To hero or not to hero? That is the question...
This hand was played in the 6th level of an $11 mystery bounty turbo tourney on Stars. 78 players remain from 130, late
@greatwhitefish
after big sizing, solver donks turn sometimes. we can give villain zero donks.
he can fold too much Tx
he can not jam/raise enough Jx
he can not jam/raise enough 3x (solver does so with Q3 or K3 with a diamond)
field will be reshoving much tighter from BB - so we'll be up against ranges that can include KQ and AJ and small pockets some of the time
and then, more opponentspecific, his checkraising strat vs small sizing, and if it includes KQ or AJ,
relative to his checkraising strat vs big sizing
when it comes to the large sizing in general, solver would prefer it with a nut advantage.
here, villain might have more two pairs occasionally with J3off, J3s, T3s that are rather defends in the BB than opens on the button.
on the other hand, we have JJ and TT and 33. both have JToff. we also have QQ, KK, and AA which BB doesn't.
equities are 60% vs 40% for btn vs bb here.
so solver isn't void of large bets here, he does use them at a frequency with KK, QQ and some draws and bluffs in baseline.
We're talking in circles at this point, and some of us have explained, repeatedly, why this hand is better to bet with than check. So that you continue to come back to repeating the same justifications suggests to me an obstinance to learning the theory behind why we would prefer betting here.
The main thing I hope you take from this thread is that your thought process in this hand seems to be centered around avoiding specific outcomes you are uncomfortable with, no matter how rare they are (or even whether or not they're actually that bad for you). You ought to think in terms of not only your range but your opponent's range, and what line produces the best overall outcome for you, not just the one that avoids a specific situation you don't want to deal with.
Learning how to deal with difficult situations is how we grow as players, besides.
edit: In other words, it's not about the specific decision, but how we think about it.
but solver isn't void of large bets here, he does use them at a frequency with KK, QQ and some draws and bluffs in baseline.
The solve I ran had the solver using a larger sizing 0%. This spot plays much differently here at 20 bb deep compared to when you're like 100 bb deep and have to polarize with a big bet or check much more.
I know, that's why I mentioned that gto actually has few large bets here. Ive a look in (free) gtowiz.
my intention is to contemplate and talk over different ideas and strategies. Im learning myself and want to know what large bets are for, what they mean and how to play when facing them. what opponents who use them have, think and try to accomplish.
@tele: if right play is max EV play, then it's not necessarily solver's play, as solver's EV is for solver vs solver, and true EV vs real opponent may differ. in general, small bet with whole range will print. Im not exactly sure how to play after checking back, but I guess bluffcatching is bad, and I may be wrong, but I dont think so.
