AA Backdoors Nut Flush

Just to clarify, when the SB leads out, if we were to raise, it's just a raise, not a 3B.

It's possible the SB is bluffing, and if so, he's just going to fold, so it doesn't matter if we raise, because he was never calling.

I disagree that the SB is never calling a raise with worse here, the way this was played. We in this forum tend to give V's in these hand histories too much credit, even though we've all witnessed tons of terrible calls in spots which should be "obvious" folds.

I wouldn't say a 4x-5x raise here is "large", in relative terms. We started $500 eff. The pot is $45, and the bet is $30. A raise to $120-$150 seems pretty reasonable, given that we're deep enough to fold to a 3B.

And as you said, hardly anyone 3B's as a bluff on the river.

Is it possible we're raising into the nuts behind us? Yes, but we can raise-fold. It's also possible the BTN calls with a worse hand, or even maybe folds a better hand, like K6, or possibly maybe even K7, at some low frequency, not that I think the BTN gets here with either of those hands, after just smooth-calling on the flop.

I really hate to bet/fold here, and again, I really don't think worse is calling. Maybe a K, maybe -- again only if the guy is just terrible. River raises w/o the nuts or close are so rare.

I guess some read on SB is in order?

GTO is a mathematical model. None of them limp ever, because it was mathematically shown to be an EV lowering move. I would love to hear the dubious math in favor of limping.

What I mean is that we don't have to worry about our river raise sizing perhaps inducing a hard-to-deal-with 3bet river bluff because there is no such thing.

GcluelessNLnoobG

We shouldn't l/rr on an average table, unless there were a couple LAGs, a sLAG or a maniac that always raises then it would make sense but I didn't see those reads here (and he at least calls the l/rr because when we do it our hand is face up pretty much anyway).

As played we're in a limped pot so anyone can have anything, even kings full. I would r/f otr and calling is fine too.

Eh, there are a decent number of wannabe LAGs that don't 3bet anywhere near enough but will open raise way too much in late position.

At low stakes, 3!s are not that common.

I was talking about the maniacs. I played with one last night and was sure to sit to his left. Sure enough, he raised or 3bet 90% of hands. The LAGs, even the wannabes, will just call your 3bet trying to pick you off, which is fine if you are a good post flop player and you can be disciplined. I absolutely love playing against the guys who limp/3bet KK+.

Result: Hero called and sb showed a black 6 and mucked the other card.

sounds like you got max value.

He bet a pair of 6's? You got extra bonus max value.

Did you table your hand?

Yes I usually wait til it’s my turn to show but if they show something weak or shake their head or what not I just show my hand.

Are you sure? Have you tried running the preflop sims? Certainly there is plenty of limping going on in a lot of spots. With 3 blinds, the first and second blind limp a ton at equilibrium. In 6 max with huge antes there is a ton of limping in CO and HJ. I have also started some preflop solves allowing limps from earlier positions in more standard games and it looks like equilibrium might have a lot of limping. The problem is the game tree grows so much when you allow limps and due to memory limitations, you can only allow so much limping behind and multiway postflop. So there is a practical limitation in computing limping strategies and there is an assumption that learning these strategies for normal games (6 max through 9 max) from all positions is not going to add too much EV. Top heads up players even simplify their strategy by only raising first in and never limping, but at equilibrium there is definitely limping heads up.

I think you are much more likely to execute a raise first in only strategy well and have a high win rate than implementing a limping + raising strategy. Almost every professional poker player plays like that for a reason. But I am not sure that all of that comes from people actually solving preflop allowing limping and sufficient multiway action as much as it comes from conventional wisdom.

Although in certain side games like bounty, standup, and splash pots, I think you are leaving money on the table by not considering a limping range. If the incentives are big enough, having only a limping range from earlier positions, maybe even CO and earlier might be a better simplification than having a raise only range.

There are problems with LRR, as it is usually so face up and unbalanced.

If you have a small pp in early position at 1/3, it is usually better to limp or raise smallish. I understand you give no information if you always raise and for the same size. However, the hand plays much better 5-way than HU. You are getting better immediate odds for your set and more players who can make 2-pair and pay you off. Those hands are not good choices to bluff with HU and have poor playability HU. Usually I prefer to raise pps rather than limp, but raising big and getting HU or taking it preflop is bad.

I have watched final tables of $250K etc. entry fee tournaments, and there was some limping. There are also reasons to limp with like 8-20xBB in a tournament, mainly so as not to commit a big portion of your stack with a minraise and of course having limp/shoves or giis. As mentioned, some players mix in limps HU in tournaments, etc.

You want to look at all plays available. There are similar issues with sizing etc. Sure, you give off no information if you always raise and cbet the same amount, but that may not be optimal. I know you see a lot of players do that, make the same plays regardless of hand. That is easier to do and avoids mistakes like bet size tells.