Pulling the trigger

Unless we have a ~maniacal image of bluffing / thin value betting for hugenormous sizes, then I'm not a fan of overbets. In most cases, especially with anything remotely close to a tighter image, then all an overbet does with a showdownable hand like TPTK is mostly get worse to fold and better to call. We also don't need to make hugenormous overbets to price out draws; any reasonably sized bet can do that (especially on the turn with only one card to come). And huge overbets look like they work great as we take down pots... until they don't and we punt into better (noting how in this example the OESD got there and it's not impossible to be behind to sets / two pear, which everyone will be happily tarping with once they realize they are up against someone who wildly overvalues one pear when checked too).

GcluelessNLnoobG

you need to add a lot of detail to your post.. stack size? bet size?

Your real question in the end was "how to I stop people outdrawing me?" Shoving will do that. However, that doesn't make you a profitable player. You'll get hands that are worse than your's fold and better ones to call.

A 3x overbet into multiple players with a good one-pair hand is probably the last choice I would make without unusual reads. I would either bet for value or check back to protect my range. Probably xb on this hand without reads and assuming normal stack sizes.

Just can’t explain what I’m asking well.

I want to know how often two players that call my continuation bet, then both check the turn to me - can have 2Pair+ ?

If it’s a big % then I shut down.

If it’s a minuscule % then I can muscle them and take the dead money. I think this is the case as a big hand would bet, afraid I might check behind. But some do slow play.

If money is going in the on the river, top pair top kicker must fold - too likely facing a better hand. So, I’ve been contemplating ways to win with that hand taking the river out of play.

So you’re too scared and want to make all the hands you beat fold so that the money only goes in if you’re behind?

Very smart.

Much depends on board texture. Generally "the two players", who you haven't profiled at all, are more likely to fast play when there'a flush draw on the flop. They're probably less likely to trap if there's an A, K or Q on the flop too. The fact that they checked turn after check-calling flop isn't that significant. It isn't therefore a "big %" possibility that they're trapping, so you're nearly always a clear favourite equity-wise. A 3x bet in this respect doesn't make sense --- no need for polarised muscle, you should be putting more money in the pot at some stage and in this case the turn is likely the best spot to do so.

You can fold to a bet on the river but on occasions you'd be folding the best hand. You can also bet on the river IP when checked to, depending on the turn action and river card.

In general you're looking for a rule-of-thumb or one-size-fits-all strategy that ignores the complexity of poker. It's probably better to embrace the complexity (i.e. all the branches of the game tree) and develop a multi-faceted strategy to help navigate it, which is sensitive to different player types, board textures, bet-sizes and so on. Just using a 3x-pot-or-check strategy on the turn as a default is not only one that yields less EV than a more nuanced one --- it's also less intellectually challenging and tbh kind of lazy.

This is a solid post doc, but all I am asking is how often I am behind with top top in this scenario. You seem to agree that ‘nearly always a clear favorite equity wise’ in this scenario.

So, I understand board texture, player types, and what I’m up against. Don’t like being accused of being lazy. If that was the case, I wouldn’t be here.

I have what I need now
If I jam the turn, I’m not likely to be snapped off by 2Pair+ so that’s a possible line.

Playing passively could allow one of these villains to catch up & create a tough river decision where I could fold the best hand, but that is also, a possible line.

I think these are the two extremes, so next time, in this scenario, I am more clear where I stand.

OP, the next question for you to think about is how many more hands will fold to a 3X bet than would fold to a 0.5X bet.

Thanks for helpful advice

I try to make a habit of making a big hand & taking the stack from someone overplaying a big pocket pair. Top pair can be difficult hand to play. I think if you can play this type of hand better than others it’s huge +EV

At face value, I’d say you’re going to the river a lot more with the small bet. I do know a small bet looks strong on the river to some that think you want them to call.

I would like to stumble into some population data of what really happens in these situations

I think a 3x overbet will get a lot of unexpected responses from villains. Some will call with KJ, some will fold 2 pair. But in general this is the hand that gets folds from worse and calls from better.

Wouldn’t it be better to get called by KJ? Or raised by a straight or set and get away without losing it all?

Your shove will give you lots of noisy feedback because you will win the pot frequently and feel like your strategy is working when in fact you missed out on lots of value by not betting smaller.

I'm accusing your thinking of being lazy not so much you personally, although just being on a 2+2 thread certainly doesn't preclude anyone from being lazy. To elaborate, you could be:

(1) Genuinely naive insofar as you're asking how often AJ is behind as IP preflop raiser in a 3 way pot on Jc3s6c2h. If you plug this hand into an equity calculator, which would necessitate assigning ranges to the other players, then you would get an answer straight away. The question of what bet size to use on the turn would remain unanswered, but, of course, you could use a solver, which would be helpful albeit less clear.

(2) Intentionally naive insofar as you know you could use an equity calculator/solver but are trying to think outside the box, particularly regarding bet-sizing on the turn and reducing the need to make decisions on the river.

(3) Setting up a toy-game, like Ace-King-Queen, which enables us to think strategically in a hand, where it's not always possible to assign accurate ranges to players and estimate our equity on different board textures. If this is what you're intending, then I'd say the real question is not how often can we bet 3x pot on the turn for value with TPTK but how often can we bluff successfully with this sizing with all of our turn range as the IP PFR (which would be very often I'd say). Then the next question would be how often can bluff with a smaller sizing? And if we use a smaller sizing to what extent do the calling thresholds of each player change accordingly (i.e. do they start calling with worse than top-pair hands if we bet 1.5x pot for instance)?

What's interesting about the toy-game scenario is how players adjust to large overbets on the turn, particularly in live poker. So, for instance, if you notice players are perhaps over-adjusting and calling too much, you can exploit them by expanding your value range. Also you might find some players simply don't understand the relationship between their equity and pot-size (e.g. might just snap call a 3x pot bet with a combo draw or an overpair).

That’s a lot to take in DrTJO
I am familiar with the toy game

But most of the players I encounter have no rhyme or reason with the things they do.

I was trying to get a feel for a line with TPTK when two players call the flop c-bet, a brick hits the turn, and they both check to the raiser.

My conclusion is that I can shove profitably in this situation. I like aggressive lines.

Typically I will not be behind, and I prevent being outdrawn on the river.

Not letting monsters under the bed keep me from exploiting over-folding to huge turn bets. Feels almost like a semi-bluff with a made hand. After all, I can also improve on the river too.

You're explaining it fine. The problem is that no one can calculate this without knowing both the board cards as well as the ranges you're assigning to the player(s) in the hand.

You may want to spend some time thinking, instead, of why you're so afraid of losing hands in which you were the preflop raiser?

Both weak and strong players have tendencies or patterns of behaviour, which typically constitute strategies. If you believe most of your opponents are acting randomly, then you may not be focusing on what matters (how often they limp-call, how often they raise-first-in, what hands they showdown on the river, etc.). Acting randomly at poker is generally only possible if you are using a randomiser.

Shoving on this turn when you're likely to win the pot 70% versus 2 players (who roughly have 15% chance each if they're playing 30% of hands preflop) is profitable but clearly NOT the most profitable line. Furthermore if you're only shoving with these types of strong one-pair hands, without ever being perceived as bluffing or semi-bluffing, then you're playing face-up and will be easily exploited.

If I read you correctly, you're claiming that you are exploiting your opponents by making them over-fold. But you are value betting not bluffing! If they're overfolding to your value bets they are exploiting you! This is why it feels like a semi-bluff.

And this in a nutshell is the disconnect between what you want to do because of the psychology of risk aversion versus what you should do in terms of maximising EV. Semi-bluffing involves leveraging your equity, which often is nutted, such as an Ace-high flush draw, to encourage a player with more equity than you to fold. There are rare situations where you can use TPTK as a semi-bluff but I'm quite certain AJ on J63cc2h is not one of them.

As I said above, if you're developing a toy-game like scenario to establish how often you can bluff with turn overbets, then it's certainly worth discussing. It's probably more worthwhile, however, to consider the extent to which risk-aversion is subconsciously influencing your strategy: it's far from an uncommon issue amongst poker players, even those who are long-term winners.

I mean the title of your thread 'Pulling the trigger' says it all: we use this phrase to express what it means to overcome the negative feeling of risk-aversion when executing a bluff. If you're using the phrase to describe a value bet then, well, I don't know, what to say ... language fails me.

Thanks for the time spent but I think you’re over-thinking it. I have watched the standard play and villain improve on the river to win often. When I can fold out these hands & take the dead money I’m interested.

I think when I read ‘no bullshit six max’ awhile back they described a number of people on this site. Not saying this about you dr as you have been very convincing & I greatly appreciate your ideas. You have made an effort to point me in the right direction & I appreciate the help.

People are frustrated with me on here, but I can assure you I’m never playing face up. I have no ‘risk aversion’ or I wouldn’t be trying to put villain to the test. People seem to think that chopping up a play on here they can tell me what I should do. I definitely listen.

But at the end of the day, I gather info and make my own decisions. That’s what I thought this sight was all about. I’m a humble guy. I know I don’t have all the answers, but I also know that none of you do either.

Not much humble on this sight.

I have never considered being overly aggressive with top pair, but now I see possibilities. That’s it, end of story

FreeCard,

I apologise, in advance, if you're actually a person IRL, but reading your posts, for some reason, made me think of this:

You would get a better response if you post a better hand history

[QUOTE=DrTJO;59043447]FreeCard,

I apologise, in advance, if you're actually a person IRL, but reading your posts, for some reason, made me think of this:
[QUOTE]

This quote from no bullshit 6 max reminds me of you and some of the others. Crazy world isn’t it.

@FreeCard,

I trolled you first, so don't mind your troll as a response.

Just keep in mind that the overwhelming consensus in this post is that your strategy for overbetting turn for a 3x pot size with TPTK isn't the most profitable (i.e., EVERY respondent says so).

I appreciate that you wish to develop what you believe is a plus EV strategy, but maybe pay more attention to what others are saying, particularly if you're posting a bunch of HHs and implicitly requesting considered responses.

Sure, the LLSNL forum isn't full of nosebleed crushers, but many are "for profit" players who play seriously and do win! While the consensus view isn't always the most optimal, taking it seriously and respectfully will likely help you in some way.

Best of Luck,
Your community-oriented intellectual who hopes you make concerted and genuine efforts to improve your poker game.

i guess we have our first chatgpt poster

I’m not sure you’re encouraging others to join this forum because it’s not a challenging exchange of information. This is a place where the old hands rudely attack any ideas they don’t agree with.

Why would anyone post on here just to be told how stupid they are. People are seeing these insults and it’s not correction, it’s personal attacks. You are encouraging people to never post here.

To win in poker you have to be your own man, to have your own style. What works for some people doesn’t work for others. I wish to learn, not be insulted & stomped on.

The problem is that I am the happiest person on this site. My life is so good, I’m so blessed, that I’m just not that impressed with the mood of the people that are supposed to be helping others.

I may live to 100+ so I might be on here awhile. I will continue to seek the truth. Get used to me nitty - it’s not chatGPT it’s URsadcase. But if you fire insults, I guess I’ll have to fire back.

For those here desiring a friendly discussion about poker, I’m here for you. Just be aware that those bullying me have major issues, so their advice might not be so great & you likely will be insulted.

Against 12 men I’m good, even at 68, so I’m certainly not worried about a few words.

I will continue to be positive, until it’s time not to be positive anymore & I will respond in kind. How many people have you run out of here with your degrading comments?

I want peace!
It’s like a gang attack. People don’t want to engage with me, b/c nitty will be mad at you? C’mon man

So, everyone has good ideas! You reading this please sort through the advice here. Make your own decisions, be your own man.

This started with AJ - one small decision in the game of life. I’m really sad that it brought us here. I bear no grudges - if you want to move forward with intelligent discussion, I’m always ready.

No one is attacking you personally mate, You clearly aren't listening to what people are saying and trying to fight people who disagree with you.

Coming back to your post:

I think you are thinking about this the wrong way

Why do you want to jam 3x on the turn?
Are you jamming 3x to get a fold? Then then you are essentially turning your hand into a bluff and I feel it's a really bad play because your hand is WAY too good at to turn into a bluff.

Are you jamming for value? Then that's a bad play as well - Worse hands are folding and better hands are calling here.

I think you are jamming to make sure that the draws fold out. If that's the case then it's a bad play because that's the opposite of what you want, you want the draws to call here, you just don't want them to give a good price to call.

Your question about how many times would Villains get their draws complete - that's a basic question and if you don't know this already then you should really invest time learning poker maths, there are already so many resources for that.

[QUOTE=DrTJO;59043447]FreeCard,

I apologise, in advance,
[QUOTE]

Felt like U2 Brutus
Felt the need to insult me

Yes I change my mind all the time, because the game is changing all the time. The old stuff doesn’t work anymore, the new stuff does. I see now this is a discredit the other guy sight, but I will continue to use you guys to improve my play.

I represent ‘live’ poker. You have 51bb, so you always do this does not apply. When I craft my plays, I do what works & it might not always be what I should do. So I’m sorry that I offer you nothing, but the viewers can learn from my mistakes.