How should hero play this river?

Imho, flop might be a range check. I probably like check/raising better.
If I were to cbet, I personally don't like the bet sizing, I'd probably polarize my cbet size + range to 1/2+ if I were to cbet here. Might even size up to 200 then jam turns.

Flop V has alot of floats

Turn I personally might check/jam or check/fold depending on reads on villain.

River I think we jamming range here once we barrel turn. V has alot pp, some random 7x/8x/kx, some draws, some nutted hands.
We only get villain's pp, 7x+draws to fold. We only getting snapped by Kx/8x/slowplayed hands.
If we somehow have AK+ here this is also easiest jam ever.

PRE - I'd just call. If I was going to 3B, I'd just go 4x.

FLOP - I'd just check-call, not c-bet.

TURN - I hate how we got here. V isn't capped. We should probably check to see if he bets this "scare" card. I might go for a check-raise if he stabs for a small size.

Otherwise, bet small. $190 is probably $20-$40 more than we need to make it, but whatever.

RIVER - What range do you think a solid player has here, after he calls turn?

Seems like the worst hands he'd ever have here would be KJs. You're trying to get a range fold, but it would be easier if you were over-betting 2x pot, rather than 77% pot. If he's on the loose side, loose enough to call your over 4x 3B pre, your c-bet, and your turn barrel, it doesn't seem like he's in a folding mood.

If we had KQ+ and were targeting worse value, we'd think he's getting a pretty good price to call. Great line with thick value. Not so much when we're bluffing.

bet 300 to get ace high to fold, everything else is calling anyway.

And in general I dont really like doing any of this stuff at 100BB poker. It's more like just outhand them instead of outplay them. We missed so our options are pretty limited.

1. I would mention T9s needs to generate some folds when it's 3! pre. Does this V fold at a reasonable frequency?

2. I would check flop. This is a fantastic hand to check/call or check/raise...although we're somewhat capped to 1-pair on this flop.

3. I'd almost rather check-call flop and then lead this turn card (or lead if flop goes x x).

4. AP I give up OTR. I would've bet closer to pot OTT. V can have some 8X that floated turn.

Don’t play this high, but wouldn’t play like this if I did. Your hand is barely a favorite against a random hand and a solid player opened - there’s no evidence this is light.

I almost never raise from the BB. You bloat the pot OOP, just call. Then you can float with a solid draw.

If you had the nuts on the river, you would bet small, so a jam looks suspicious. What is v calling all your bets with?

If you tell me you jam and v folds, it wouldn’t surprise me - but if he calls….

Maybe a leak in my game, but I just never decide to bluff from the git-go, especially OOP. However, you caught a semi-bluff with the initiative, so continuing makes sense and I like this type of bluff.

If you jam the river, because that’s the only way you can win, I don’t like the thought process. If you think you’re line is so strong that he can’t call, what is your range for v

I remember a reg that sat down and 1st hand starting betting like you. I folded, but the hand proceeded similar to yours. I would have bet my stack the reg had nothing, but his river jam went uncalled and he won a monster.

sizing choices dont really seem right to me. id jam without clubs but the bulk of ip's folding range is AQ which i dont think ppl will end up w here at nearly high enough frequency at a 2/5 live game, and 99 / tt along with some double floated straight draws that i doubt they have either.

v ends up w good amount of kx bc of your flop size

you're supposed to value jam JJ here but no one is going to think you're doing that

I liked this rainbow board for a cbet, I think it's going to get a lot of folds.

Sizing up flop and jamming turn is definitely an option I like, although the solvers indicate that it's lower EV than betting across three streets.

Yeah on the river it's a good question what to jam and what to give up with - mostly I was thinking about what villain's range looks like, and how much pressure it can take. I think the generaly player pool are folding most everything lower than QQ - and if you plug that into a solver, you will find that jamming is printing here.

For sure I have a lot of value bets here, specifically with AK and AA, so I have to find bluffs to balance with, and T9 is certainly close to the bottom end of my 3betting range.

T9s is a pretty standard 3bet in BB vs BTN, but calling is also okay.

I feel this is a mandatory cbet, but check-calling is also okay - just a bit passive; solver is betting at a high frequency to leverage the range advantage.

On the river solid players who haven't raised earlier in the hand are going to have a lot of QQ-99 (QQ isn't always 4betting pre), Kx, 8x, and missed draws.

Definitely I got the sizings a little wrong here and should have left more behind for the river. But in any case, if I'm jamming river for value, I have to balance it with bluffs.

So you think QQ-99 is calling a river jam? Villain has some missed draws too that will of course fold to a jam.

For sure the button range is so wide than he has to fold a lot vs 3bets, even if he's playing GTO. This villain specifically - not so sure.

Yes hero is largely capped at overpairs on this board, but that's okay - it's dry enough that betting is going to get a lot of folds.

I like a cbet here for the reasons indicated above. Our range becomes "even more capped" if we check flop instead.

Sizing up on flop and jamming turn is an interesting exploitative option that solvers won't do because it's lower EV than tripling off - I like it though and will certainly play this way sometimes.

The problem with potting the turn is that it doesn't leave enough behind for fold equity on the river, where we need it the most - this is one of the reasons I prefer jamming turn instead.

The button range is super wide and easy to attack with 3bets - it's going to get a lot of fodls right off the bat and win without resistance (or rake).

If I had the nuts on the river I would be jamming. Villain, after calling and not raising, is calling my bets with a pretty capped range of mostly one pair hands.

It's mandatory to bluff some percentage of the time in order to remain balanced and keep doubt in your opponents' mind.

Yeah, I think this hand fits the bill for that too - bottom of range, no showdown, fully polarized, unblocking clubs...

I agree, I got the sizings a little wrong here. I should either go a little smaller on flop and turn and jam river for a larger size, or perhaps size up on flop and jam turn.

I think many live players are overfolding this river, including hands QQ-99. They are "putting me on AK" a lot and I'm banking on the K giving me good fold equity as a result.

Yeah no way I am jamming JJ for value on the river, and I don't think many villains will think I'm doing that either.

Is T9 a standard 3B at 100BB? Is it standard to raise over 4x? Is it standard to 3B to 4x at 100BB and c-bet 1/3 pot from OOP? In short, is the rest of your line "standard", from beginning to end? I suspect it wouldn't be, and as you get further down the game tree you're straying farther from GTO.

Only an observation - it seems like you're looking at solvers to support what you're doing in game, which is fine, obviously. But when you admit you like to defend your BB aggressively, I wonder if that means you're defending it more aggressively than a solver would. If so, that would set you off on a trajectory to depart from GTO.

Further, if you believe your opponent is on the loose side, that would seem to indicate you should deviate from pure equilibrium, and make adjustments for his looser play. Combining his loose play and your preference for over-defending the BB would seem to push us further from what would be "standard" according to theory.

A solver may range-bet this flop in equilibrium, but I'd suspect that if we node-locked it to give V a wider range getting to the flop, a solver would start checking more. If we know that V may stab a lot when we check, or float wide when we c-bet, the solver may start to c-bet a lot less.

I don't agree you have to be balanced on the river, but that's a debate we've already had and don't need to keep repeating.

All that said, I agree your line gets V to the river with KX and some worse hands. It's unfortunate that the 8 paired on the river, as that would seem to help him more than us, and make his folding range more narrow. Regardless, it may be hard for him to hang on with worse than AK when you jam.

With the sizing scheme you chose getting here, you're walking a tightrope, trying to get him to fold not just 99-QQ but also KX that isn't AK, for less than a PSB. Even if you had an over-bet available, I wouldn't feel comfortable jamming, because he could still have AK here, and the board texture seems better for him than for us.

It's hard to cap V when we get to the turn the way we do. The only way to do it is to check or bet small, and even then, his response doesn't necessarily give us certainty about his range. He could check back Kx or 8x, or 99-QQ. We would have more clarity if the flop checked through, and then he checked back again on the turn.

I'd like this line better if the board was more connected, and we had 65s and bet small on the river, just to fold out T9s and missed flush draws (if there were any, which isn't the case here).

Overall, this seems like a hand that looks okay in a sim but isn't necessary in the real world. We don't need to take an aggressive line defending our BB against a loose opponent who's likely to continue wide vs a 3B.

We'll have position on him more often than he'll have it on us, so it would seem like we should be under-defending our BB and looking to take him to value-town when we're IP.

Played fine now jam with AK+, T9, 56

I dont really put V on QQ/JJ since those would 4bet pre. Our hand looks like a monkey-cbet with AK which V will reluctantly fold all his hero calls against. And we dont need to jam to get missed draws to fold.

Yes, T9s is a standard 3bet in BB vs BTN at 100bbs, raising to 4x when 3betting is normal when OOP, third pot flop cbet is one of many good options.

Solvers definitely defend their blinds more aggressively than I do.

If opponent is opening wider than he should be then one of many good adjustments is to 3bet wider, as he either has to overfold or defend with weaker hands to remain "unexploitable" - both of which are obviously good outcomes for me.

When opponents' ranges are wider we should attack them more often with cbets.

If you're not balanced on the river, then you're losing money vs observant opponents.

Yes the 8 on the river is definitely better for him - however he still gets there with many pairs worse than the K and it's primarily those hands I'm targeting if I decide to jam. I don't expect him to fold many Kx - if he has those, he's getting my stack - but I expect him to fold a reasonable amount of Kx to the flop bet.

Villain is pretty capped as soon as he calls the flop cbet (and does not raise instead). I don't think he's checking back overpairs on the flop. If he checks back flop and turn then yes, he's certainly capped - but so are we. IMO the only way to play this hand is to start betting on the flop - that way we remain both uncapped and polarized.

Yes it's nicer to play IP but of course I'm at least defending my BB with T9s - but I prefer 3betting and playing with range advantage.

Good call - I decided to jam, and...

At game theory equilibrium, QQ and JJ are 4betting less than half the time in BTN vs BB 3bet setups:

Yes I agree that our hand "looks like" AK a lot, and I'm banking on the K giving me a good amount of fold equity if I jam the river. Sure, we don't need to jam to get missed draws to fold, but we want to maximize fold equity vs all his weak one pair hands, and get max value when we're value betting - so in my view jamming is the only betsize to use on this river for all hands that are betting.