Feeling Lost Facing Aggression with AA
1/3 NLHE
This is my 3rd or 4th hand after sitting down. V is about 70 and plays at least semi regularily. I've played with him once or twice and don't remember him doing anything different from what I would assume about the play of a random 70yo. V is the SB
H - UTG (500) Raises to 15 with AcAs
UTG+2 (500) Calls
Bu (300) Calls
SB (V) (600) Calls
BB (300) Calls
Flop (70)
Qc 5c 4h
SB (V) Check
3 more checks
H Bets 50
Folds to SB who c/r to 125
BB Folds.
-I honestly consider folding here on the flop as a hard exploit. 70yo players rarely do this with a draw or with worse for value.
H Calls
Turn (320) (360 behind)
Qc 5c 4h (5d)
SB (V) Bets 100
-I think to myself that V's value combos have now decreased quite a bit. If we assume that V 3! PF 66% of the time with QQ, then he only had 7 combos of sets and 2 combos of 45s for a total of 9 combos OTF. Now he only has 1 combo of 55 and 1 combo of 45s so his value combos have shrunk to 6. I'm wondering if these last 2 thoughts are even worth considering against a random 70yo in my 1/3 game..-
H Calls
River (520) (260 behind)
Qc 5c 4h 5d (6c)
SB (V) Snap Shoves 260 into 520.
-H goes back and forth between 2 different trains of thought. At first I think that V is never doing this with worse for value. H is getting 3 to 1 so V needs to be bluffing 25% for me to call. This seems very unlikely so I want to fold.
Then I consider that I literally only need to find 2 combos of bluffs in his range in order to call (I think I have reasonably condensed his value range to 6 combos).
H?
Should having the Ac sway my decisions one way or the other on any street?
11 Replies
He flopped two pair.
When someone check/raises out of the blinds, it's always 2 pair.
Every
single
time
This seems to me to be an excellent assumption to make.
Assuming I've ranged him correctly (which I didn't since he had 45o and presumably could have had all the 2 pairs since he had 45o..) he has a single combo of flopped 2 pair by the turn; 4s5s.
Are you suggesting that folding to V's flop C/R is the best option?
I don't think it's a mistake to fold here. But it's a close spot. You have to use default settings until you get a read that says otherwise. And the book on 70 year old poker players says he's raising for value. This isn't some spicy bluff with 78cc
You have outs against two pair, so continuing isn't terrible. But when the turn pairs the board, your equity just evaporates. If the turn was say, a Jack, and V bets 100 offering you better than 4-1 you're getting very near the price you need to hit a Q, J, or A on the river. Then again, he might have bet bigger had he not hit a boat.
So yea, I think it's a fold on the flop. It's really hard to win a big pot with an overpair multi-way. It's really easy to lose one though.
You're getting lost in the combos - a random 70-something probably isn't playing perfect GTO, he is playing his hand.
V called from the SB after H raises and gets two callers. So his range is super wide, with QQ probably at the top, and anything that is somewhat connected or pretty.
OTF, what is V x/r with? Sets, 2p, and maybe a draw. But what draws? NFDs... but you block all of those. Is V ever x/r with a hand like KJcc? My guess is probably not. Is V x/r with an OESD? Again, probably not. Is V x/r with KQ? Probably not. If V were that aggressive with draws, you'd have put an aggressive label on him by now. Maybe a combo draw like 76cc gets spicy.
So OTF, you're against sets, 2p, and combo draws. The weaker draws that might x/r all include the Ac which you hold. V can't have TP + FD. Preflop, V has QQ/55/44/54 that would play this way preflop a lot. We're really hoping he has 87cc 76cc or 32cc - both plausibly in his preflop range and plausibly x/r here. But really we're in terrible shape vs his range
OTT, V leads small. Is V leading small with sets and 2p that just became boats? Absolutely. Is he leading with combo draws? Seems a bit weird. Even weirder if he somehow still has Kxcc in his range. So you're against nuts and random blow-ups.
OTR, V jams. All the draws just came in. The flush, the straight, there's boats, all very plausibly in your hand because you know he doesn't hold the Ac. Yet he still shoves. To believe your ahead, you have to believe that V basically started bluffing with a complete airball hand and has decided to carry it out three streets with like 72. Maybe he is 72?
The bottom line is that he is essentially never bluffing this line or he is 70 year-old Rampage. Going back to the flop, KQ isn't taking this line for value. He isn't x/r non-nut FDs (and if he is, he just got there), all the combo draws came in, and the most likely hands to take this action are sets and 2p on the flop because even "good" $1/$3 players tend to way under x/r. They x/r with strong made hands and the aggressive ones with a good chunk of equity. So the river is an easy snap fold IMO.
I think the turn call was way too light, and you probably could have folded the flop because you block the only relevant draws that might get out of line. Keep in mind, V x/r you with another player in between who also has all the sets and 2p in his range. To continue OTF, we need to believe that V is x/ring with a Kx FD sometimes. If we didn't have the Ac, then I think a call is necessary because it is plausible that NFDs will x/r sometimes, like A4cc or A3cc.
Could take a different view of the line after facing the c/r if given some reads (do you think V does this with AQ or KK?
1st comment tho is that on the flop typically we want to bet smaller here, esp since you have the Ac.
Given the larger bet size, not thrilled by the 2.5x check raise. You are usually toast, unless you have a read to the contrary.
I do have to agree that my read is 2pair with the check-raise as a set is maybe not quite as aggressive. Still, I wouldn’t count out AQ.
The problem when the board pairs you could be counterfeiting him or he just boated up.
There is a typical 70 year old player, but be careful - some can make bizarre plays; so reads are important.
The small turn bet:
1. Could be a boat not wanting a fold
2. Could be AQ thinking ono better slow down maybe he’s got better than TPTK
If there’s any chance of 2 at all, I’m probably gonna get in & be cracked. It usually takes 2+ players shoving $ in the middle for me to fold aces. Sometimes the line looks like you have to be beat….. but you’re not.
But don’t feel you need reinforcement about folding aces. Anytime you think you’re beat, it’s a good play to fold. Sometimes you just know.
PRE - raise bigger. It's clearly a splashy game. Make it $20.
FLOP - check or use a smaller c-bet size, like $20 or $25. If you're going to use a large c-bet size, go really large, like full pot or over-bet.
As played, when V check-raises, he could have 2P or a set. Sometimes he just has TP or a good combo-draw. If we had c-bet smaller, his raise size might tell us something about his hand strength, but when we c-bet big, a smaller raise size doesn't seem to tell us much.
Since we have position and we're getting a good price to continue, I wouldn't fold. I'd probably just call and see what he does on the turn.
If we had a read that V was wild, and capable of x/r'ing a super-wide range, I might consider 3B'ing here.
TURN - Actually seems like a decent card for us, as it cuts down on his combos of 2P and sets. It makes his range more weighted towards TP and combo draws.
Before deciding what we want to do with AA, it might help to think about how we'd play other hands in our range.
We could get here with a lot of missed draws, 66-JJ, AK, etc. We'd probably be folding all those hands that don't beat TP and don't have much if any chance to improve. If we had AQ/KQ, we'd block TP, and his range would be more weighted towards better value and bluffs.
If we're folding AA/KK here, what do we have that calls? Just boats? If we're sure V is never betting worse for value or semi-bluffing, we could make an exploitable fold, but it would be hard for me to fold here, without more info on V. Just being old doesn't mean he isn't capable.
RIVER - he SNAP shoved? Hmmmm...
I've heard people say that snap shoves on nut-changing cards are usually bluffs. The 6c isn't exactly nut-changing, but it does bring in some draws, and maybe some other weird stuff.
What I've seen with the snap shove is it's often done when someone was semi-bluffing and got there. It's an involuntary response to the release of tension and anxiety when they make their hand.
It's also sometimes the case that they knew they were going to shove before the card was dealt, either as a bluff or for value.
The 6c makes it impossible for him to have the most obvious combo-draw of 76cc. The Qc on board makes it impossible for him to have any QXcc combos. Maybe he takes this line with 87cc or some other combo draw, but it seems less likely he's going to x/r a big flop c-bet with the sort of draw that's a gut-shot and a low flush draw.
I don't know. There's no read or reliable tell that gives us enough additional info to make an exploitable decision. I'd probably just default to combo-counting and decide based on that.
Getting 3:1 on a call, we need to find 1 hand we beat for every 3 hands that beat us. If we give him every combo of 55, 44, and 54, that's 10 combos. If we give him every combo of AQ, that's 6 combos, which is more than enough. If he ever does this with KQ, or KK, or anything else we beat, it's a slam dunk call.
PRE - raise bigger. It's clearly a splashy game. Make it $20.
FLOP - check or use a smaller c-bet size, like $20 or $25. If you're going to use a large c-bet size, go really large, like full pot or over-bet.
I'm trying to become more thoughtful with my bet sizes based on what I'm trying to accomplish. You're saying that the 2/3PSB OTF is the worst of my 4 options here. I think I understand why 1.25x pot OTF is better than my 2/3x pot. I think it is because their calling ranges will be about the same to those 2 bet sizes. AQ, KQ, 67s and clubs probably aren't folding. Is checking better than my 2/3PSB because in the event that lots of money goes in, I am probably beat? So it's better to pot control, and maybe get 1-2 streets of value later on clean runouts?
I have a harder time understanding why a 1/3PSB is better than a 2/3PSB. I hear MG say all the time that he wants to "bet the biggest amount to get them to raise with their strong stuff and call with their weak stuff". Is that what we would be doing by betting smaller OTF like you suggested? Are we trying to thin the field, while keeping the pot smallish with our 1 pair hand?
Thank you all for the critiques.
Results:
Hero feels annoyed, and tells himself that he haz Aces and half his stack is already in the middle. He thinks he's beat somewhere between 100 and 105% of the time and calls anyway.
V had 45o and turned a boat.
Are there any types of V' where you all are folding to V's flop C/R? What if I've labeled him an OMC?
I'm trying to become more thoughtful with my bet sizes based on what I'm trying to accomplish. You're saying that the 2/3PSB OTF is the worst of my 4 options here. I think I understand why 1.25x pot OTF is better than my 2/3x pot. I think it is because their calling ranges will be about the same to those 2 bet sizes. AQ, KQ, 67s and clubs probably aren't folding. Is checking be
Our bet sizing should be based on how we're ranging our opponents and what we're trying to accomplish vs those ranges.
So, here, in a multi-way pot, our opponents can have a lot of hands that are better than ours and a lot of hands that are worse. If we bet big, we're funneling thrm into continuing with the strongest hands and best draws, and folding all the weak hands we want to call.
A smaller bet or a check works better here than a big bet. A 1/2 to 3/4 pot bet is too in between. We're just losing more when we're behind and winning less when we're ahead, because it'll be harder to get multiple streets of value from their worse hands.
Thank you all for the critiques.
Results:
Hero feels annoyed, and tells himself that he haz Aces and half his stack is already in the middle. He thinks he's beat somewhere between 100 and 105% of the time and calls anyway.
V had 45o and turned a boat.
Are there any types of V' where you all are folding to V's flop C/R What if I've labeled him an OMC
If you think you're always beat, you can still fold. Our small raise pre lets people get to the flop with wider ranges.
I don't think it's a huge mistake to call. It's probably a bigger mistake if the only hand you call with is QQ. If that's the only hand you can have that calls, V is just punting when he takes this line.
Don't beat yourself up. Just learn and move on.
Thank you all for the critiques.
Results:
Hero feels annoyed, and tells himself that he haz Aces and half his stack is already in the middle. He thinks he's beat somewhere between 100 and 105% of the time and calls anyway.
V had 45o and turned a boat.
Are there any types of V' where you all are folding to V's flop C/R? What if I've labeled him an OMC?
Yes. There are V's who'll always have it when they x/r, and against those V's, I'll snap muck.
If you did label him an OMC, maybe he has QQ here, or maybe he's over-playing JJ, or he slow-played AK or AQ pre. Some OMC's are capable of playing off their nitty image, and will have some bluffs. Labeling an opponent an OMC doesn't necessarily make your decision easier.
One of the challenges I see people facing repeatedly is how to respond in situations where their own actions have created a situation in which their decisions become more difficult.
It isn't just you. Far from it. I feel like more than half the responses I give in hand history threads start with "raise bigger pre" and then suggesting some other action on the flop, be it checking, c-betting smaller, or occasionally, c-betting larger.
I think many people are stuck in auto-pilot mode, using standard sizes for their pre-flop raises or post-flop bets. But auto-piloting means we're not actually thinking consciously about the situation, and whether or not the situation calls for a deviation.
Not looking to beat you up, but if you raised to a bigger size pre, SB may not be in here with 54o. If we checked flop or c-bet smaller, we might have gotten additional info about our opponents' hands, or simply put less into the pot, making it easier for us to either get away from our hand or at least continue with a higher SPR / more left in our stack.
All that said - sometimes we just lose, regardless. We could have QQ here, and V gets stacked. V could have AQ here, and he gets stacked. The turn could have been another Q, and V's 2P get counterfeited, and we win. The turn could have been a brick, and we could have more easily gotten away from our hand. Even if we didn't fold turn, maybe the river pairs the board, and V's 2P is counterfeited, and we win.
None of those things happened. The cards went V's way, and against us. It's hard to lay down AA getting 3:1 in a spot where V could reasonably have way more than 1 worse hand for every 3 better hands.
