Rate these players, marginal spots, 3 bet pot.

Agree except that I think the check raise bluff with bottom pair is okay. The bluff on the river feels iffy though. More sense to do that on the turn to fold out better and get called by worse eg hearts

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

Hand 1: The turn jam is a bluff, BTN has to figure he is beat. BTN is trying to represent a strong hand but UTG+1 has more strong hands then weak aces and a bunch of good AX that can call sometimes. UTG is bluff catching when he calls but it's a reasonable play in the situation. Preflop is standard, BTN doesn't have to raise 99 but doing it is fine.

Hand 2: Both played badly, UTG+1 played worse. He should have folded preflop. His flop check/raise is an agressive bluff and not terrible, it should have worked vs BTN's hand. UTG+1 not continuing on turn was a mistake, as was BTN not betting when checked to. BTN couldn't really know if a bet was a bluff or not but with unpaired cards he should be trying to end the hand. Once he gets to the river this is a fairly automatic call for BTN. Pot size pretty much compels it as BTN needs to be figuring UTG+1 for a lot of bluffs to be in the hand.

H1 looks like two reasonably decent players. Preflop is fine from both. I don't mind the cbet because you might get immediate folds from TT-QQ, UTG's call is good. Not sure about turn jam, I think it may be alright but very player dependent (if he expected QQ-TT to have already folded then it may be spew, but if he's clearing out any sticky flop calls and expects to get weak Ax to additionally fold, then it's not bad). Overall, I think both players did alright. Table selection....there will be plenty of worse players than this at 1/2 based on this hand on its own.

H2 goes off the rails on the flop. +1 is bad: standard passive preflop rubbish followed by a check-raise which may not be quite as bad as it seems at first - denies equity to overcards - it might just about be OK if there was a spade on the board, but there isn't. The river call from button may be OK as he has Ah in his hand and he's getting a price. The flop call is probably more dubious.

I was thinking about this after Wild Bill responded to my post. I know that check-raising bottom pair with back door draws is a thing, but I would think having an Ace in our hand means we want to call instead. There are less over cards that we fear and we can also cooler our opponents who have AK/AQ. Similarly, if the turn is an A and our opponent has a hand like KQ/QJ, they will usually continue bluffing which is great for us.

Big difference from having 65s on J76 or something like that.

Edit: I also think part of the theory behind making this bluff is that bottom pair blocks our opponents from having two pair and sets, but the 2 is a completely irrelevant blocker in OP’s hand.

I don't understand - a few months ago I opened AJs UTG, called SB's 3-bet, and lost to AK for top pair but worse kicker, and everyone on 2+2 told me I should have folded AJs pre (in position, HU) to a normal 3-bet range. And now AQs should be calling a 3-bet with the worst position, giving +1 a good price to see the flop playing 3-way?

Given the rainbow board is so dry and static, and with the scary A and K both there, particularly in a 3! pot, it should be an under bluff spot. I don't know if you guys would snap call with AQ, but we lose to all the most common 3! hands (AA, KK, AK), and struggle to find bluffing hands who keeps the aggression still on the turn. If I called here, it's mostly because I can't leg go of my top pair, instead of having the confidence that I can win every one of three times.

Folding AJs from UTG to an SB 3bet is a reasonable play, but I don’t think it’s necessary or standard in all circumstances.

AQs is also (obviously) a better hand than AJs. It is dominated less often, and has more equity against hands like JJ and TT. More potential to dominate hands like KQs and AJs as well.

Can you fold AQs from UTG against a BTN 3bet? Yes. Especially if it’s a tighter player. Is that my default play? No.

As far as postflop goes, stacking off with TPTK is standard in low SPR spots like 3bet pots.

Are we losing to AA KK and AK on this board? Yes. Do those hands always play like this though? Half pot flop sure but do people usually jam turn for pot when they have invulnerable nutted hands?

Typically, Villains in this spot can have worse hands for value (AJs, ATs, AQ) and potentially bluffs (QJs, JTs) so I’m only considering folding if I think they are a complete nit.

Now it makes a lot of sense. Thanks for your clarification and patience 😀

2p2ers tend to be results-oriented and nitty, putting opponents on overly-narrow ranges.

Hand 1 - BTN over-played his hand on every street. UTG seemed to play it in a fairly standard way.

Hand 2 - UTG1 is out of line, limp-calling pre, and check-raising flop with almost no chance to improve. The river jam is just pure spew, because he's not repping much that wants to check-raise flop, check turn, and then jam river.

BTN's play is debatable. I could see folding the flop when UTG1 x/r's, but not to this small raise sizing. Stack depth makes stabbing turn when UTG1 checks to him a bit sketchy, but I might stab if the stacks are deeper. Hard to fold to the river jam when he makes TPTK. He's beating all of UTG1's bluffs, and worse value.

In terms of who's making the most / biggest mistakes, I'd say:

BTN in Hand 1 < UTG1 in Hand 2 < UTG in hand 1 & BTN in hand 2 (tied).

I suppose we could argue that UTG in hand 1 should give more respect to the BTN's raise, because he's 3B'ing over a UTG open, and should have a stronger hand than 99. He could have AA/KK/AK, and take the same line, though I'm not sure those hands are jamming pot on the turn, on a rainbow board.

If we look at it that way, then BTN is turning 99 into a bluff, and following through with it, which is at least logically consistent. We could say UTG is bluff catching, but with very little chance to improve if he's behind, and not beating anything other than a bluff.

As opposed to UTG1 in hand 2, x/r'ing as a bluff on the flop, but NOT following through on the turn, which is mostly a brick, unless BTN has TT. His flop x/r is mostly repping 55 or 22, hands that aren't slowing down on the turn. Once he checks turn, and the river completes the FDFD, he could bet smaller, and get just as many folds from hands that missed, like AK. He doesn't need to jam.

So...I dunno. Maybe UTG1 in hand 2 did more wrong than the BTN in hand 1. They both get a failing grade, just not sure which one failed harder.

It makes me smile when a 'nitty old man' says 2+2ers are too nitty.

Without being result-oriented, I would indeed feel uncomfortable if I was AQ on this board.

PF - depending on BTN's image, arguably raising is better than calling to see the flop, which is more likely to be 3-ways.

On the turn: fine, if the jam looks bluffy. How about facing a 40% bet - folding is too nitty, raising makes no sense, and calling makes AQ committed to call a brick river again, or check the river praying for BTN to check back?

Anyway I was glad to see their turn actions so I got to see both their hands.

First thing ill say is that not aure if this is reverse HH, but generally postiong other people’s hands isnt very useful, because we dont know the thought process of the player.

Hand 1, 3 bet with 99 is perfectly reasonable. C betting flop is good, you can basically cbet ATC after 3 betting because people are so fit or fold. You can fold out their TT-KK pretty often. Turn, i mean who knows what his read is. His hand is dead, if he thinks V overfolds, jamming as a pure bluff seems fine. V tank called with AQ, so maybe he folds AJ-A8. As a general rule im done with that hand after the turn unless i spike my 2 outer.

Hand 2 +1 limp calling obviously sucks, Axs is one of the best hands to limp, but i still wouodnt, but if i had to pick an exzct hand to limp utg, its be A2s. Turning bottom pair into a bluff raise is great. I do it all the time. It blocks a set, it has 5 outs to improve, its often no good once it faces a bet. AQ calling the raise with A high is kinda wild at low stakes, i got a feeling there is some history here.

AQ is a lot better than AJ, but what youre calling a 3 bet with should be VERY V dependent. AJs would be a standard call vs a standard 3 betting range, which almost nobody has, so id be snap folding it against a lot of players, and for that matter maybe AQ too.

I agree completely with paragraph 2, but if you cant call down when you hit an A with AQ vs the V in question, you should be folding it preflop. So either V 3 bet bluffs at enough of a frequency that youre good when you hit, or he doesnt and you should fold pre.

I am curious - why Axs is better than small pocket pairs, or small suited connectors, if we have to have a limp range EP.

Multiway pots are about big hands outflopping even bigger hands. Its easy to see why Axs is better than suited connectors because if they get stacks in, Axs is almost always winning the stack.

Examples:

A5ss vs 76ss on a triple spade flop

A5ss vs 54cc on a 55Q flop

A5ss vs 65cc on an A65 flop

The only real counter example is straight over straight, but low SCs get both ends of that, 65 will stack A5 on 234, but will get stacked by JT on 789.

If you play 76ss and flop a flush, on average youre making money, because you hit, but the times you get stacked caps your average profit when you hit big, and you lose money when you whiff, so its EV-

Pocket pairs are another hand which just doesnt quite hit hard enough in MW pots, 44 flopping a set on a 48Q board is an absolute monster HU, but you wont be as excited if you see significant action, especially if a straight card comes out on the turn like a 9.

Hands like suited connectors and pocket pairs need to be able to just bet and take it down as a bluff or semibluff sometimes to be profitable and the opportunity to bluff is way lower MW.

For me personally, i effectively never limp. I do think there are extreme table dynamics where you can argue its profitable. But i think these situations are MUCH MUCH rarer than the limping crowd would like you to think, and id personally rather focus my game around keeping the early part of my decision tree more consistent.

I do, however, use this logic to affext my decision making when facing a raise. I think Axs is much more happy to cold call a raise at a passive table, and I tend to be less inclined to 3 bet them than GTO, i tend to find my 3 betting frequency more with SCs and less with Axs. This is also VERY player dependent, but in 3 bet pots, i think SCs have more playability, and Axs has more blockers which means more folds and fewer 3 bets, but most 1/3 and 2/5 players are calling far too much and 4 betting far too little, so i find SCs to work better as a 3 bet bluff with Axs just calling along.

Thanks for taking the time to explain their differences. I used to limp EP, then changed to never limped, before changing it back to occasional limping. An important reason is that I wanted to get into pots with some certain players with enough SPR. In the example of hand 2, UTG1’s bluff raise's main issue is that once it's called, with 0.7 SPR it's hard to get an overpair to fold on a brick turn. If we didn't know BTN was AQo, instead, he was having overpairs + Ace FD, UTG1‘s jam OTT would be very unwise.

Not sure about their history, but I once CR on a T64 two-tone flop (also 3! pot, PF aggressor is an unknown), and got called by KJo, with J in the flushing suit - that's way more wild! In Hand 2, at least the preflop aggressor has the Ah as a good blocker. My point is, if in practice, the CR does not get enough FE as it should get, and it's hard to continue without enough SPR to keep the pressure on, it should be used less often.

Unlike most people's comments, I quite like his jam on the river. That Qh actually blocks a lot of BTN's possible FD hands played this way so far, and UTG1 now gets much better FEs from big pairs. Anyway, these are my thoughts days after watching this hand, I don't actually think his snap jam allows for enough time process so much info.

H1 UTG: Entirely standard imo, I like that he recognizes he has a bluff catcher on a dry board but still has to call. 7/10 docked points for difficulty.

H1 BTN: Pre is fine, calling is also fine. Flop is fine, checking behind is also fine. Turn is bad but probably not as bad as it looks, I think his main issue is that he thinks he's supposed to shove here when in reality he should still be betting 1/3rd given how hard it is for UTG to have anything more than 1 pair here and how little equity he has vs any of BTN's value hands. Betting $55 on turn and $115 on river with this hand as an occasional bluff on a 3rd broadway river is strictly a better line than jamming turn and a super cool guy thing to do. Checking behind is still best though. 4/10 be smarter with your bet sizes.

H2 UTG: Idk about 3 blind games but I've never been a fan of limping UTG. I imagine if you did, this would be an ideal hand to limp/3bet given the action so imo the dude is just being a fish pre. Flop not a fan, he just doesn't have much coverage around any of the draws making it really tough for him to turn more equity. On top of that, BTN's bluff range should be ace high heavy which UTG is far ahead of, he isn't really denying much value. Agreed with checking turn, I don't think BTN folds anything that has UTG beat. River is pretty standard imo, he should have a ton of flushes, 2pairs, sets, etc. and not a whole lot of logical bluffs. 3/10 stop clicking buttons.

H2 BTN: Pre super standard. Flop I like that he recognizes having two overs with the Ah means he should be floating the flop c/r, river I hate that he doesn't recognize having the Ah makes this a super routine call. 6/10 no one likes a nit roller.

Hey I find your rating with reasonings very fun to read!

Let's say if BTN gives up on the turn so it goes X X. River comes a brick low card, UTG checks again, BTN now regains some ambition to put max pressure on A2s-AJs and possible QQ so he jams on the river. How does this affect your scores on both players？

My issue with bluffing on a brick river is that 99 is prob just a little too high up in his range to do so. He'll have better bluff candidates like QJdd or JTss which block UTG's best aces and have very little showdown value. 99 still has a reasonable amount of showdown value beating hands like 88 or 76s.

3rd broadway card is different though. Any Q J or T changes the texture of the board and pushes 99 far down to near the bottom of BTN's range. In that case, I really like bluffing the river and I expect he'll put basically all of UTG's 1 pair holdings in the blender.

Hand1 UTG player seems fine. I don't like button's play. I don't like th 4x 3bet, I think 3x-3.5x is better. I don't love 99 as a 3bet, but low frequency it could be ok. I don't love whoever is playing with just 250. If people are opening to $10 and only playing 250 deep that is a pretty miserable game tbh.

On the flop, I think button's size is too big and if he is going this size, he shouldn't be betting 99.

Maybe if we go smaller on the flop we could potentially get QQ and JJ to call and we can get them to fold turn without having to jam. I don't see why we need to put our whole stack at risk on the turn to get what would mainly fold for less. I would probably give up most rivers because on this static board, I don't think people will call turn with an ace to fold on the river.

Hand 2 straight away I think open limping is pretty bad strategically and just going to be a sign of a weak rec. I think the button played fine. Vs a small check raise, having the Ah is probably just enough to continue, but he has to bluff some heart runouts imo. The limper's postflop play seemed ok, but I would rather have a heart. His range is just jacked up because he limp called though so what he should do is a moot point.

Biggest mistakes would be the btn in hand 1, followed by limper in hand 2.

1 - Big overplay. There's your opponent had a an ace there a lot of the time. The effective stacks are low so the ability to do complex things isn't there.

99 is playing like they really hit the flop when likely their opponent did. The AQ is prone to calling thinking they beat most things but AK. You don't have 77, 44 or 56 in your range there.

2 - You don't need 3 or 4 minutes to think this over. Show some respect for the table.

H1: BTN is a NPC button clicker

H2: dislike the flop bet and call as AQo rates poorly vs. his xr range