What huh? There's a range disadvantage on the turn? That's ridiculous... At these stack sizes, playing heads up, *any* flush is the nuts. If we were at like 240BBs, a tough villain might put us to the test with Ac blocker. They might even peel rivers to a donk bet and rep some boats. But we really have little to worry about with our hand, at these SPRs, unless board four flushes on river or QQ on board trips up.

Plus I think hero can conceivably have sets/underfulls here.

I don't see anything capped about hero's range.

I'm not talking about hero's range, just the statement in isolation: "How can villain have an uncapped range AND I have a range disadvantage?" Clearly this happens all the time in poker.

Maybe Im a moron and I need the whole "capped..uncapped" thing explained to me. Capped means you have a certain hand that is the strongest hand possible for you in a certain situation, right?

So what am I capped at with the action so far? I opened and called a reraise. I would be capped at AA preflop I guess? Because I certainly dont 4 bet every time with AA. I check/called the flop and led the turn. What am I capped at now?

And why do people assume a guy who 3 bet preflop is uncapped? We dont know if he 3 bets lite or not. Maybe I just dont understand what capped is?

+1

Look at my range analysis. I have never once said you're capped here. I'm trying to find agreement with you.

The ONLY thing I took issue with was your statement: "How can villain have an uncapped range AND I have a range disadvantage?"

Think about this statement in isolation, unrelated to this current hand. The answer to your question "how can this happen?" is: it happens when you have a capped range. I interpreted your phrasing and emphasis on "AND" to mean that you think these two ideas are contradictory when in fact, this happens all the time and is the definition of a "range advantage". I'm NOT talking about specific ranges in this hand, but the meaning of range advantage and uncapped ranges.

This is the last I'll say about it...will be more instructive to talk about your range in the hand.

Capped isnt a 100 percent case written in stones. When you open and calls a 3 bet your range is capped in the term that you have very few QQ/KK/AA and AK for example, if any at all. Sure you might mix it up once in a while, but the vast majority of your range when flatting the 3 bet will be heavily weighted towards alot of other medium strong starting hands. Like the one you have in this hand, 9-10 suited. Your range is packed with medium strong hands such as 7-8 suited, 9-10 suited, suited A type of hands, lots of pocket pairs like 55,66 and 77, QJ suited, KJ suited and so on.

Villain as the 3 bettor on the other hand, have a totally uncapped range witch includes every combo of all the ultra premiums like AK (suited), JJ,QQ,KK and AA. Alongside the premium portion of his range he can have a variaty of other holdings wich he mixes in as lighter 3 bets.

In the next step this manifest itself with villain having a range advantage over you in this hand on alot of boards due to his range is totally uncapped.Your range is alot more defined the second you just flat the 3 bet OOP. (Note that the particular board in this hand isnt the worst for you as you have alot of good Qx yourself in your 3 bet callingrange). On a board of 4-K-A for example, he can have all the combos of top two and middle/top set and you dont=youre on a range disadvantage.

Not trying to be confrontational at all. Im being serious and trying to understand. A capped range means Im capped at a certain hand strength right? If Im capped at the nuts or very close to it, then how can I have a range disadvantage? Thats the part I dont understand about this capped / uncapped poker theory.

Isnt it more important to discuss what he thinks my hand range is instead of what it actually is? Hes playing based on what he perceives a standard 2/5 players range is since he doesnt know me. If hes wrong about my range, then I have a big advantage in the hand.

OK, I get it. Thx. I guess whats throwing me off is that my range isnt capped at all but I see how it looks that way and how it works in theory.

Ah. Yeah you have an incorrect idea of uncapped vs capped.

Capped = there's a "ceiling" (cap) on the strongest hands you can have. Usually happens after calling when you would raise your strongest holdings
Uncapped = your actions are consistent with the strongest possible hands including the nuts. It's "uncapped" because there's no limit on how strong you can be

You would never say you're "capped" at the nuts, because capped implies there are stronger hands than you can possibly have

For sure Mike, and the fact that your range can appear capped to your villains (when infact you know the reality is that its not) is something you can exploit pretty hard in alot of spots.

+1...

Petrucci, you were simply describing a range advantage/disadavantage.

A range disadvantage is not the same as being capped.

Regardless, I think Mike's range is stronger than villain's range, after he check/calls flop and the turn peels a club. Mike has a range advantage in this spot... Note: This is assuming a wide 3bet range - which we need to assume or else we wouldn't call pre - and a high cbet frequency, which I think is also a fair assumption.

This thread is unreadable and impossible to follow.

+1

too much dick waving and ego wars in threads all the time. also calling our someone's winrate is petty imo. my winrate is pretty legit in $2/5 and i blow at poker.

Im beating 200NL & 200NLz online for higher, and my WR at 100NL+ was slightly above 10BB. I only have my graph for 200NL atm over 3.5k hands running at 27BB/100. You could say I'm running hot, but my redline is linearly positive with an even greater blue line, which is very uncommon. My C Won is pretty much more or less the same as my C All-In Adj. These games are infinitely harder than 2/5, where donks reside and basically gift you their stacks.

You question if I can even beat 2/5, and you don't even know what it means to be capped. Wow.

You are capped on this board runout

You're going to have way less flushes than pairs if you decide to lead most/all of your pairs and flushes OTT.

That's the inherent disadvantage of being OOP. IP always realizes more of their equity. There's nothing you can do. Why do you think a lot of good regs 3-bet or fold their SB?

I actually expect a good reg to be firing this turn very often for thin value and with bluffs.

https://ibb.co/jYuSvk

Wow, even a new poster to the forum knows this. What a shocker!

This is exactly what is going on in the hand. You don't even understand what it means to be capped/uncapped or to be at a range advantage/disadvantage.

You are capped. He's uncapped. You have a range disadvantage.

No one gave me a poker manual with the definition of capped and uncapped ranges, but I always took capped to mean that your range is well defined and probably tilted heavily towards value hands. This means that it's easier for villain to range you and play optimally against you. Uncapped I take as having a range consisting of both value and bluffs. That makes player tougher to read.

I don't understand why a 2.75x 3 bet is small. It's standard online and the logic behind it is to make it enticing enough for you to call while committing a mistake. Just because bet sizing is high live, doesn't mean that smaller bet sizes are mathematically incorrect or that you should be calling them.

Playing OOP is hard regardless of how good of a player you are. That's why you need to have a good idea of 4bet ranges you might adopt against various type of opponents especially 3bet happy regs behind you. Calling OOP against a 3bet is bound to put you in tough spots so it's better to fold pre.

I think that checking on the turn all of your range is the easier way to play. You can go by by donking, but it's harder to do so, because it's harder to construct either an optimal or exploitative bet range.

I am skeptical of betting medium pairs as bluff in that spot, mostly because these are hands that have showdown value; if you are reraised, you might be folding the better hand. I would be more amenable to betting some Acx type of hands as a bluff, but not sure if there are enough and also not sure if those type of hands peel one on the flop. So all in all, it seems to me as a tough spot to play well.

I am fascinated by why this hand (even if you eliminate the outlying posts) has generated so much discussion. That alone should indicate that there are probably a range of not-terrible options here.

I wonder if part of the issue is that there are 2 different arguments being made in favor of checking.

1 - We should check 100% of our hands here, bc OOP + balance + a few other reasons, and

2 - We should check a specific range of our hands here, including this one.

I can get behind #1 (I don't play that way or agree, but I think it can be a winning strategy as part of an overall game). I have a much harder time with #2.

I think fundamentally, the disagreement is largely based in our expectation about how villain plays the turn when checked to him.

If villain checks back 100% of his range, except for bigger flushes, then clearly we should bet.

If villain bets 100% of his range, including a ton of stuff that folds to a bet, then clearly we should check.

I expect villains to check back this turn a lot. I guess if I was at the table, I could gauge his overall aggression, but in a vacuum, I'm expecting a lot of checks.

Kinda bad you can't follow - Minatorr is educating you (and zeroes and johnny) on what will happen when you choose to lead turns too often with too much of your range. You also haven't discussed/thought about what such a range would look like/do on the river which is kind of important don't you think?

When Minatorr outlined Vs exploitative folds (AA/KK, etc), those were otr (after calling turn right?) facing a bet bet line, before any adjustments had been made. (You seem wildly strong... but won't be if you're bet betting pairs).

If you were to show V a ~80%+ turn donking range of pp/flushes/Qx (and subsequently weak wide riv betting range-or are you checking it???) he would be able to counter/rip it apart easily having position+range advantage (he has equal Qx/more premium pairs/ arguably more NF/more AcX) by mixing calls/raises on turn and/or river. When you lead, preadjustment, V also has more folds with hands you crush that otherwise might have bet facing a check - you also lose EV from stronger hands that might have bet-called (a check-raise) but won't call two steeets against brute strength lines.

Think about what you're actually proposing - in order to increase net EV over checking, I want to bet more hands on the turn more often while OOP when my opponent has the stronger range and position and another street to play and stack behind. This is your solution to mitigate being OOP.

So then we can lead half of our PP combos (the ones with a ) and routinely fold out better?

Villain most likely folded a hand like JJ-99 that wasn't going to put any more money in the pot unless he binked a 2 outer. Or he had complete air with zero equity and likewise wasn't going to spew off on the turn.

As pocketzero's alluded to I think this all comes down to how you perceive villain's 3! range and what you think he does with that range OTT. I expect to see mostly x backs, and depending on how wide he is 3! pre he can have quite a number of hands with 20-25% equity.

The reason I believe that villain checks back here a lot is... In villain's shoes, after I'm called once in a 3bet pot, my expectation is either (1) they "put" me on AK or (2) they have a strong hand. Furthermore, projecting myself into villain's shoes, I know my range is much wider than JJ+/AK to 3bet.... In villain's shoes, I feel like I can definitely get value by betting AA, but there are enough Qx hands and flushes in hero's range that makes betting that very marginal (I'd personally probably bet AA without Ac and check with Ac - specifically to avoid getting shoved on holding Ac).

So with my own range, i'm just going to check back a lot of hands, especially hands with a FD card.

Therefore, if *I'm* villain, I think this hero would be better off donking the turn and scooping up their equity. Because if I'm villain, it's just not worth it to bluff off stacks at LLSNL, especially not in this spot, and I definitely have many more hands that are looking to realize their equity with a river peel than want to value-bet (or bluff).

Of course, I'm not villain, but if I think they're thinking, i expect them to follow a similar thought pattern.