5/10/20 Lost in the Merge

I don't play those stakes, but why not x/c the flop. You could x/r draws on that flop if you want to balance big hands. Are you really supposed to blast off with TPNK?

Interesting hand. Thanks for posting.

PRE - I haven't studied pre-flop straddle-defend charts for 3-blind games. I'm wondering if J7s is a standard defend, or a little too wide, even vs a 2.5x open from the CO. Maybe it would be in a polar 3B-bluffing range?

I dunno. I think we're supposed to 3B linear from OOP, so maybe it's just a square call.

FLOP - I think our specific combo has some good properties to be put into an x/r range when V c-bets small. I'd think we're supposed to have fewer x/r's when V uses this large c-bet size, and they'd be more value-oriented, less bluff-oriented. And I'd think we'd want to x/r using a smaller size, like maybe just 3x, or even 2.5x.

One challenge I can immediately see is that we'll either need to barrel when we pick up a lot of equity, and check/give-up when we don't. With our specific combo, we'd mostly be giving up on any turn that isn't a club, J, T, 8, or 7, I'd think. So we'll barrel on any of those 16 cards, and otherwise give up.

And the problem with that is that there are a bunch of turn cards that could otherwise help our flop x/c range. Like, we could have KT, QT, T8, 87, or 75, or just Jx, 9x, or 6x, and literally any card from a 6 to a K might have improved us to trips or a straight.

That's 29 cards we could x/r on the turn if he barrels, especially if he uses a smaller size relative to the pot, which seems at least fairly likely when one of those 29 cards hits.

He could also just check back the turn, allowing us to realize or make a play for the pot on a river brick. Or he could barrel huge and let us off the hook.

TURN - Yeesh. We now have 3 clean outs to the 4th nuts. This could have been a good card to x/r if we didn't x/r the flop.

I think it's okay to give up and check-fold to a big bet, or maybe check-call a smallish bet since we do have some SDV and picked up the GSSD. I wouldn't think barreling is absolutely terrible. I'm afraid I can't get behind the double-x/r. Seems like you're basically repping 1 combo of 87dd for value.

Are you putting CO on a bluff here? Or are you thinking you can get him to fold top of range with this line? If I'm CO with a set, you're going to have to show me a straight here. I think I'm almost always calling with JJ or 99. I might fold 66, though I'd probably 3B flop with 66.

I'd question how much KQ/KT/QT/T8 he has in his range getting to the turn. I'd think some of those hands would check back or bet smaller on the flop, or fold to the x/r, or possibly check back the turn, or use a larger size that would be less inducing.

If he is taking this line with one of those hands, do we need to x-jam? Could we not just x/c and look to bluff-catch brick rivers? The large x/r size you used on the flop doesn't leave us much SPR to maneuver.

If he has all those KQ/KT/QT/T8 hands, he could also just have J9. This line makes more sense for J9 than it does for any of the others.

Preflop seems ok to defend with this price

What is this obsession with the check-raise?
I don’t usually see two check-raises in the same hand.

I would donk the flop for 40. This indicates that I have top pair, so see how villain responds- I likely fold to a raise

You list a lot of stuff that goes into a flop check-raise and I can’t remember the last time I saw one. Then when he calls, you want to keep coming - that seems strange. Almost every hand with a jack that villain could have has you outkicked and beat. What could he have that you are ahead of?

You want the many hands worse than Jc7c to continue and they all fold to a x/r leaving you facing better hands than yours. Can you make a better hand fold to a jam, seems to be your question.

Sure, better hands will fold with an overbet jam, so you could get a good result - but that doesn’t make it a good play. If you’re jamming for value, I don’t see worse hands calling. You have no draws, no blockers - it’s not a good situation to bluff. Do you really want to stack off with Jc7c?

Things changed when villain calls the questionable flop check-raise. Small lead on the turn is to induce, set a price for a draw, or medium strength trying to reach showdown. I would call the 140 (folding is too tight/great pot odds) and evaluate the river.

Pre - fine
Flop - call - x/r too aggressive & unnecessary
Turn - call - jam over a small bet - I think is a clear and huge mistake.

Jc7c works better as a bluff-catcher

You basically turned top pair into a weird bluff with this line. I think on this board J7 is too weak to be raising for thin value, and too strong to be bluffing with. It plays better as a check call (I'm ignoring pre flop for now).

If you look at solver ranges, they are often mixing some small frequency of flop check raises with a wide variety of hands, but that is mostly for deception and board coverage, because the solver assumes their entire strategy is basically face up and that their opponent will attack any imbalance. However our human opponents don't know our exact strategy, so this is unnecessary in practice. The low frequency raises with stuff like top pair weak kicker are probably best to leave out of our human strategies altogether (generalizing here, in a very wide range spot like SB vs BB top pair weak kicker could actually be a strong value hand).

I try to focus on making the higher frequency "thin" solver raises, which are typically top pairs with the strongest kickers and/or top pairs with some additional potential to improve to a nutted hand (such as top pair with a gutshot straight draw).

Now speaking in general, after check raising the flop, our most marginal flop check raises often want to go into our turn check call range. This has multiple benefits. When we check raise the flop we squeeze out some additional value. Then when we check call turn our stronger hand protects all our weak flop check raise bluffs that would have to check fold turn.

If you never check turn with any of your stronger top-pair + type hands after check raising the flop, then your opponent can just float your flop check raises super wide and stab anytime you check the turn. You need some stronger hands in your turn check range that can continue facing a bet. It makes sense to use the more marginal "value" flop check raises as turn check calls because the fat value hands generally want to keep betting turn to continue building the pot.

Anyway don't get discouraged. I've dealt with exactly what you're going through now. As your poker knowledge grows and your strategy transitions to a more advanced, solver-like approach it can cause your game to regress at times. I'm dealing with the same thing now as I'm working on incorporating more robust leading strategies on certain turn cards that are good for my flop calling range. The problem is you can get into some difficult spots when you take unfamiliar lines, and unfortunately making some blunders is part of the growth process.

Is there some solver strategy to x/r and stack off with TPWK? I don't understand. This seems really bad, like a huge overplay. Seems like you are misusing some results from a solver and doing something against basic poker theory.

Folding preflop may be better, even getting 2.8-1.

You wind up with TPWK on a connected board. Pretty sure the best approach is not to go allin.

Just call and plan on calling down, but reevaluate on later streets based on the cards and action. If you had some third pair you couldn't call with, then you could maybe consider running a big bluff with 2 pair and trips out, but you should usually fold that.

You can definitely check-raise some top pair hands from OOP like this, but I'm not sure if you can do it with such a weak kicker like this. Maybe with all the different backdoor equity options it becomes viable?

I'm also not sure if this board is more or less check-raisable with a hand like this. You'd expect CO to check back a lot of hands so does a check-raise just strengthen his continuing range to an unacceptable level?

Very donkable board.

Like the OP I am completely lost by the turn but instinctively feel this may not be as bad as some people reckon?

What is your assessment of Villian’s opening range when he goes 2.5x from the cutoff and you should know how deep he is and relative to other stacks at table to help assess that based on what you know about him. How many J10, J9, J8 type above quality hands that cooler you does he have to that sizing? In addition to his strong AJ and KJ and QJ hands.

You are 80 straddles deep so that’s what you loose when you get “coolered” by those possible hands. The rest of the time you may get a call from a smaller flopped pair and have him 77-23 or so and be check raising flop for value.

Your decision to check turn to trap him is the humble brag/strategy highlight and I think it’s good versus an aggressive pro who will see your cr flop range as having turn give ups.

If you give no action the game culture goes to **** so call pre and have some fun so others give it back to you. Bring numerous rebuys if you choose to play 80 straddles deep.

Not sure villain should be cbetting the connected medium card flop much. When he cbets and calls the x/r, it seems like he has an overpair, good J, or maybe a set / top two pair, or an OESD or pair and gutshot.

I don't understand villain's 1/5 pot turn bet in position on a somewhat wet board after being checkraised on the flop. It doesn't seem to make sense with any hand. He could maybe be inducing with a set or straight, but I assume he folded since this was posted. I guess flat calling the turn is a little better than folding.

think wrong positions / sizing / board texture to raise flop depolar. i did run the sim and it basically never raises this hand for either r75 or r20 and i cant even really get it to raise vs b25 flop sizing.

if i force it to raise sometimes it will always bet the turn with this combo but absent that it will x/r though not all in (though it will x/r and call it off so likely all in is okish)

i personally think if you dont know what you're doing (spend bunch of time in solver / understand villain and pop tendencies well) you are likely to way underperform the ev of raise with marginal hands in these spots and just end up making large mistakes

if you're looking for explo, id think b20 ott is likely to be weak for a couple reasons. its unclear to me if xjam is the best way to take advantage of that

if you fold pre i think you have no chance to win in pretty much any reasonable lineup. i think you're going to be overfolding everywhere

What other hands did it have continuing turn? Diamonds? I'm imagining it has V with a wider flop bet-call range than you see in reality

I don't understand villain's 20% on the turn. Is it a blocking bet in position to freeze up hero on the river? Is he inducing? I don't like reopening the action betting small in position, particularly when hero has already checkraised.

Yeah, the 70% cbet on a board that favors the caller is kind of interesting, and probably indicates strength. It definitely is not a range cbet.

It might be better just to fold the flop. Obviously, then you would be folding way too much of your range. The chances are villain has a good hand or maybe a draw. TPNK is way behind his range. The checkraise is interesting, because villain has indicated he likes his hand on this flop, and he shouldn't be folding immediately much. Seems like checkraising because you don't like calling. Once he calls the checkraise, it is clear he wasn't bluffing.

RESULT

Villain snap calls with JTo

Yeah solvers use these types of small bets quite a bit in certain shorter stacked tournament spots following a flop check raise and turn check.

In position you can bet small with some marginal made hands to charge stuff like weak draws. When betting with marginal made hands you're mostly planning to check back river if called. You can also bet small with some nutted combos that can continue against a second check raise and/or bet big on the river after being called. You can also stab small with some weak hands like a gutshot with backdoors that floated the flop check raise, attempting to fold out our opponent's give ups.

Yeah the idea is that OOP has a very polarized XR range, so their hands have either 80%+ equity or 20%-
So they’re inherently inelastic to sizing. So if IP bets 20p it generates a ton of folds, maybe OOP folds as much as 70% of his range in practice. (Not a bad deal for 20p!)

OOP XRing a hand like J7 is actually designed to combat this very strategy, because it fills in the middle of the equity graph.

I don't think this a good situation for 20%. It is a wet board. Villain bet big on a board favoring the caller. I don't think the caller has a pure bluff here often at all.

I am not totally surprised villain snap called. A lot of what hero is checkraising is 2-way straight draws and pair plus straight draws. With pot odds and maybe being way ahead, I can see the call even though villain's hand is also very weak.

The double check raise line looks really FOS to me. I'm not surprised he snap called with a marginal top pair.

After check raising the flop the OOP player has to expect the IP player to check back the turn a lot when checked to. Even a hand as strong as a set is vulnerable on this board, and I would expect strong hands to almost always keep betting the turn after check raising the flop. In theory the OOP player should check with a sliver of strong combos on the turn to protect all of their turn give ups, but in practice I think most players just never have a really strong hand after they check raise flop and check turn on this type of dynamic board.

I don't play this stakes and not a solver expert. However, I don't think you should be checkraising a weak pair on a wet board. You shouldn't be checkraising with a weak draw or a pure bluff on this flop either, particularly when villain showed strength.

Yeah, TPNK probably wasn't good. It may be a correct defend, but J7s is hard to play.

Kind of a disaster when he calls with JT, which means he is calling with pretty much his whole range that got to that point. I don't know if he plays draws that way, but you are ahead of those. So you weren't getting any better hands to fold. In addition to the double x/r, you defended from the straddle, so you could have worse top pairs, 2nd pair and gutshot, etc.

It is hard to hit top pair and fold, but that is way better than stacking off like this.

Not arguing against what you're saying. Only providing one counter-example, and wondering if there could be other hypothetical scenarios which would make sense. If not, this may be the exception.

Had an opponent x/r flop on me holding a S1G that flopped an OESD. He checked again when he made his hand on the turn. Albeit, I seem to recall there was no flush draw possible, making it less risky.

With top 2P, I bet, and he check-jammed on me. I didn't snap fold, but I did go into a bit of a tank, calling out his hand before folding. He was kind enough to show me, and say good fold.

Maybe he had a read on me, telling him I'd bet again when checked to. Maybe this is just a spot he's studied. The lack of better draws and being nutted might make it more viable.

I would push back on the idea that the double x/r is inherently FOS. I'd think it's the opposite. But it tends to narrow the value range significantly to hands that were likely semi-bluffing on the flop and got there on the turn. The line would seem to require having a very reliable read that the IP player will almost always bet when checked to, or pay off a big river bet when the turn checks through.

If we consider the alternative lines on the turn after the flop x/r, V can barrel, check-call, or check-fold. Of the four possibilities, the double x/r would seem the least FOS, assuming V is capable of finding the flop x/r as a semi-bluff and having the right read on his opponent. I could see taking this line with a combo draw or pair + draw to the nuts.

All that said, the presence of the BDFD here does make it seem less likely that hero has a nutted hand when we check turn. Hero is really only repping 87dd exactly. I wouldn't expect to get snapped by JTo, but I also wouldn't expect V to lay down 2P+.

I'm not sure this action says a lot about V's play with his entire range. V's specific hand blocks H's nut straight draws, double gutters and TP. I think both V and H overplayed here.

80 bb deep, this was just a weird line by both. That said, I suspect had this been 150bb+ deep, H's play could have worked. It was a very clever attempt, but perhaps made in the wrong game situation.

Again, I think this line could have worked in a deeper spot. H offers V ~2-1 on his call. As you correctly observe, he ain't folding anything 2P+ at that price. V probably should have folded anyway.

That said, I would just add that position makes H's line a lot more plausible. H is oop and isn't setting up some deep floating situation. 2 xrs have to instill some fear here just 80 bb deep.

Why can't H play his sets this way? I think H reps wider than 87dd. H may not donk his sets in every situation here. I agree with you though that the "fat" part of H's range is combos/pairs.

If we're honest here, I bet most of us would have folded in V's position in this hand, despite whatever theoretical errors H made.