yeah avarita is wrong here imo. i think you could limp reraise as wide as 88+,AQ+,ATs+. i think you also should check flop or turn with no pair hands and pot control and nearly never fold with your pairs.

I think you're overvaluing AQs a bit, and undervaluing position given stack depth.

None. You should have absolutely zero incentive to bloat a pot OOP from one of the worst positions with A high 300bb+ deep against players that are IP, deep, and can put pressure on you postflop since your range is pretty well-defined. Or at least your perceived range is.

Your opponent is not folding 98o for $20 300bb deep IP vs your UTG raise if he's calling your $135 reraise pre.

Open raising pre is better than open limping imo but after we open limp and we get this specific action l/rr is clearly the superior play.

.

The reasons to l/rr are if you have a perfect series of circumstances at a table and to do so with a made hand. I'm not sure I want to lay them out but we are trying to bloat pot in such a way that would have been unachievable otherwise.

With a hand like AQs there's just no valid reason to want to bloat the pot pre. We have 2 unmade cards and 5 more to go, and a table of stations.

Don't get me wrong, AQs is a strong hand and I'd happily 3bet it here from the sb for example, but that's because the circumstances would warrant it. I'm not specifically trying to set up a spot where I bloat a pot pre oop with Ace high which is what we do when we l/rr.

^ When I meant 3-betting OOP with A high, I was saying that in response to l/rr. I'm always 3-betting AQs 6-handed from any position unless the original raiser only raises 0.5% of hands

we're getting ~10% of our stack in preflop though vs a very weak range and a spewy opponent. AQs is strong in this situation. the times villain outplays us will be negated by the times we stack him for 300bb with one pair hands.

the bolded part is definitely incorrect. there are a lot of opponents that i've played with that were raising literally 100% of their hands when no one has raised to them (no matter who limped or not) however they would fold 80% of those hands if i (or someone else) had raised in front of them. i've seen it with my own eyes, such opponents are rare yet they do exist.

though we may be 300bb deep and OOP we are able to get in about 10% of our stack preflop(27bb) by l/rr with a strong hand like AQs vs a very weak range. So we are effectively cutting stack sizes down by a large factor.

the limp reraise pre is definintely the right move OP don't listen to this other noise.

Minatorr I quoted you with a period bud we are on the same page (period signifying there's nothing more to be said/you covered it)

Yeah, says the marginal player at LLSNL and the guy who confidently thinks balance is "not doing the same action in every situation." LOL

Oh yeah, forgot to mention advocating a 4x pot overbet shove 3-way on a two-tone T high board with a pair + FD. Pretty laughable

My bad bro. Didnt know what the dot meant

what percentage of your stack do you have to get in preflop with AQs vs a range that includes 98os for position not to be factor against doing it? (since 10 is not high enough)

would you limp reraise AQs for 150bb if you knew your opponent was calling as wide as 98os or would you rather be putting 4bb in the pot?

no need to insult me btw jackass and im not a marginal player.

i know balance is having a mix of bluffs and strong hands btw. i was trying to say that you dont need to have the nut full house in your shoving range to balance there are plenty of trips with strong kickers to balance your bluffs and besides you dont need to balance against a level 1 thinking opponent. thats leaving money on the table you should be playing a much more exploitative style against such players.

and you probably never bet more than pot because you're a two dimensional poker player. just look at how often libratus was betting 4x pot etc and you'll see that overbets are next level GTO thinking.

I think limp/rr is perfectly fine in this spot.

But I also think we need to play the hand as if we had KK, recognizing (1) the flop is very dry and we can't/shouldn't be able to get value from draws, (2) checking flop would look very weird, (3) KK crushes flop, (4) we're repping a very narrow range and usually actually have a pretty narrow/tight range... So essentially - if we have KK - we're looking for value from hands like 78s, and we're just really hoping one of the villains has the case K or flopped a set.

So bet small. I could go as low as $115 on this flop. We bet half pot or more, in general, to deny correct odds to flush draws which are 4 to 1 to hit their hand with one card to come. On this flop, if we have AK, when we're ahead, we're mostly against 3 outs, and sometimes 2 or 5 outs when we're called. We just simply don't need to bet big.

Same thing with the turn. I just can't see how betting over half pot fits well with the range we're repping. Plus the T is pretty bad for us in the sense that we almost never have KT, but villain might.

The point here is when you bet small, you're really not weakening your range at all. Sure, you don't get as many folds, but you get such a better price on your bluffs that it is well worth it... And when you have AA here, it's probably not a great idea to try to always stack off (even if you're balancing that hand with AQ). It's just way too profitable to setmine against you if you play that way.

I think river we have to give up. If villain has called us for two streets with KJ/KQ/KA, which are his most likely hands, then the ten is probably the worst card in the deck in terms of getting called a third time by one pair - simply because we have so few tens in our range, so we tend to look more bluffy when we bet again here.

Yeah results suck, but whatever. Given villain's passive flop and turn play and how weak his range actually is, I think the thing to do here should you play with him more, is triple barrel small... It's going to be very difficult for a weak range to play against that with frequent light floats; they'll have to start bluff raising you a lot, and that should be perfectly fine with you as long as you start with a much stronger range.

Classic results oriented 2+2 to justify suboptimal plays [x]

And I never insult people on 2+2 unless they start **** with me, so don't start playing the victim card

Two dimensional poker players who don't understand GTO crushes 5NL all the way to 200NL, which is 200x harder than lol LLSNL, within 1.5 yrs playing very infrequently []

Suggesting that overbetting 4x pot with 2nd pair + FD on a two-tone board OTT 3-way on a blank is anywhere near GTO is completely ******ed & only something you'd suggest.

You understand a modicum of GTO/balance []

Your assumption that i don't utilize the overbet in my own games, which are infinitely harder than yours, is pretty pretentious.

If I'm a two dimensional poker player, you're not even one-dimensional. Probably not even half-dimensional or a quarter-dimensional.

Imagine how he would feel if you called him with a pair of Ts and A kicker hahahaha.

This V is a crazy son of @ b****! 98o???

I hate playing these kind of super loose but thinking players. It is their willingness to throw enormous amount of chips around so regularly that I just can't match on my roll. Being IP helps but you also need huge confidence in your reads and the guts to follow up. Seeing this guy do this I'd know my adjustment needs to be to let him make moves against me and call down with an extended value range but I honestly can't say I have the confidence or in-game-reading-skills to do it!

Good luck at the tables Ranma4703, sounds like you'll need it vs these guys!

Stay perceived wider(open raise more) than perceived narrower (l/rr) against a decent-enough handreadeing aggro type. Save the l/rr for an oop whale iso.

I do very much like the idea of finding creative lines to make him pay a heavy price for flops and turns considering his range needs to see as many cards as possible/as cheaply as possible (why he's breakevenish) However, you have to do it well - and something went wrong here. It's by no means easy to bet pile pile 1600 in w AQ high, but you found a magnificent board/runout with which to do it with the perfect perceived range. But somehow you left only .55psb for the river which you then elected to ck-f.

I'm not by any means saying it's an easy hand to play, but if you have an opponent good enough to make folds with marginal hands/spewy enough to float 89 then I think you can make a play like this from time to time, but you gotta size it right/commit to the line when the bottom of your range turns equity. I just don't think you can ever leave so little behind (pot wise) and not showdown your hand. You're not that deep, I mean 1600 is an average stack for my game, not sure about yours.

I'm going to go against the grain and say that I like the limp re-raise. The fact that he's directly to your left and is very likely to raise a marginal holding makes this a great spot to limp re-raise for several reasons.

1) his calling range is behind your l/rr raise. So this is a good raise for value
2) The fact that he's very loose means that players who observe him will open their calling ranges. So it's likely there will be a lot of dead money when it comes back to you and their looser calling ranges will mean your 3bet has more fold equity. And if everyone folds, great, you just took down a decent pot with a "marginal" holding. If you get called, that's fine because you're going to be ahead of villain's calling range, and if he 4bets it, you can easily get away.
3) Live poker limp/reraises are heavily skewed toward AA/KK/AK. If a K hits the flop, which it does, you can credibly rep it and absolutely get villain to fold weaker kings. If villain is the thinking player that OP espouses him to be, he certainly should be be able to KQ,KJ,K10, which are more often in his 3bet calling range than a AK (which will sometimes 4bet, especially given that villain is a loose thinking player). I find it interesting how many players here say that villain won't fold a king - why do I feel like if I made a PAHWM where we had KQ or KJ playing postflop against a l/rr that the same people saying we can't get this dude off a king would all advocate folding turn or river since we're not beating anything and l/rr is obviously AA/KK/AK.

I'm not saying absolutely shove river, but definitely think about it, especially if you think villain is a decent hand reader. I've seen similar spots to this where average/so-so players fold top pair second kicker because a limp/reraise looks exactly like the above range. If you have a good image and villain hasn't seen you l/rr much or shown down your l/rr hands, then I'd certainly consider going for a third barrel here.

how did i start anything with you? i simply pointed out that you were factually incorrect in saying that any player that would call a limp reraise with 98os would call a 4x open. i know it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but i've definitely seen one guy who was literally opening 100% of hands unopened to him disregarding any limpers, yet folding 80% of hands if opened in front of him. Maybe such bad players don't exist in the games you play, but don't assume they don't exist at all just because you've never encountered them.

and i'd still like to know: what percent of your stack you would want to get in preflop with AQs against a range including 98os to make this limp reraise worthwhile in your eyes? im of the opinion that getting about 10% of your stack here with AQs is fine.