Barely an overpair on the turn, 3-bet pot, facing a shove from an erratic player.

It's an interesting problem, though I think checking turn should at least be a consideration

Against a reg low stakes, this line is usually hecka strong, but you're describing lots of bluffs, so really hard to know.

Your turn bet looks pretty weak and he may be jumping on that, or he could have a strong semi bluff like 88, and I wouldn't rule out JJ/QQ either, as well as all the sets.

I think call is probably right given description, but I probably chicken out live at the table.

Did V sit down at 7:00 am after his morning exercise and a shower? Or does his long-face, droopy eyes, and deep pockets reveal a high-functioning degen?

After a regular V opens UTG and then just calls your 4.75x 3bet, I would put him on AK, 99+, maybe AQs or AJs. Hero should hence click back flop and turn, trying to get to showdown cheap. As played, I'm folding to V's raise. Given your read about his erratic aggression, I would be more likely to get it in against V preflop if he 4bet than bet the flop and the turn after V just calls hero's large 3bet.

I was actually checking him out more closely than usual today. He always reminds me of that actor, though his face isn't as extreme as that actor's. This V has long stringy hair and it was damp today, but likely recently washed. He usually wears a black puffy north face jacket, and it was clean today. He has an unhealthy look, as if he never exercises. Today he was doing these repetitve jaw and tongue movements, and for a moment I wondered if it could be tardive dyskinesia, a side effect of anti-psychotic medications. I thought of that because elsewhere in this forum there is poster saying he is on such medication for schizophrenia (I don't know if it's true or not). So I was asking myself could schizophrenia be the explanation for this guys's odd demeanor. Anyway, after a few minutes those movements stopped. I think if that guy opens and gets 3-bet, he is always calling unless he is already in a bad mood and is holding 95/73 type trash.

Since you have AA/KK, V’s value shoving range should be sets and his natural bluffs are 88 and big heart draws. We are not doing great against that range.

I like a check back OTT esp with a gutshot. I would be more likely to bet TT with an OESD as calling a shove would be easier or with no draw as folding to a shove would be easier.

I also think TT is a cuspy 3-bet against an UTG open.

I would flat call preflop. Small turn bet reopening the action is not good.

Agree the turn looks weak and he could be simply taking advantage with something like 98 (open end and turned top pair).. I would have gone with different sizing:

80 pre flop, with a 60 cbet on the flop and if called then around 250 on the turn

Puts slightly more into the pot but I think you’d have more info to go on if he does still check jam the turn

As played you’re getting almost 3:1 on the all in, if he’s bluffing more than 10% it’s a call but you expect to lose a fair amount of the time

Flatting pre vs utg.

Vs described villain seems like an easy call.

He needs to be bluffing more than 25% of the time. Bad math. Probably more than 25%, because he semibluffs have decent equity, but you are drawing to 2 outs against JJ/QQ/KK/AA/99/77/66/33.

There is a problem 3-betting this hand, particularly OOP versus UTG. You don't really want to be playing for stacks with it. He can have JJ/QQ and at low stakes for a lot of players KK/AA too.

I went with 10% bluff as I was counting hero’s 6 outs as good.. sure we might in fact be drawing to only two outs, but those scenarios are offset by the ones in which our overpair are still ahead of a top or second pair type hand

Oh, I missed that hero has a gutshot. Still the call on the river getting 3-1, you need to be good 25% of the time. If villain is semibluffing, he usually has a lot more than 6 outs. Your 6 outs don't change much. You still need to be ahead more than 25% of the time, maybe 30% of the time.

I feel OP got into a lot of trouble 3-betting this hand. You could easily wind up stacking off against a higher pp.

I don't have a problem with the 3bet preflop, although there's very little useful player info amongst the pseudo psychoanalysis. I'm getting "loose and splashy". In that case I don't hate a 3bet and don't hate it being a bit bigger than normal, but 5x is pretty extreme.

The small turn bet screams weakness, but the main problem I have is that your huge 3bet sizing means hands like QQ-JJ (maybe even AA) are going to be a big chunk of his range. One of the few hands you'd expect to be legitimately targeting (99) has just got there. I take the point about this player punting off with bad bluffs (hence not just hands like AQhh), but that relies on those hands staying involved after the preflop and flop action. I might fold now

I thought about it for quite a while and called.
River was a Tc. V turned over Ks9s.

V calling my preflop 3-bet with his hand is terrible.

Calling a 1/2 pot bet on the flop with 2 overs and back door SD/FD seems marginal.

Turn check raise - I think this is a terrible raise, but it almost worked.

Maybe I played this hand poorly by usual strategy standards, but the V is such a bad player, maybe it was exploitative.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why are we 3B'ing to almost 5x? Is that because he's opening wide, even UTG, and loose with his calls? Why not just go 3.5x-4x?

I'd usually c-bet 1/3 pot on the flop. I'd go smaller here, after he calls the huge 3B pre. Your >1/2 pot c-bet doesn't do much to help define his range, other than make it stronger getting to the turn.

The large flop bet sets up this awkward SPR on the turn. I'd usually bet bigger on turn when V just flats a small flop c-bet. But here, you bet so much on the flop that you're almost down betting, which looks weak, and possibly induces his raise, which could be a bluff, but will often be value.

We're not beating anything in his value range, except maybe A9s. But with your read that he bluffs off a lot of chips, I don't see how we can fold an over-pair with an ISSD.

It's just hard to figure out what he's repping here, based on the pre-flop action. I'd think QQ+/AK would 4B, even over our larger 3B size. So maybe he shows up with JJ.

I dunno man. Seems like we messed this one up pre and on the flop, and now we're in the blender facing this gross jam.

if you cant bet at least 2/3 pot OTT dont bet.

pre isnt horrible but i prefer flatting.

50 OTF, check turn

Think you just need to call it off vs. the villain described. Hero chose a line that can induce villain to shove light, and is going to have 6+ clean outs even when against a better overpair or two pair. And villain can find semibluffs.

i think check flop and call down probably going to be really good vs this v

Not looking to pick a fight with you, but feel like it's worth pointing out that you're suggesting a very exploitative line here, based on limited info about this V, whereas in many other threads, you've excoriated others for suggesting exploitative lines based on similarly limited info, and suggested the more GTO line would be better, because we don't have enough info on V to start making huge deviations.

If you see something here that the rest of us don't, okay, fine. But with TT on a board of 763rb, I'd think the more GTO line of c-betting flop would be better generally, and probably better against this V, inasmuch as the read could indicate he'll call flop wide and bluff later streets (exactly what he did here), not just start bluffing with ATC whenever the PFR checks back on the flop.

If the line V took in this hand is indicative of his play, hero's losing value by checking back the flop.

i mean TT is going to get checked some amount of time at equilibrium

My first inclination is to say "fair enough", and let your answer stand, but in the interest of intellectual curiosity, I'd like to press you on this, if you'll humor me.

What sort of frequency is TT checking? A lot, or occasionally? If we simplified, we'd be c-betting closer to 100, or 0?

My challenge to your post above is that you seemed to be suggesting hero could check back 100, I'm assuming to induce V to start bluffing the turn.

But as I pointed out, that seems like a pretty big deviation based on limited info, and by my reasoning, likely not a good deviation, inasmuch as this V seems like he'll be over-calling and under-folding to most flop c-bets, and bluffing on later streets regardless.

I wanted to point it out to you, not as a "gotcha", but because you clearly study with solvers and have been a persistent advocate of not deviating too far from equilibrium based on limited observation of our opponents. And speaking at least for myself, sometimes the adjustments we should be making seem very logically defensible.

My point here is that you may think the adjustment you suggested is logically defensible. I happen to disagree, but that's not the point. The point is that you routinely scold others for suggesting the same sort of adjustments based on fairly limited info, and I hope that by pointing it out to you, you'll be more open to considering these sorts of adjustments before dismissing them out of hand.