Deepish with bad V
1/3 NLHE 8 handed.
V - I've had his number all night. Used to be one of the biggest donaters to our game but seems to have studied up a bit and is now folding a lot more preflop - used to be a loose passive whale. He's also trying to be more aggressive postflop but he's outplaying himself. He's x/raising in spots where it doesn't make sense or he'll stab multiway for no reason - kind of like a kid on training wheels whose learned a bit about bicycles but now wants to enter le tour de france. All this said he's still primarily a loose passive player. Has a bet sizing tell pre - bigger = stronger. Covers. HJ.
HH - some fish opens HJ to 10, V 3-bets CO to 25, H cold 4-bets SB to 100 with AQhh, only V calls. HU OOP. Kh-7c-3s I bet 75 he calls. Turn As. I bet 225 into 250 and he tanks for over 5 minutes before folding - had about 450 back.
----
one limp, V opens HJ to 15, H sees 2♣ 2♥ and calls BTN off 850$ eff stack, limper folds and we go HU IP.
Flop 30 - T♣ 5♦ 2♠
V checks, I bet 15, he calls
Turn 60 - J♦
V checks, I bet 35, V calls
River 130 - Q♥
V checks, I bet 50, V x/raises to 400...
id call but i think you are not putting in enough money with ur hand w ur sizings
4bet sizing is too large IMO. Big preflop sizings make sense since people don't fold I guess, but the problem here is that the population doesn't 3bet enough so vs pop range, AQ is close to a 4bet bluff.
As for the hand, not sure what's the best sizing for flop, I am leaning to 1/3. But on the turn, I would bomb it and go for an overbet. If you don't want to overbet, bet 75% of the flop and pot on the turn.
River seems like an exploitative fold in those stakes. In most stakes really.
Over-bet turn, for $90.
As played, fold river.
I think it’s bad to bet river for this small (less than 40% pot) and then fold to a raise. If you bet close to pot and he raised, I could get behind making an exploitative fold.
When you bet this small, you can induce a loose/aggressive opponent to spazz (maybe especially so in this spot where V thinks he can rep AK or QQ even though neither hand makes much sense to be played this way). This sizing kind of reads like he might be spazzing too.
Loose-passives trying to be more aggressive don't just decide to c/r this river on a whim or as a bluff. He can have AK and all of the Bdwy sets. The only value hands you're beating are QJs, QTs, JTs (although JT likely checkraises the turn).
However, I assume a set of deuces is within our MDF.
Cold 4 too big. In first hand.
Your turn and river size are way too small. We should almost never bet less than half pot on the river in position, especially with a set. Turn should be about pot and river should be overbet.
Actually I think you should fold this river. We need to be good 38% of the time here and I can't put him on a range where we are good that often. Because we bet turn so small I could see him arriving on river with all combos of AK.
Is 15 his size he has been going with AK, QQ, JJ, TT?
Also, OP is leaving out some important indo. You say he is check raising in spots thst don't make sense. But are these bluffs? Value owning himself? It would take a very special history with v to make me think we are good 38% of the time here.
yeah i ran this
ip ends up really polar ott the worst hand its better is AJ and its mixing with x. the preferred size i see it used is ~2x pot. oddly, it will end up pure checking this particular river when it does it (i guess this is how things change as we get deeper) but will jam less bad rivers
if i give it the option to use 50% or 200% ott it still mostly uses 2x pot, there isn't really much incentive to add a 50% sizing, the hands that could conceivably bet that size really can't bet the river without an extreme amount of assumptions for oop and you leave your river range in turn x back line extremely vulnerable. if you do only allow a 50% sizing it will add a bunch of tx to the betting range, but again i question what kind of value that brings to your strategy, and it comes at the expense of a ton of ev to your actual value hands.
the river is tricky, hes supposed to have leads but i suspect many people just don't lead here as oop at all. the 2 cases
if he has leads, your sizing is too small and it prefers like a 2/3 sizing where the weakest hand you bet is QJ (again this is a function of being capped and being so deep), vs this sizing scheme you're indifferent w 22. i just think in general this person vs this size is going to over bluff. if you don't think u can induce doing this, i think the sizing decisions end up being a large mistake ev wise.
if he doesnt have leads, ip is meant to essentially pure check back the river, betting ~6% of the time with straights lol
this is with the ai solve on there and idk if this makes sense. i will prob look w the presolved ~150 bb ranges and take a look but yeah river scenario really bad for ip it seems w the spr
To those saying my 4-bet was too big in the HH: I read/watched somewhere a poker pro saying that you shouldn't let small sizings dictate your raise size. For example if the typical open at your 2/5 game is 15 and the typical 3-bet is to 45 (3x) and someone instead opens to 10...the correct thing to do is STILL to 3-bet to 45 (which is now 4.5x). The elaboration was that people can use small sizings to control the pot from OOP at games with a lot of raising and reraising going on. I read V's 3-bet in late position to 25 (2.5x) as quite weak, if he had gone 30 or 35 which was typical for our table..I would have 4-bet OOP to 100ish.. so I still went 100.
Also we were quite deep. Like 200 and change to the flop with about 700 back so 3.5x SPR in a 4-bet pot.
Also, OP is leaving out some important indo. You say he is check raising in spots thst don't make sense. But are these bluffs? Value owning himself? It would take a very special history with v to make me think we are good 38% of the time here.
Example -
Hi my name is V, I haz 5♣ 6♣ in the BB and saw somewhere that this is a good 3-bet for "balance" soooo emm.. this 90 year old asian man just opened 10 off 100$ stack from CO??? Okayyy ermm I raise! (because balance) .. *old man calls* okay no problem, *Flop Q-J-T one club*, well I raised pre so I can have dee ace ace cardz so I cbet. *old man calls with like 20 bucks remaining and turn comes a brick club* ooo I haz club draaw too okay ALLLL INNNN (haha he won't see this one coming). *90 year old man calls with A♣ K♣* ermmm oops.
Fold river, and it's not even exploitative.
Surprised no one has questioned preflop, so I guess I'll be that nit...
I think pre and flop are fine, although I might go $20 on flop for value (if he's calling $15...). I go bigger on turn for same reason. I probably go bigger on river, but not by much, and fold to the shove. If he's bluffing, more power to him. It's just not done often enough at this level.
call, you beat value.
The most likely hand you lose to is a bigger set, annnnnd....That's ok.
Result:
Spoiler
I puke call thinking it can be QT or JT and remember that this guy is tilted from me taking his money all night - he shows A♠ 9♥
Result:
Spoiler
I puke call thinking it can be QT or JT and remember that this guy is tilted from me taking his money all night - he shows A♠ 9♥
Interesting reveal. I suppose it might go to your read that V x/r's in spots that may not make sense, at least on the surface.
Circling back to the action from your OP...
When V opens and you flat call pre, I suppose V could be excused for thinking it caps your range, and removes AK, QQ, JJ, and TT, leaving you with a lot of 2P at best on the river, and probably not even top 2, more like QT or JT, which opens the door for him to try bluffing with A9, blocking your straight combos of AK, K9, and 98.
Yeah, you could have sets with 55 or 22, but if V thinks you just never have any straights here, I can see him attempting this bluff.
I wouldn't expect most V's to go for a check-raise-bluff with just ace-high, because you can always just check back, and he doesn't get the chance to raise.
If you never get to the river with AK, QQ, JJ, or TT, then you're left with K9 and 98 for straights, and then 55 / 22 for sets, then QT/JT for some meh 2P. If that's your value range, I guess we should mostly call with our sets, but I wouldn't be fist-pumping to call off here.
Don't know what the GTO line would be with our hand, but I'd think the preferred line would be to really start piling the money in on the turn, if not the flop. I think the 1/2 PSB on the flop is fine, but the turn and river bets both seem way too small.
If we over-bet turn, and then bet pot or more on the river, I'd think it would be extremely unlikely he tries to bluff.
1/3 NLHE 8 handed.
V - I've had his number all night. Used to be one of the biggest donaters to our game but seems to have studied up a bit and is now folding a lot more preflop - used to be a loose passive whale. He's also trying to be more aggressive postflop but he's outplaying himself. He's x/raising in spots where it doesn't make sense or he'll stab multiway for no reason - kind of like a kid on training wheels whose learned a bit about bicycles but now wants to enter le tour de france. All
The two things I think are interesting here are:
1. H _needs_ to get $135 in the pot postflop to make preflop not-bad, and all your bet sizings are making that difficult without V's help.
2. V playing well can rep. pretty much all combos. of most better hands on the river: 55/TT/JJ/QQ/AK ... but H has 55/22 and maybe 9d8d/Kd9d.
...on river (having seen the result) I think it's close but lean call. A lot changes on any reads though, most people aren't turning AJ/KJ into a bluff here but then most people aren't check/calling QQ/JJ on the flop. Also QJ might well do this for value given H's sizes. Obviously with the "can spazz bluff" read I'd only be pretending to think about it so he thinks it might get through.
To those saying my 4-bet was too big in the HH: I read/watched somewhere a poker pro saying that you shouldn't let small sizings dictate your raise size. For example if the typical open at your 2/5 game is 15 and the typical 3-bet is to 45 (3x) and someone instead opens to 10...the correct thing to do is STILL to 3-bet to 45 (which is now 4.5x). The elaboration was that people can use small sizings to control the pot from OOP at games with a lot of raising and reraising going on. I read V's 3-b
This is old school thinking, but there's still some truth in it ... AIUI the truth is closer to: if you are going to 3bet the same range you would for the bigger open size, then going to the same 3bet size is better than no adjustment. The better adjustment is to 3bet/4bet wider for the correct relative sizing. I'm also not sure how well that translates to cold 4bets OOP. Also even if you make it like $50 I think HJ has roughly the same range as when you make it $100. Also (3rd) if V 3bet to 35 I doubt I'd cold 4bet AA to 100 (for the same reasons).
Saying that I'd be hesitant to over adjust because a lot of bad players do very random things with their open sizes, and most humans will accidentally screw the sizes up live often enough.
I don't really like being the first caller to setmine, but on the Button against someone who is still probably a donator, ok.
I probably bet a lot more on the flop. IME, people simply don't raise preflop to get it HU and then check to fold the flop. So start pounding in as much as possible now, imo.
Again I'd probably bet more on the turn. Setmining isn't going to be profitable with these postflop bet sizes, imo.
Pretty sucky runout as lots of straights / higher sets now get there. Against most (especially anyone described as "passive") I do a small bet/fold here.
ETA: I had to re-read the Villain read after the reveal. In no world can anyone one who does this on the river ever be described as "primarily a loose PASSIVE player".
GcluelessNLnoobG
I don't see any reason why we can't have TT/JJ and other combos of 98/K9 (and QJ/JT, fwiw). I'd even have a combo or two of QQ/AKo.
I think whether you call or fold depends on what you make of the Rorschach test that is OP's reads, but there are certainly plenty of other hands you CAN call this 1.5 PSR with.
It's wild 'cause if we don't give villain a donking range, then a solver only bets IP 5% of the time and STILL folds K9 half the time, relying on AKo for most of its calling range. That Q river is real, REAL bad for us.
Obviously we can debate all day how exactly this villain plays this or that combo, but sufficed to say we should not be putting 133bbs in OTR frivolously...
I don't see any reason why we can't have TT/JJ and other combos of 98/K9 (and QJ/JT, fwiw). I'd even have a combo or two of QQ/AKo.
To put this more accurately: The number of combos of 98/K9 combos I flat preflop is directly proportional to the number of 55/22 combos I have and inversely proportional to the number of QQ/AKo combos I have. So ain't no way is it correct to put me on baby sets but not straights and top set here.
What I was saying is I don't mind the small sizing to induce a bluff, as played.
Given the read however, I do prefer to over bet the turn and river, mostly.
I mean, our hand isn't really strong enough to want to induce V to raise. Even when hero takes this line, we're not loving it with bottom set.
