A tale of two dubious turn jams...

i just used hj vs co ranges for pre (i am very certain it's going to look closer to that than bvb)

for fun, if i node lock u to betting range ip otf instead

even vs that aggro of a response you still fold the ax w/o bdfd for the most part

you're going to be better off looking at this kind of stuff instead of trying to reason out counters and what you think he thinks you think he thinks you think he should do or whatever. while that's fun and makes poker seem like a wild west game of outlaws outthinking their opponents, at its heart its basically chess w variance at this point. even if you constantly want to deviate from the solver, it's very important imo to study them to learn poker theory. also, rejoice i figured out how to post screenshots

Point taken. Thank you for showing those solves.

I think the big takeaway for me is that these are just examples of situations where I don't need to be taking unnecessary low equity risks simply because I think I know what my opponents are doing. Even if I'm correct, I'll have better hands in my range that can continue, and should fold the rest.

yeah i mean the issue with the line you took is essentially it performs perfectly vs an opponent who is xring either too much air or too depolar and always xfing the turn, but poorly vs everyone else. while that type of opponent does exist, your default should not be to assume that this is the case, because if you're wrong you end up making really large errors (putting in another 12bb minimum with relatively hopeless hands, potentially getting stacked on a Q / A, having another 30+ (maybe more depending how crazy u get with this "exploit") combos of unpaired air you're going to need to deal with ott, having to risk more on the turn if he checks etc). i think in actuality the flop gets under checkraised in general because people don't really bluff. also pre ranges are tighter here than you're giving them credit for bc of preflop configuration and just the sizing of stuff iis quite large relative to the stakes

the other thing too, is you're like 50ish MAWG that's doing all kinds of table talk and weird stuff (open jamming hand 1 ott blah blah). these random young regs probably perceive you as a fish and are likely not looking to run it vs you, esp here. like how often do you see tight people call rec 3bets oop and x/r the flop as a bluff?

Many points, well taken. Much food for thought.

I've been on a downswing lately, and likely not playing my best, as we see here.

"...the opponent is a fish," which is a similar thought expressed by many posters on here as justification for playing hands we should be folding.

This gets at something I've wondered for a while: PLO players at a NLHE table, are they nut peddlers who are inured by coolers and gross folds or action junkies who get impatient and blastoff when they only get dealt two cards?

I've assumed it's highly bifurcated with the PLO grinders being comparably nitty NLHE players while the PLO fish become whales at a NLHE table, but I have wondered if they're all tighter at a NLHE table. Well, tighter but also less variance adverse (playing more marginal equity more aggressively, but being able to make bigger folds...so I guess more TAG? lol)

H1 you're killing your own action. You're getting something like AK to fold when you want to keep it in.