1/3 AKs facing limp/3b

We have to match the 85 as well as ship the rest.

We're only in for $20 at this point.

1. I think you're dead wrong about our fold equity.

V started with $330, and limped in. He then 3B to an amount that doesn't commit him to calling the rest off. If he's not committed to calling the rest off, then he can fold when we jam.

2. His range isn't always and only AA/KK. He can have AK, AQs, JJ/QQ, and if he's aggro, perhaps worse than that. Like I said, I've done this with A8o. He can have TT. I've seen guys get it in for 100BB's with 99, and A5s.

There's a portion of his limp-3B range that can fold, especially when he doesn't commit himself by 3B'ing to a larger size. Even if there's no fold equity, it's okay

3. Ah, I see what you're saying about it being another $310 more for us to ship. But that's not how we should look at it. It's $85 more to call, or $310 more to ship, but the difference is only $245. If you call the $85, it's in the pot, and we'd have $245 left.

It doesn't make a ton of sense to call, let V see a flop, and then decide if we want to get stacks in for another $245, when the SPR will be under 1.3. It's not a call or fold decision, it's a jam or fold decision. And if we jam over his $85, it's for another $245 on top of his $85, not another $310 on top of your $20.

Yes, the math works out the same. Conceptually, it's not the same. He's not putting us to the test for $330. We're putting him to the test for another $245.

It's a trade-off. If we keep V2 in the pot, there's another player who can pay us off, but our overall equity goes down.

Seeing as how it can be hard to squeeze any value out of opponents when they put us on AK and we flop TPTK, or they go bonkers whenever the board looks "safe" without an A or K on it, I'm generally happy to squeeze out the dead money and play for stacks heads up.

I did mean to word it that way, but probably only because I've picked up that phrasing from others. My meaning is that we want worse hands to call our c-bet, and the smaller the bet size we use, the more pressure worse hands feel to continue.

@Dango - ^This is why it's not a fold-or-call decision. I disagree that we never have fold equity here, though.

It's 1/3. V limp-3B. The assumption is that it's always AA/KK when someone does that, but it's a bad assumption. It's always AA when it's an OMC limp-3B'ing, but usually the OMC pot-commits himself.

This V is a 40's Asian who apparently dresses like he just woke up from a 20 year nap. He's going to be wider than AA/KK here. In fact, I'd be inclined to believe he never plays AA/KK this way. He's most likely just open AA/KK for a raise.

This is more likely to be a B-tier hand that will absolutely fold if you 4B, because a 4B at 1/3 is usually nutted, particularly when it's a 4B over a limp-3B.

If you flat call here, you're rewarding opponents for playing this way. Instead of just opening their hand for a raise, and having to call a 3B if they want to see a flop, and then play from OOP, they get to generate tons of fold equity by back-raising, and see a flop with a perceived range advantage.

When you then c-bet 1/3 pot, you make it easy for them to play perfectly. If you're not going to 4B-jam on this guy pre, you need to make insultingly-small bets after you flop TPTK, to force him to continue with all the low-equity crap in his limp-3B range.

Alternatively, if he wants to get stacks in pre with all the mid-PP's and dominated AX in his range, okay, let's get it in when we have AK.

I was more speaking as to what we want V2 to do when we shove and V1 calls. Yes, our equity will go down, but our EV will often go up due to his money now being in the pot too, although it depends on the hands involved and how much dead money V2 has already put in compared to stacks. If V1 calls our shove, I'm giving him a very pear heavy range, which I believe means we also want V2 in the mix with worse pears (unless he has put in a much more significant portion of stacks as dead money, in which case we probably want him to fold). But if V1 somehow calls with worse (which I'm not really expecting) then I'm guessing we want V2 to fold his pears. All kinda moot / whatever, but just kinda clarifying that it isn't necessarily clear what we would like V2 to do in this case (it depends).

Odd/confusing way of using it, imo, but ok and we're on the same page.

GcluelessNLnoobG

This is a close spot. I fold or shove to maximise our raw equity and fold equity, and never call.

I lean shove because IME the l/rr line is less nutted than a 4bet. I've seen some nonsense hands show up here where I almost never see worse than QQ/AKo with a 4bet. I would fold to a 4bet (cold or otherwise) in this scenario.

If they do have a nonsense hand, shoving should fold out all the mid pockets. The usual AK arguments apply. Additionally if we are going to take a hyper-aggressive line with AK at low stakes, AKs gives us some extra equity.

Note that this is dependant on my personal experience with this l/rr line, YMMV.

TL;DR I shove.

I agree that a shove here is best. As described, I think we should assume V1 has more than the standard cr range of KK+ and is capable of being aggresive to try to pick up the $47 already in the pot . And I think that V2 is basically always 3 betting with KK+. We're fine getting it in on the flop against both ranges, and we can get V2 to fold 22-TT a lot which is a great result. There is also a non zero chance that V1 calls with a worse Ax after putting in 1/4 of his stack, AND V2 folds a pair.