting 3b by a pro in the BB. BB is supposed to be 3betting a ton of garbage hands in those spots like A5o, A2o, but they are also supposed to be flatting hands like AQo (vs button open) and KQo a decent amount. A surprising amount of hands that solver would continue at equilibrium are going to become folds in this spot, even though it is really late position. Not sure the exact cutoffs here, but thinking about hands like KQo, QJs, QTs. Some of the hands still have strength as a 4b though.

right but preflop sims are a function of money in the pot vs money behind as well. it doesn't really matter that you start the hand with 2500 when the open is 100 (5bb) and the 3bet is to 325 (16bb), unless you think a 2.5bb open and 8bb 3bet will play identically (they won't)

i think vs an unknown foreign midstakes pro you are better off not making assumptions about how he's going to deviate from very common preflop spots (this is probably the most studied node pre in the game tree). i think its good to think about that stuff, but in practice like these are the spots imo at least that you just want to execute the solver strategy until you have a reason not to (if anything i think people 3b too much here as btn)

I don't think that villain is 3betting closer to what solver is 3betting btn vs CO rfi. The spot is so inherently different from the btn 3b vs CO RFI equilibrium strategy. The button would be mixing 3bet witb ATo, a lot of suited connectors J9s, T8s, low suited kings like K7s K5s, A6s, A2s. They would also be flatting a fair amount with AQo, AJs KQs at equilibrium. In my experience, in iso pots pros are not 3betting the hands that 3b and they aren't flatting a lot of the hands that sometimes flat CO vs btn. Their 3bet range looks more like the one I gave them. It's not just a matter of them deviating from btn 3b vs CO RFI. It's just a different spot entirely when we 5x iso a HJ fish limp and BTN 3b to 3.25x. And this true spot - btn response to CO iso vs a HJ fish limp - is not a spot that is studied much at all because it's not in GTO Wizard or other presolved preflop libraries. You would have to do what I just did and nodelock a preflop solver and most live pros just aren't doing that. You can gain an edge by studying this spot when they aren't

What I nodelocked for the 3b is what my baseline is for a pro 3betting btn vs CO after CO 5x isos a fish. That would be how I think their range is constructed until I have been given reason to think their range looks different. It comes from observations in my own games. I think when we nodelock preflop to be closer to what they are actually doing, the resulting solver output is a really solid exploitative strategy. A lot of regs/pros would just flat KJs to a 3b here, but honestly I think that is a mistake - a super common leak for not responding to the linear 3b range of villain. I had a strong intuition that flatting is not good. But the solver now really has me set on 4betting.

As an update, I left the solver running all day today and this is the output:

Flatting KJs is losing .08 straddles while 4betting is winning 0.33 straddles. Solver basically 4betting pure.

Damn this is awesome analysis, what are you using for the preflop solve? Is that something I can learn to do in PIO? I've played around with fish ranges and ranges closer to what some regs at my stakes might play and how I would adjust to run the post flop sim but I'd love to look at preflop solves instead of making up my own ranges.

As for the analysis, I know the spot is different from CO rfi and BTN 3bet but even at 100bbs in that config the CO is 4betting KJs a lot of the time along with KTs and ATs and calling more with AJs AQs and KQs. I noticed bc we didn't actually have too much KJs in OOPs range for the BTN vs CO 3b pot.

Also lol at ripping in JJ with some AKo and low pps in the mix. I believe the initial run had some QQ in there as well but dropped it out in the longer solve

Interesting how we basically pure fold 88/99 but flat some 66/55/44 and pure bluff 77. I'm assuming bc V has more T9s/98s in their 3bet range that we would be blocking

Edit: actually he doesn't have those in the 3bet range so now I'm really curious

having a K blocks hands like KK and AK, having a J blocks JJ, you unblock folds like AJo, AQo, you get hands that dominate you to fold like KQo, AJ. 99 and 88 unblock his value hands.

ok but like the sim / nodelock u posted has btn 3bing 8% which is less than equilibrium. i pretty sure euro pro is 3bing fish that iso's co fairly well in this spot and has probably not run a nodelocked 5x iso sim but instead just looks at preflop charts. i think its a weird expectation to think he is going to play differently unless you have mda to suggest otherwise

again if anything i think he's more likely to over 3bet than under 3bet this spot

Again, this is from observations of showdowns from watching pros in my games. Also from discussions with other pros in my study group there is a consensus that pros in general but especially in iso spots are 3betting linearly similar ranges. And in general in every spot you can think of live pros are 3betting more linear than the solver is.

1) People say all sorts of nonsense for no reason. Some people might just think he's tight because he doesn't limp-call 64s preflop. It could just be he's actually Nash preflop, like who knows.

2) If he actually is an omega nit then yeah call is probably the worst option. You can 4b if he's gonna be nitty pre or on flop, or you can fold if it's like Jacks+ and AK. By calling with this hand your thesis is that when you flop top pair in a 3bp your hand is worth a lot. You can't call pre and then be tortured when your hand outperforms.

If he's actually a pro playing 10/20 he's probably not THAT nitty.

would assume euro is going to play "better" than americans here - such racism on my part lol.

im open to him being somewhat more linear but i don't think he is going to under 3bet when its rec who's been isoing limps aggressively isos from the co vs habitual limp caller. i suppose its all speculation at the end of the day. i also just have a very difficult time seeing pros pure fold suited connectors and the like facing this. tbh the node lock id be most amenable to believing is something like ~13% 3b here with minimal flats when hes facing a 5x from a player type that likely under 4bets

What are all the worse hands hero gets to turn with? Everyone is saying kj is strong on this runout but the flop hit the 3bettor and I can't think of worse hands we have. We shouldn't have any 8xs. Three kts???? Not sure we even have those

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

What do we have thats better though? KQs , 88? We 4bet KK, AK pure, 4bet 75% AA, 50% QQ (rough assumption)

Doesnt leave us with many hands better than KJ

So...when V sizes way down with his flop c-bet, he can do this with his entire range, including a ton of hands we beat. If we flat call, rather than x/r, we're under-repping our hand, which is fine, since we're not really all that strong, and V could take this line with AA, better Kx, and even 88.

The turn Qs makes it possible that someone turned 2P. But if V had KQ, we were already losing. So from our perspective, nothing has changed, other than now we might be able to credibly rep 2P.

V's turn bet sizing seems "correct", in that the the Qs improves some hands in both ranges, and adds some draws. He shouldn't necessarily size up here, so betting around 1/2 pot with his entire range seems right.

But here again, if we're not going to check-raise to rep KQ, we're effectively capping our range to 1P, a draw, or (if V believes it) a slow-played KQ.

Whether we flat call turn or not depends on how we play AK, KQ, KX, and draws, both on the turn, and on the river. If V thinks we're always raising turn with KQ, and just flat calling with everything else in our range, he's likely to apply max pressure if we check to him on the river.

I *think* the correct line here is to just flat call turn with AK, KQ, KX, and all our draws. On the river, we're mostly checking and hoping he gives up and checks back, or folding if he jams or bets big. Occasionally we can donk bet for a smaller size if we run into 2P or trips, or the board pairs Q's, or one of our potential draws comes in, and we want to rep it.

If we never raise turn, I don't think we need to be too worried about V running a three-street bluff on us, or blowing us off our hand by betting big with worse value. So long as we can get to the river with some TP and 2P+, he should be checking back a lot, and so we should mostly be calling turn with KJdd.

Not many hands better I agree. But what worse hands are there? We simply don't have many hands at all. Potentially we shouldn't have KJs, it's more a 4b bluff or fold hand.

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

pocket pairs and ace highs? 8x? occasional backdoor jtss qjss type hands?

in the 75bb sim im looking at, co has better than top pair 9% of the time and top pair 18% of the time ott. so yeah

Surely 8x doesn't get to the flop. A high surely doesn't get past the flop?

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

pre a8, 98 and 87 will make it in some times, ace highs cant really pure fold vs 1/4 pot