How was I spamming? I know hero has Qs. What did I say to contradict that?

I agree with that.

Same here.

I agree that V would have to include bluffs in a balanced (GTO) range but I think it's QsQc not JsJc. JsJc is cannot be GTO because we could call with QsQc.

That operates under the assumption that you know what my calling range actually is, which assumes you've read a thread on the internet on precisely my thought process in this scenario. Of course, you know that I just read a post of yours saying that you would always bluff your nut blockers against me, so you'll assume I'd adjust and actually call some percentage of the time so now I should probably fold. Or should I?

My noob ass says this would be the easiest fold Ive made lifetime in poker. He has to have QJ with flushdraw if is even remotely competant

We can't call with QsQc are you crazy? We only beat bluffs

You said 'Based on scenario a competent villain should have 3 combos in his range!"

Those combos were QJ clubs, QJ c/s, JJcs. That range can be exploited by calling with black QQ since every time we call we will be facing a bluff.... black QQ vs black JJ.

So black QQ is the hand to bluff with, not JJ.

Oh yeah you're right nvm, I didn't read that right before... So numbers will change when we factor that in... It's going to become very complex once we factor that in along with probabilities of V and H have exact combos

I'm done with this, although there is significant merit to calling in certain situations, I would only ever consider a call if I found V to be very bluffy

Oh wow... this setup turns out to be way more interesting than I thought. I'm pretty sure that Nash Equilibrium includes calling with QsQc (!!!) some signficant % of the time. I'll try to explain tomorrow if anyone is interested.

I did a quick evaluation (pen and papere only)..

My read is that
It would be incorrect for villain to include blocker JJ/QQ to his range IF hero will call more than 1/2000 w any QJ.

I do not agree on including blocker QQ in calling range.

My read on villain.
villain will bet QJcc and (QJcs, QJsc) yes.. hero know that QJsc is blocked.

What would be MINIMUM bet for villain to make when he intends to bet/check-call 100% of rivers .. to make villains line +ev WHEN he has QJcs AND villain assumes HERO will put villain on QJcs 100% of time?

I don't think it's possible to construct a set of hands in villain's & hero's Nash Equilibrium range that does not include black QQ in BOTH ranges.

Here is my logic. I start with some default "common sense" range for betting/calling and then find the flaw (hand that can exploit) and then add hands to fix that.

STEP 1
Villain: {black QJ}
Hero: {black QJ}

This can not be NE because hero will want to bluff with black QQ which will succeed 100%.

STEP 2
Villian: {black QJ, some black QQ}
Hero: {black QJ, some red Q black J}

Note that red Q black J is the only hand hero can use to combat black QQ bluffs since all other hands will be -ev. But this still can not be NE because hero will want to bluff black JJ since it will succeed 100%. The only hands that can combat black JJ bluffs and not be -ev are black Q red J and black QQ. But black QQ is much more efficient since it will face black JJ all the time while red Q black J will be facing flush redraws against the other black QJ.

STEP 3
Villain: {black QJ, some black QQ}
Hero: {black QJ, some red Q black J, some black QQ}

Hero calls enough red Q black J to make black QQ indifferent to bluffing.
Hero calls enough black QQ to make black JJ indifferent to bluffing.

Note that there is no way to exploit the black QQ calling. Any hand that tries to punish black QQ calling is going to be -ev. For example Qh Js is going to face Qc Jc much more often than it faces black QQ so it will be -ev.

theres a problem with step 3.
Hero never has black QQ when villain only shoves black QJ and black QQ.
villain will have to shove some black JJ.
then however hero will only face black JJ with his black QQ. he then wants to call QQ all the time.
to combat this villain will have to shove some non-all black QJ but im not sure hero is capable of making those indifferent. he will need to have enough redQ blackJ and black QQ in his calling range for that to be the case. this might however interfere with making villains QQ and JJ indifferent.

I realize that hero will never have black QQ when a GTO villain bets. That doesn't make the strategy invalid. It's still a strategy. It can be used against a non GTO. Step 3 is the result of what would happen in step 2 if hero never calls with black QQ. JJ would want to bluff 100% and in response QQ would want to call 100%. Step 2 proves that hero must call some with black QQ.

If you think the resulting strategy pair can not be a nash equilibrium then tell me how either side can exploit the other. If QQ is calling say 5% of the time it's dealt, then I see no way hero can be exploited.

Villain has no hand to exploit with:
JJ can not bet. It will only face black QQ.
QsJh can not bet. It will only face QcJc and QcJs.
QcJh can not bet. It will only face QsJs and QsJc.
QhJc is the best chance. It will face QsJs, QcJs and black QQ. But if QQ is calling 5% of the time then QhJc will face QsJs 20x as often as it faces black QQ. So it will be -ev.
QhJs is the same.
QhJh is worse than QhJc since it will twice as many flush draws.
Set's are worse.

Hero has no other hand to call with.

The OP is a good question to separate the good players from the players who think they're good.

Lol. So in a regular pot if I shoved 50bb on the turn with qjo on that board I would be wrong to say "I've got the nuts" when called?

qjo is the nuts. This is an interesting discussion, stop arguing over stupid stuff.

I wanted to clarify about the bolded...

To combat losing with JJ to QQ, villain can simply not bluff with JJ. This was the purpose of calling with black QQ - to stop villain from being able to bluff with JJ.

Hero doesn't have to do anything to stop villain from shoving red/black QJ... he already can't do that so long as hero doesn't call too often with black QQ.

Fist pump snap fold my cards face up and tell the dealer to rabbit hunt it.

Also, I probably rack up and leave the 10,000bb cash game that has good players playing in it right after that hand.

I think it separates the players who have such a strong interest in poker theory that they are willing to consider problems with little real application from those who say "10,000 bb deep poker doesn't exist!! What nonsense is this?! Let's discuss REAL poker!"

This is just my own personal opinion but thinking about situations like this really improves your ability to think about poker on your own. Yeah the situations are not realistic, but the way in which you have to approach these questions improves your ability to think about more realistic situations. I think too many people just want answers about poker.. like when to cbet and on what boards, etc, etc.... but don't really ever learn how to answer these questions on their own. No one is ever going to be playing 10,000bbs deep and have someone shove into a 3bb pot on the turn, but if you can develop a strong opinion about how to handle this situation, then chances are you have a good understanding of poker in general

My post which was quite tongue-in-cheek I do think though it separates posters with an interest in GTO poker from those who play exploitatively with little interest in GTO poker. Since the situation doesn't exist, there is no exploit to be found so it has little value for a player interested in exploiting situations.

What difference does it make? All that matters is having the theoretical understanding to apply it in situations.

These hypothetical questions don't help improve a player who already possesses the theoretical understanding necessary to correctly think about these kinds of problems. In other words it won't help them make more money at the tables.

It's fun to think about, but ultimately pointless.

You have to see the forest for the trees.

Its getting to the point where I'm about to post "You talk about game theory optimal poker vs exploitative poker like its some kind of black magic vs white magic" in the I Know You're a Fish When thread.

Snap fold.
QJo is the nuts.

I don't hate the fold here, especially given those exact cards n suits with that board.

Obviously if you have two clubs or two spades I don't hate a call and hope he doesn't have the other suit and gets there (or something crazy like he boats up or hits a nut flush or a bigger straight lol)

But yeah most of the time you're chopping or losing.


Ask him to show a card. Even offer to show one of yours. Haha. Knowledge is power

Hm, standard math?

ProPokerTools Hold'em Simulation

44 trials (Exhaustive)

board: 9 3 K T

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
Qs Jd	39.77%	0	35
Qc Jc	60.23%	9	35

Assuming we call 10000bb, total pot would be 20003bb. Given that we have 39,77 % equity, we drop 2000bb every time we make this call vs QcJc.

Wait what, getting freerolled is -EV?