CO vs BTN 3bet pot flop decision

Our hand needs a lot of protection. It’s a decent board for our range and we have plenty of big draws to bluff with. I’m check ripping.

Ripping can't be horrible, but I think you should call with paired hands that contain an 8, otherwise your calls are very weak. QQ7 protects you from JT at least.

Interested in how a solver approaches this.

Does it make sense to be more inclined to raise without diamonds and flat with diamonds?

Judging from a very quick solve, the EV of raising and calling are very similar, but solver prefers to call this exact combo.

IP is also checking back a ton on this board, also with an 8.

What about leading vs checking? I'd have guessed we need leads and this combo is a better lead because not playable enough to kc with the pp. Easy to get turned around and suspect it might be happening to me here.

Feel like I am struggling with the idea that so many turn cards suck and will force us to check, so is raising here fine because of the low SPR? Let's say this is a SRP...how do we play it as the PFR?

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

Pretty sure we want to block their continuing range, so feel like it's the opposite. Not to mention that having diamonds gives us more equity.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

I’d rather call with straight blockers so that he can make his hand when we fill up and there are less bad runouts. If deep I would always check call and play turns. If lots of money goes in we could be in real bad shape.

We have good equity against flush draws so why don't we want them to continue

So this is a hold em concept that may not apply in PLO: we xr less on boards where it is easier for our opponent to continue ie they have more natural calls and more when in order to defend enough villain needs to find floats that population usually won't be able to. It is based on the idea of robust equity and how well our will hand fare on future streets.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

In PLO it's important that villain continues with hands that can make 2nd best. Which is exactly what I meant in my earlier post when I said "QQ7 protects you from JT at least".

This is 1 cent/2 cent plo dont need to reference a solve bruh

Yup, makes total sense, especially since hero unblocks JT and when villain improves to a straight Hero makes a boat and can get paid.

Well, I think it's still useful to know how a solver would play the spot.

If you're going to slowplay 8x, you want the sidecards to be live, over the 9, and unblocking diamonds. Those are the 8xs that need the least protection. This is very vulnerable - about half the deck fills a straight or flush, and even a badly-constructed cb range will include hands that have a lot of equity against you but will fold to a jam. But it's also ahead of his range. We're not raising here because primarily we're imagining he'll make a bad fold or call, we're doing so to deny equity. With a hand like AsKsQc8c, we're blocking the most likely overpairs that could spike their 2 outer, he's going to hit a diamond that fills our boat a third of the time, an aggro player will likely want to rep that Q / K / A on the turn, and our c/cing range will include a bunch of draws, a very occasional flopped boat, but not much strong 8x. This isn't strong enough to slowplay. Plenty better candidates. And it's always nice to check-jam in a 3b pot.

It's useful if you know how and when to use the solver and how and when to revert to theory. The value of the solver is correlated with the strength of your opposition.

Having diamonds with your trips generally has a very mild positive effect on your equity. Not having diamonds puts more draws that are ~25% vs you in their range, so in general you don't want to have diamonds here. The main exception is when you share a kicker with them.

Because they have equity that we can steal from them by going allin now rather than calling and letting them hit the turn and maybe even try to charge us to hit our kicker on the river if they're good and ambitious.

And we have better equity when we have trips in an unpaired hand i.e. 3 live kickers.

Got it, thanks. We feel better about x/c in a single raised pot?

Yeah, in an srp you'd be getting in too much money with too little equity i.e. their range will be much stronger to gii and the pot is much smaller. You could take a weird line that turns it into a bluff of sorts on the flop - not that you expect better hands to fold, but plenty of hands with equity to continue to fold - but it's probably dicey and unnecessary so just stick with pot management strategy and keep the pot small.

Of course. I also didn't mean that the Hero (who is playing micros) should be that interested in what the solver says. I meant seeing this hand made me interested in the solver solution.