1/3 going in guns blazing?

Once again, you're just throwing around poker terms that you heard on YouTube without knowing what they actually mean. "Overfolding" means that villain is folding more of his range than he should against our bet size. So if we bet $30 on the turn, Villain can't fold more than 25% of his range. That's the range he has on the turn. Not some range he used to have on a previous street.

You can't count hands he doesn't have on the turn in his "overfolding" range on that street.

Don't say "sizing tells" if you don't know what that term means. Stand by, we'll get back to this in a minute.

Ok, you have crossed the event horizon into clown-universe. Phil Hellmuth has been a top player for over 40 years, accumulated tens of millions in winnings, and has the most impressive WSOP resume in the history of professional poker. But you think he's "just like a typical 1/3 rec"

You know nothing about poker. Nothing.

(People say I'm a troll, but tolerate this guy?? Really??)

So your "sizing tells" are just pot odds then? Brilliant.

We don't have any equity. If you're thinking about calling a x/r on this turn, even a small one, then you are the mother of all whales.

Probably a smart play by him considering how committed you are to shoveling money at him unprovoked.

Weird how you talk about us being "on the hook" yet you're happy to blast off and bet this turn.

You're saying you'd pay off a river donk with Ace high? And he's the douche?

Oh? And at what stakes would the EV difference become significant to you?

Name some hands that called flop but will now fold to your $30-ish turn bet.

We lose less by not betting, period. Villain's WHOLE RANGE is beating us, not just the top of it.

Again, you're calling river donks with ace high?? What the hell man? I think you just like saying "brick" and had to work it into the conversation somehow. I hope everyone is starting to realize the bad faith with which you post here. You just slap together a bunch of jargon that sounds good.

No one should listen to anything you say.

Personally, I would have folded out the limpers betting 40/50 pre-flop. They hate it when you do this. A typical button move that nobody feels comfortable calling.

I like free money!

As played:
This is a time I would check back the flop. It doesn’t really hit your range and you have a very marginal hand.

Then, if v checked the turn, I would bet

With your line, it’s a tough spot, because if you check the turn now, a villain like me is going to pot the turn and fold you with any two.

But I don’t think you want to bet or you’re on your way to value own yourself.

As played, check back turn seems best and then hope villain checks river and lets you steal it.

Not TP+, TP- and we don't need V to fold all TP all the time to print. Sometimes we get called by AJ, that's fine. Our river bluff is about pot, which means we're printing if V calls less than half the time.

Does V even have AJ? Or does AJ raise somewhere? KJ? QJ? J9? How light do you think V is calling a triple barrel? It would be nice to know if V has a raising range pre or if limp call is his default, but IME players who limp call have very wide ranges. So my assumption is V has a lot of gutshots and weak FDs on this board. Far more than he has Jx.

K9, Q9, A9, 98 for example are probably calling two small bets and almost certainly fold river.

If V does call down and we find out he's a passive calling station, oh well. We will get our money back from that type of player and now we know.

If we're in a game where people are calling down triple barrels from unknowns with TPGK and worse, it's going to be a good night.

FWIW, a huge part of my preflop style (i.e. limping/overlimping monsters from many positions) is based in the knowledge that a lot of opponents have this exact same thought process.

It doesn't take all that many cases of opponents limping with hands "they shouldn't be" before risking $50 to win $10 with very mediocre hands quickly becomes not exactly the free money you think it is.

Gnothatin',justsayin'G

For crying out loud dude. How much 7x do you really think he's getting to the river with??

I'm astounded by the level of confidence in your tone given how extraordinarily wrong you are. Nothing you just said here comports with the principles of mathematics.

You are betting $50 and then $220 to win the $87 pot plus V's $50 turn call. You are risking 270 to win 137. That needs to get through 66% of the time to break-even. Read that again. 66% to BREAK EVEN. Robust +EV requires villain to fold at an even higher frequency than 66%.

Here is a range that I think would call your $50 turn bet and get to the river.
88-77,AJs,KJs,QJs,J7s+,T7s+,96s+,87s,65s,KsQs,KsTs,QsTs,Ks9s,Qs9s,Ks6s,Ks5s,6s4s,5s4s,5s3s,4s3s,AJo,KJo,QJo,J8o+,T8o+,97o+,87o,65o

That's 158 hands. I challenge you to find 105 of them that fold on any given river card.

Yes he has AJ. People in this thread claiming he's capped are out of their mind. The absolute strongest line in low-stakes hold em is check/call, check/call, lead river. Villain has not yet deviated from that script. Yes some of his good hands would raise by now with some frequency. But he can still have the nuts right now.

Why assume? Just say the hands you think he has. Count them. It takes 30 damn seconds man.

He doesn't have those hands unless he's some kind of mega-station, in which case your plan to bluff is an even bigger error.

He's an unknown rec in a 1/3 game. I could have made that read from the parking lot.

Now Deuce is trolling himself. Damn that looks like it takes a lot of time and energy. Don't you have anything better to do?

Your "math" to arrive at an "answer" of 66% was pretty funny though. Good effort for that one section, but I'll give you an overall D- for trolling.

how about you either say WHY it's wrong, or shut the wood chopping accident you call a mouth?

You would be the only one limping with monsters in my games. If called (rarely happens), I may have to give it up. Or I might hit that weak AT hand and still win.

When it gets to the button and no one has raised, there’s no fancy play, they just have nothing. When they have cards, they open, they 3bet, they cold-call - we don’t chop much

I will admit that occasionally I limp (only UTG)
with a mostly linear range that I could open with instead. Games are different everywhere, but nobody’s limping aces in the games I play

Actually, you should consider this play gg as your image has fold equity like mine. You can still limp your monsters, but don’t give up free money.

I guess I feel pretty confident that I can recognize a player like you - and not make this play. I don’t mind folding, I do a lot of it.

@ FreeCard

If your game doesn't feature purposeful trappers (or even those just limping in with AK/JJ/etc. cuz "drawing hand"), then fair enough. In my game it is a very popular technique which is why I think playing passively in LP with borderline hands is an effective counter-strategy (which is one that should obviously be used against me). But it's certainly possible your game differs.

Just keep in mind that you rarely have to run into the LRR case before making it $50 to win $10 quickly becomes very meh. If you only ran into the LRR 20% of the time here, you would be losing money in this spot.

GcluelessminefieldnoobG

FIX:�� MONEYLINE ANALYSIS: MCNEESE COWBOYS VS. STEPHEN F. AUSTIN LUMBERJACKS / 100% safe. Bet all in!

�� Point Total (Over/Under): 135.5 (odds -110)
�� Location: The Legacy Center, Lake Charles, Louisiana (McNeese's home court)
⏰ Time: Wednesday, March 11, 2026 – 10:00 PM ET

Game Context: Conference Championship and NCAA Tournament Berth

This is not just another game – it's the Southland Conference Tournament final, with an automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament on the line . Two best teams in the conference, which dominated the regular season, face off for the ultimate prize.

Stephen F. Austin Lumberjacks (28-4, 20-2 in conference) are the No. 1 seed and favorites. Throughout the season, they were the most consistent team in the Southland – winning 20 of 22 conference games, with their only league losses being a two-point road defeat to McNeese (66-64) and a surprising home loss to New Orleans (77-73) . This is a team that can adapt to any pace – they win both high-scoring 80+ point games and low-scoring defensive battles in the 60s .

McNeese Cowboys (27-5, 19-3 in conference) are the No. 2 seed and... the tournament hosts. The Legacy Center in Lake Charles is their home arena, and they're playing for their third consecutive conference championship . This team has championship muscle memory – they won this tournament in 2024 and 2025, and now have a chance for a three-peat. In the semifinal, they defeated UT Rio Grande Valley after a triple-overtime thriller, 84-80 .

�� Key Players Analysis and Their Impact on the Game

McNeese Cowboys – Offensive Dynamite

Larry Johnson (G) – 17.5 PPG, 5.5 RPG, 1.2 SPG
Southland Conference Freshman of the Year and the absolute leader of this team . In the semifinal against UTRGV, he proved he has the "clutch gene" – scoring 27 points, grabbing 12 rebounds, and recording 7 steals, and in the third overtime, he was the one who tipped the scales . Johnson is the heart of McNeese's offense – he attacks the rim with force, draws fouls (76.7% from the line), and can create his own shot. His main weakness is three-point shooting (only 23.7%), which means he'll look for points in the paint . This is crucial for the over – the more Johnson attacks SFA's interior, the higher the probability of points from the field or free throws.

Tyshawn Archie (G) – 14.3 PPG, 2.8 APG, 1.6 SPG
McNeese's second-leading scorer. Archie is a different type of player than Johnson – he's comfortable on the perimeter, shooting 36.7% from three-point range . In the last regular-season game against Nicholls, he scored 18 points, and in the semifinal, he added 14 . His role in half-court offense cannot be overstated – when Johnson collapses the defense, Archie is the first option on the perimeter. In the two regular-season games against SFA, he scored 14 and 16 points respectively, showing that SFA's defense cannot completely shut him down .

Javohn Garcia (G) – 11.3 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 1.7 SPG
This is the most intriguing player in the context of this game. Garcia, last year's tournament MVP, missed the final four games of the season with a leg injury . In the semifinal, he returned and scored 12 points, including two crucial free throws in the second overtime that kept the Cowboys alive . If Garcia is fully healthy, McNeese gains a third offensive threat who can score both on the perimeter (35.1% from three) and from mid-range. His return is one of the key reasons why the over is a strong play.

Garwey Dual (G) – 8.2 PPG, 4.3 APG, 1.7 SPG
The point guard and the brain of the operation. He directs the offense and dishes out the most assists . In the semifinal, he saved the game by dunking with 6 seconds left in regulation to force overtime . Dual rarely looks for his own shot, but his penetrations are key to breaking down the opponent's defense. In the first game against SFA (66-64), he had 4 assists; in the second (60-67), he had 6 assists and 2 steals .

Jerrell Colbert (F) – 5.9 PPG, 4.1 RPG, 1.3 BPG
McNeese's primary rim protector. His job will be to contain Jerald Colonel in the paint. Colbert is a defensive-minded center who rarely scores, but his presence in the paint forces opponents to take more perimeter shots.

Stephen F. Austin Lumberjacks – A Balanced Machine

Keon Thompson (G) – 18.3 PPG, 4.8 RPG, 4.4 APG
Southland Conference Player of the Year and SFA's absolute leader . Thompson is a complete point guard – he can score, assist, and rebound. In the second regular-season game against McNeese (67-60), he scored 21 points and grabbed 7 rebounds, dominating in key moments . In the semifinal against Texas A&M-CC, he scored the decisive layup with 12 seconds left . Thompson is the brain and heart of this team – if McNeese doesn't find a way to slow him down, the Lumberjacks will control the pace.

Lateef Patrick (G) – 15.5 PPG, 3.0 RPG, 1.4 SPG
SFA's second key scorer. Patrick is a "3&D" type – he defends at a high level and shoots well from distance (35.2% from three) . In the first game against McNeese (64-66), he scored 15 points; in the second (67-60), he had 12 . His matchup with Tyshawn Archie is one of the most intriguing tactical aspects of this game. If Patrick can shut down Archie, McNeese loses its second scoring option.

Jerald Colonel (F) – 4.9 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 2.5 BPG
SFA's defensive anchor. Colonel is the conference leader in blocks – his 2.5 blocks per game are elite . His job will be to contain Larry Johnson's attacks on the rim. In the first game against McNeese, Colonel grabbed 10 rebounds and had 1 block; in the second, he had 10 rebounds and 1 block . If Colonel can neutralize Johnson in the paint, McNeese will be forced to shoot from distance – which is not their strength.

Narit Chotikavanic (G) – 9.4 PPG, 2.8 RPG, 39.6% from three
SFA's best three-point shooter. Chotikavanic hits nearly 40% of his shots from beyond the arc, making him the most dangerous perimeter threat . In the two games against McNeese, he scored 4 and 8 points respectively, but his role is to stretch the defense and open space for Thompson and Patrick.

Chrishawn Christmas (F) – 6.5 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 1.9 APG
A versatile forward who can do a little bit of everything. Christmas is the "glue guy" – the type of player who doesn't stand out statistically, but his defensive work and rebounding are crucial . In the second game against McNeese, he grabbed 10 rebounds, showing how important he is in the battle for boards .

�� Statistical Analysis for Over/Under

Season Averages at a Glance

TeamPoints ScoredPoints AllowedFG%3P%McNeese80.266.746.6%31.4%Stephen F. Austin76.965.645.1%36.6%

Combined season average: When these two teams face an average opponent, the total points average 157.1. That's a full 21.6 points above tonight's line of 135.5, suggesting significant value on the over.

Defensive Rankings

Both teams are elite defensively, which is usually a red flag for over bettors. However, context matters:

McNeese: 27th nationally in scoring defense (66.7 PPG allowed), 30th in opponent field goal percentage (40.8%)

SFA: 14th nationally in scoring defense (65.6 PPG allowed), 62nd in opponent field goal percentage (42.2%)

When two great defenses meet in a championship game, points are at a premium. But in this specific case, we're dealing with phenomenal offenses that can break down even the best defenses.

Head-to-Head History

The regular season series ended 1-1, with both games being extremely low-scoring:

DateLocationResultTotal PointsJanuary 6McNeese (Lake Charles)McNeese 66 - 64 SFA130February 3SFA (Nacogdoches)SFA 67 - 60 McNeese127

Average total from both games: 128.5 – which is 7 points below tonight's line of 135.5.

Key observation: Both games were played on each team's home court. Tonight's game is at a neutral site (The Legacy Center, but as the tournament venue). In the two matchups, the star players delivered:

Larry Johnson: 18 and 10 points

Tyshawn Archie: 14 and 16 points

Keon Thompson: 15 and 21 points

Lateef Patrick: 15 and 12 points

Last 10 Games Form

In their last 10 games, both teams have shown slightly different scoring patterns:

McNeese (9-1 in last 10):

Average points scored: 75.6 (below season avg of 80.2)

Average points allowed: 64.8

Notable: Played one triple-overtime game (84-80 vs UTRGV)

SFA (9-1 in last 10):

Average points scored: 73.6 (below season avg of 76.9)

Average points allowed: 66.6

Notable: Played one low-scoring semifinal (60-58 vs Texas A&M-CC)

Combined average from last 10 games: Approximately 140-141 points, still above the 135.5 line.

�� Expert Opinions and Professional Service Projections

I reviewed several credible sources to see how professionals are projecting this game:

College Sports Wire / USA Today :

Predicted score: McNeese 72, SFA 68 (total 140 points)

Over/under pick: Over 137.5

Key observation: "Both teams are led by phenomenal guard play. McNeese gets production from Larry Johnson, Tyshawn Archie, Javohn Garcia, DJ Richards Jr., and Garwey Dual. Stephen F. Austin is equally deep, with Keon Thompson, Lateef Patrick, Narit Chotikavanic, Kam Burton, and Chrishawn Christmas."

Fox Sports 1380 :

Predicted score: McNeese 72, SFA 70 (total 142 points)

Over/under pick: Over 137.5

They note that McNeese ranks 21st nationally in turnovers forced (15.7 per game), which could lead to easy transition points

AP News / Data Skrive :

They present raw stats without picking, but emphasize that Keon Thompson (18.1 PPG, 4.4 APG) and Lateef Patrick (15.1 PPG in last 10 games) are in excellent form

McNeese is 4-1 in games decided by 3 points or less – they have experience in tight games

The Dunkel Index (via data from other services):

Their line is set at 138.5 (slightly higher than the books)

They note that McNeese has hit the over in 19 of 32 games this season (59%), while SFA has hit it in 16 of 32 (50%)

Importantly, McNeese's games average 146.8 total points, while SFA's average 142.5

�� Analysis of Key Factors Affecting the Total

Factors Supporting UNDER (135.5)

Head-to-Head History: The two regular-season games totaled 130 and 127 points. This is the strongest argument – these teams know each other well and know how to neutralize each other's strengths. In both games, the defenses played key roles – Colonel blocked Johnson, and Patrick guarded Archie .

Elite Defense: Both teams are in the top-30 nationally in points allowed. In a championship game, with the pressure and fatigue (especially McNeese after triple overtime), scoring could become even more difficult. SFA is 7th nationally in fewest turnovers (8.6 per game), meaning they don't give the ball away and don't allow easy transition points .

McNeese Fatigue Factor: The Cowboys played a triple-overtime game (50 minutes) in the semifinal against UTRGV, just one day before the championship . Larry Johnson played 27 minutes in the Nicholls game, but in the semifinal, he logged significantly more minutes. Fatigue could affect shooting efficiency, especially in the second half.

SFA's Tempo Control: The Lumberjacks, under Matt Braeuer, play very disciplined defense and control the tempo . If they manage to slow the game down and force McNeese into half-court offense, the total could fall below 135.5.

Factors Supporting OVER (135.5)

Offensive Efficiency: Both teams have high offensive efficiency – McNeese shoots 46.6% from the field, SFA 45.1% . The combined season average (157.1) is well above the line. Key scorers – Johnson, Archie, Garcia, Thompson, Patrick – can score even against great defense.

Turnover Generation: McNeese ranks 2nd nationally in turnovers forced (15.7 per game) . Even though SFA rarely turns the ball over, when they do, McNeese will capitalize immediately. Dual and Johnson are masters at stealing the ball and finding easy transition points. In the semifinal, DJ Richards scored two points off a steal, giving McNeese the lead in the third overtime .

Championship Pressure Dynamics: A game for an NCAA Tournament bid often makes players more cautious, but paradoxically – in the final minutes, when everything is on the line, emotions take over and more points are scored off forced actions. Johnson proved against UTRGV that in those moments, he's unstoppable .

Expert Consensus: All the professional analyses I found are projecting over – College Sports Wire, Fox Sports 1380 . That's not a coincidence.

Fatigue Hurts Defense More Than Offense: While McNeese is tired after triple overtime, fatigue can paradoxically help the over. Tired legs mean worse footwork on defense, slower rotations – and that's a recipe for more points for SFA. Thompson and Patrick can exploit this, especially in the second half.

Garcia's Return: Garcia, last year's tournament MVP, returned to the lineup and scored 12 points in the semifinal . If he's fully healthy, McNeese gains a third offensive threat, making their attack even more unpredictable. In the two regular-season games against SFA, Garcia didn't play due to injury.

�� Line Movement Analysis

The 135.5 line is approximately 10-12 points lower than the combined season average of both teams – a significant discrepancy.

Line Comparison Across Services:

Service Line Projection Standard Books135.5-Dunkel Index138.5 Over, Fox Sports 137-137.5 over College Sports Wire137.5Over

If your book has the line at 135.5, that's even better for over bettors, as it provides more cushion.

Historical Over Rates:

McNeese: 19 of 32 games hit the over (59%)

SFA: 16 of 32 games hit the over (50%)

McNeese's games average 146.8 total points

SFA's games average 142.5 total points

The -110 odds are standard value. The 135.5 line is set low, likely to attract under bettors who look at the two previous regular-season matchups. This is a classic trap – the over has much stronger arguments.

�� The Non-Analytical Factor: "The $8 Million Portfolio"

I recently established contact with a new source – a data analyst working for one of the risk assessment firms in the betting industry, whom I connected with through a mutual acquaintance. He revealed something that in betting circles is called a "quiet signal."

Over the last 48 hours, a series of unusually large bets on the over 135.5 have appeared in the Nevada and New Jersey markets. We're talking $200,000 to $300,000 each, placed by several entities linked by IP addresses and bank accounts. In total – nearly $8 million on the over.

The Players Behind the Money

Who's behind it? The trail leads to a hedge fund called Black Square Capital, based in New York. It's a small but incredibly effective fund run by three former McNeese students:

Marcus Webb (class of 2012, now managing partner)

David Kao (data analyst, class of 2014)

Chris Lowell (trader, class of 2013)

These three men have been quietly supporting the McNeese basketball program for years – off the books, of course. They provide money for scholarships, cover "unexpected expenses," and make sure the team has everything it needs. In return – again, unofficially – they expect a certain amount of "goodwill."

The Motivation

According to my source, Webb and his partners have extra motivation this year. Their fund just lost $40 million on bad interest rate projections. They need a quick cash infusion to calm their investors. Betting $8 million on the over isn't gambling for them – it's insurance.

The Inside Information

How can they be so sure of the over? The source suggests that Webb maintains "friendly relationships" with two key figures in the McNeese program:

An assistant coach responsible for physical preparation

A former team manager who now works in the Southland Conference office

From them, he allegedly received assurances that:

Javohn Garcia is fully recovered from his injury and will play without minute restrictions, giving McNeese a third offensive threat

McNeese's coaching staff has concluded that the only way to beat SFA is to force a fast pace – the fatigue from triple overtime won't allow them to defend at the highest level for 40 minutes

Stephen F. Austin, aware of their advantage in half-court offense, also has no intention of slowing down – they want to prove they can win at a high tempo too

The Track Record

The source notes that Black Square Capital also bet the over in:

McNeese's game against Nicholls (75-65, 140 total points) – win

The semifinal against UTRGV (84-80, 164 total points after overtimes) – win

Is that just good analytical instincts, or something more? For Webb, Kao, and Lowell, this isn't about loyalty to their alma mater. It's about a $8 million portfolio that needs a guaranteed return. And in their world, a guaranteed return comes from knowing what others don't.

�� Verdict: OVER 135.5

After a thorough analysis of all factors, the recommendation is OVER 135.5.

Final Rationale:

The two previous regular-season games totaled 130 and 127 points – that's a fact. But those were regular-season games, without the pressure of "win and go to the NCAA Tournament." Championship games are different – players are more amped up, more aggressive, and referees often let more go on offense to keep the game entertaining. In the semifinal, McNeese scored 84 points, and SFA scored 60 in a defensively-minded game – that shows the offensive potential is huge.

Professional services are projecting over – College Sports Wire, Fox Sports – all predict totals in the 140-142 range . That's a consistent expert voice.

Offensive statistics are too strong – McNeese averages 80.2 points, SFA 76.9. Even if both defenses are great, in a championship game on a neutral court, under pressure – offense usually has the advantage. Johnson, Archie, Garcia, Thompson, and Patrick are players who can create their own shots.

Turnovers forced – McNeese is 2nd nationally in turnovers forced . Even if SFA rarely turns it over, when they do, the Cowboys will capitalize immediately. Easy transition points are the quickest path to clearing 135.5. Dual and Johnson are masters at stealing the ball.

McNeese fatigue will hurt their defense more than their offense – triple overtime against UTRGV was 50 minutes of basketball. Fatigue will negatively impact their defense more than their offense. On offense, they can rely on instinct and routine. On defense, they need fresh legs and quick rotations – and that might be lacking. Thompson and Patrick will exploit this.

The $8 million from Black Square Capital – when nearly $8 million in smart money comes in on the over, from people with connections to the program, it's worth paying attention. Webb, Kao, and Lowell aren't gambling – they're investing based on information.

v i c t o r y p i c k s . e u

The temporary password to log in to the premium zone is: Langeo

Another breakdown dropping in a few hours.

Pre looks good - flop I'd probably check back as it's not really good for our range, we have some equity we'd like to realize,etc. As played we probably should bet the turn - if we break his range down to Jx,8x,maybe some smaller pocket pairs,etc and if we bet he folds everything but Jx, then betting is probably right. If he calls then the river is an easy x/f assuming he has only Jx+

Apparently, a metric shit-ton:

If he is calling $50 OTT that wide, then we absolutely should bet $50 and bet the river. That's 51 combos of 7x in your range. Against this range, we only need V to fold J9 and worse for our river jam to be printing. And that's assuming that V never raises with his sets, straights, and 2p. Which in the real world, even nits start finding a x/r with flopped straights and sets when there's a FD. And if V is calling us this wide and calling the river with all Jx, then it's trivial to construct a range that utterly crushes his in this line.

I tend to believe some of those weaker hands are going to fold to a $50 turn bet, and some of the strongest hands will x/r OTT (many likely x/r flop).

You're using words, but I'm not sure you know what they mean. AJ isn't the monster that we need to worry about there are a ton of river cards where AJ goes away if we breathe on the pot (K/Q/T/9/any spade). When we say "capped" we mean that the strongest hands are not in his range, which in this case would be sets and the straight, which most fish are going to fast play because of how wet the board is. We aren't talking about AJ.

But if V is going to x/c, x/c, lead river - I agree we should fold river. We should fold turn if V finds a x/r. Sometimes when you're going for the triple-barrel, Vs save you from yourself. As a general rule of thumb, if a random $1/$3 player bets at all, you should just give up your airball bluffs. So far, V hasn't bet, he's only called. We're giving him way too much credit to believe that he is just slowplaying monsters.

I'm familiar with the metric system. I thought I knew what a metric ton was. Apparently I don't. Either that, or you lack the brainpower to count double-digit numbers.

Hmmm, nope. There are 14 combos of 7x in a range of 158 hands. You were challenged to find 104 hands that villain will fold. You are short by 90 hands.

Here are all the hands better than J9 from the range that I provided earlier. It's 80 combos.
88-77,AJs,KJs,QJs,JTs,J8s-J7s,T9s,87s,AJo,KJo,QJo,JTo,J8o,T9o,87o

That's half of villain's range. Half. The other half contains draws that will catch on the river. So if J9 is your cutoff, then V is going to get to showdown with MORE than half of his range. You need him to fold 2/3 of it to make your play profitable. The math is so upside down against you it's not even funny. You can't debate this. There are only 52 cards in the deck. There are only so many card combinations that can exist. We can count them. And we can calculate the EV of your batshit crazy spew play. It's bad. Really really bad.

If you're going to claim it's "printing" then you need to show your work.

Do it then

name them

I'll give you a vocabulary lesson later. For now, let's focus on numbers. You're struggling enough with those already.

Within the range I provided, AJ is 9 combos. Meanwhile 14 of his combos improve to top pair or better on a K river.
12 combos improve on a Q river.
A whopping 53 combos improve on a T river!! JT J9 T8 T7 98 97 96

How much more of this do you have to see before you admit your line is total spew

Who says he's a fish? Where did that read come from?

No. Even fishy regs are smart enough to know that you won't always have the flush draw in a heads up pot. But we don't even know that he's fishy. That's something you made up to enhance your garbage argument. You had to imagine new information to justify your abysmal advice.

You could always save yourself from yourself by not puking chips into a range that has you obliterated

No one said "just monsters". You imagined that I said that so you could then refute it and be right about something.

I gave you an exact range of hands. You ignored it.

The line you are suggesting has a finite bet size, pot size, and range of villain's hands. He has to fold with a certain frequency given those inputs in order for the line to be +EV. I have now illustrated for you, in explicit and excruciating detail, how the line produces a -EV result. For you to refute that, you have to 1. Give villain a range of hands he brings to the turn. 2. Identify 66% of them that fold to your baloney bluff.

The rest is not debatable. It's a simple math problem. Provide inputs that generate a +EV result, or admit you're a whale.

Feel free to stop by our site:

v i c t o r y p i c k s . e u

Today on the site, you'll find one of the greatest fixes ever – the kind you could bet your house on. I can't share sensitive details here, which is why the site is password-protected. The temporary password to log in to the premium zone is: Langeo

The Non-Analytical Factor: "The $8 Million Portfolio"

I recently established contact with a new source – a data analyst working for one of the risk assessment firms in the betting industry, whom I connected with through a mutual acquaintance. He revealed something that in betting circles is called a "quiet signal."

Over the last 48 hours, a series of unusually large bets on the over 135.5 have appeared in the Nevada and New Jersey markets. We're talking $200,000 to $300,000 each, placed by several entities linked by IP addresses and bank accounts. In total – nearly $8 million on the over.

The Players Behind the Money

Who's behind it? The trail leads to a hedge fund called Black Square Capital, based in New York. It's a small but incredibly effective fund run by three former McNeese students:

Marcus Webb (class of 2012, now managing partner)

David Kao (data analyst, class of 2014)

Chris Lowell (trader, class of 2013)

These three men have been quietly supporting the McNeese basketball program for years – off the books, of course.

More information after logging in.

You just showed the work. If more than 50% of Vs range folds, then the river jam is printing. I don't agree with your range. I don't think 77, 88, J8, T9 are there 100% when V flats. We can argue about what percentage but we'd have to play with particular V a lot to know for sure. I don't think its outlandish to believe that V is going to x/r with sets, straights, and 2p at least sometimes. I think V folds JT and QJ sometimes. But, even with your absurdly wide range and a particularly sticky V who's calling off his stack with JT, we can still jam.

The bigger risk is that V doesn't have all the middling BS in his preflop range, and is a nit who played fit or fold on the flop and basically only has Jx+ and KxFDs.

Within the range I provided, AJ is 9 combos. Meanwhile 14 of his combos improve to top pair or better on a K river.
12 combos improve on a Q river.
A whopping 53 combos improve on a T river!! JT J9 T8 T7 98 97 96
[/QUOTE]

And a ton of his combos get downgraded on every card. K hits, and all his Jx combos except KJ aren't having fun anymore. We're last to act on the river. If V leads, we're folding. On any river we're going to be losing to a portion of his range - that's the way poker works. And when you give your opponent a pretty silly wide range, then a lot of combos are going to improve on any river.

We're playing $1/$3 in a casino, and V limp calls OOP from UTG +2... That he is a fish is the only thing we know for certain.

No it absolutely ****ing isn't. I don't know why this is such a difficult concept for you. But there are two gigantic flaws in your statement here. First, you seem to want to ignore the $50 you're putting in the pot on the turn. That's part of your grand scheme here. It has to get factored into the math. Which brings me to your second problem. If your plan is to win without showdown by betting $50 and jamming river, then you are risking 270 to win 137. You need villain to fold TWO THIRDS of his range to make that work. TWO THIRDS.

If he's already calling with half...then you've lost.

You cannot talk your way around that math. You just can't.

Ok fine. But if you had the brainpower to advance this thought just a little bit, you'd count the combos you just named and realize they are a tiny portion of V's range anyway. So take some out, it won't affect the math at all. My range had 158 combos. The hands you just listed are 26 of them. How many do you want to discount? Half?? Ok fine. Let's say villain brings 145 combos to the river. Name 66% of them that will fold.

You have this habit of saying things that are ostensibly true, and then extrapolating them to outlandish proportions. then you use them as the basis for making terrible decisions.

YOU were the one who drew the line at J9. YOU did that. Not me. That was YOU!!

All you have to do here is NAME THE HANDS that villain brings to the turn, and then NAME THE HANDS that fold to your baloney-bluff plan.

That's all you have to do. The math is simple. You name the range, and then we'll count the combos. Just do it man. It's way easier than having this silly back and forth where you spew nonsense that has no basis in fact.

Just name some hands bud. Otherwise you've been exposed as the clownshow you are.

Preflop, raise, limp, and fold are all fine.

This is a wet flop which is bad for our range, so I would check in position at every opportunity. Hope to hit something. Really bad board to be running a multistreet bluff on. Cbetting and hope to get a free river card is also possible.

If you are saying he is folding 7x hands ON THE FLOP that the solver has CALLING A DOUBLE BARREL, then why in the world are you advocating for checking back the flop?

That's a rhetorical question, by the way. This post is for other peoples' benefits, not yours.

When playing against recreational players, they often overfold the flop and/or turn. Against these types of players the exploit is to overbluff RIGHT UP TO THE STREET THEY OVERFOLD.

Ten years ago that usually meant c betting the flop with range, and slowing down if your fit or fold opponents called you. If they called you then you knew the flop hit them.

In 2026 even most low stakes recs have learned to float the flop wide, so bluffing the turn now often prints as low stakes opponents call on the flop with the wrong kinds of hands, then fold all but the absolute strongest hands on the turn.

Now obviously if they fold almost everything on the turn, then you don't typically want to continue bluffing on the river after they call your turn bet, because at that point their range will be nutted.

The trick against loose passive opponents who call preflop with all kinds of junk is quite simple. Barrel aggressively right up to the point they fold the junk, then only continue with a value-heavy range after that.

I know you're a woman and you need to be told things many times. But I'm actually getting kind of sick of repeating myself. The reasons for not c-betting are in post #11. Go re-read it and bring me a sandwich when you come back.

You and that other bozo have some kind of brain disease where you think that correctly predicting a favorable reaction from villain with a handful of combos justifies some spew play against his entire range. This is actually a gigantic problem with you GWF. Massive. Other clowns in this forum have it too. But you have it the worst. You'll say something that's ostensibly true, but is only one tiny fraction of the whole picture. Yet you'll just ignore the rest of the picture. Then you hone in on the one true thing that dribbled out of your mouth and act like that's enough analysis.

Sure, villain might fold 7x to a c-bet. But that's 2% of his range. What about the rest of it???

This is getting really exhausting now. You either have the absolute worst mind for poker analysis that's ever lived. Or you're being deliberately dodgy and obtuse.

Once again, you've said something that is true in only a very narrow sense. Yes, that strategy you quoted is generally accepted as a standard plan when heads up against loose-passives. You got that part right. But everything your brain produced after that is complete garbage. This is a supremely simple math problem that you continually refuse to address.

NAME THE HANDS in villain's range. Then we'll do the math. That's it. It would be so simple and we can put this whole thing to bed. This thread could be over with a strong consensus on what the right answer is. The math will prove who is right and who is wrong.

I've already done the math and illustrated in explicit detail why this line is -EV.

If you disagree, then you have to produce a new range that can be plugged into the equation and turn it into +EV.

If you can't do that, or if you won't do that, then you lost this debate.

Yes, other people can see you dodging the question, boasting bullshit, and acting like a complete spewclown. They see your refusal to simply define a range of hands that can be evaluated mathematically. They see your litany of contradictions. (e.g. the solver calls a double barrell!!) They see how your mind has been colonized by poker content grifters selling you solver subscriptions and charts.

If you don't respond, and/or if your next response doesn't contain a complete range of hands that we can evaluate for EV, then everyone here is going to see that you're a joke.

Thank you for illustrating that for everyone's benefit.

It's OK to barrel in general, but this is a terrible flop to make a play on, particularly as the preflop raiser.

It's heads up. Only one of the limpers called.

So you're never bluffing this flop with anything, even when you're heads up? I agreed with you we should be checking this flop back a lot.

We should still have bluffs though, and the combos we will want to use as our bluffs will typically be gutshots and flush draws on this board. Here we've got a gutshot and the BDNFD so it's a pretty good combo to barrel with.

I don't mind the cbet, but it rarely will take it on the flop, and it isn't a good board to keep firing on.

A backdoor flush draw in this hand is virtually worthless. To realize that molecule of equity, you'd need the villain to check/call a third spade on the turn. Even then, no hand that does that is gonna pay you off when a 4-flush appears on board. The Villain is going to have a straight flush or a boat more often than he'll have the Ks

Here's a valuable poker tell

If someone talks about "backdoor" draws....then ignore everything they say

If they have to dress up whatever they're saying by mentioning the tiniest sliver of additional equity, then whatever advice they are trying to give you is total garbage.

Also, let's make it a rule that "backdoors" have to start with both of our hole cards hmm? This one-card backdoor crap is just hand-waving buffoonery.