This is what i mean about incomplete information. IF you always bet weird amounts... 17, 22, 74, then betting 23 is fine. IF you usually bet easy numbers, 10,25,30, then betting 23 would be out of the norm, which you could either try to use to your advantage. Generally I think changing your patterns is good when you want to look like your doing the opposite of your table image. IF you have a very loose image and always bet easy numbers like 20, 30, or 70, then if your bluffing you could bet a weird number like 59 to try and make it look like you actually have a hand this time. If your a super tight image you could vary your bet sizing to make it look like your bluffing. It's about changing your image in a noticable way when you have an extreem table image to make people think your doing the opposite of your image. So 23 isn't bad, it just depends.

I'm gonna throw out a contrarian view and it is intended as a question not an argument.

To me this would be the ideal flop to cbet with air, because it is extremely unlikely villain has anything to continue with.

We know this guy is capable of bluffing from oop.

Couldn't these factors argue for checking back?

Next part...

V limps UTG, folded to hero in MP with A A who raises to $15, folded to V who calls.
Flop ($34): Q 2 3
V checks, hero bets $20, V tanks then check-raises to $40, hero...


Regarding hero's standard c-bet sizing/tendencies, I'd always been c-betting using only red chips, and when HU they had been very similar to this sizing wise. Additionally, in this specific spot, I thought that V was ready to check-raise my c-bet very often given the following factors:

a) His donk-bets and OOP floats against c-bets had previously failed, and as such I expected him to try something else. A check-raise was the only move left besides check-folding which he hadn't already tried.

b) I had raised his flop bet literally the previous hand successfully (I did not show or tell), and as such this might encourage him to respond in kind.

c) My c-bets were on the smaller side, and as such he wouldn't have to risk as much to check-raise me.

Certainly, calling is best. Raising blasts his junk out and gets you in a lot of trouble when he 4 bet shoves. Call and see how tight he wants to tie the noose. I'm betting if checked to and along a normal sized bet. Maybe raising a timid bet. Maybe folding to a turn bomb.

It's also worth noting that this was the first time I'd seen him check-raise all night (about 4 hours).

Definitely flat c/r.

I'm calling pretty much all turn leads.

There is a case to be made for checking back, but in my opinion it's not as strong as the case for betting.

One big reason why is, look at Hand 2. He called a flop bet, then bluffed the river with air. If we want him to do that again, we have to bet the flop.

Basically I'm saying that if Villain is going to bluff, let's induce that bluff after we've built the pot up. So I might check the turn after betting the flop, but I still want to bet the flop.

Played fine so far. Let's flat the c/r, keep him wide and plan to flat most turns.

Glorious! Ok, so clearly my sizing was small, but we've gotten the best possible result.

Flat. Since we're in position, we get to decide whether to raise (or bet) OTT.

Pot going into the turn will be ~ $110 with $345 left. Hopefully, he'll lead the turn for something like $40-70. My preference will be to click it back, which will put it back to him for $40-70 to call, with $190-260 in the pot, and about 1.5 PSB left in stacks.

Given that we started the hand 133bb deep, I wouldn't have a problem at all with a bigger raise OTT. So, e.g., if he makes it $40-70, we raise to ~$175 total, leaving ~$175 left in stacks.

At this point, I will be considering folding if the board pairs and V decides to move in. Otherwise, I'm going broke.

V's range... [Q-big, sets, TT+]. Its possible he could have something like A2s-A5s, but given prior histories, I deem these unlikely. TPGK or TPTK is most likely though (I wonder why he didn't open raise pre, tho).

Good stuff. Call the min raise and eval

I would be considering folding if V makes a big bet, whether the board pairs or not. My suspicion is that V is the sort of player where the size of the bet matters more than the texture of the board in deciding whether or not to fold against him.

This was lol funny but so true.

This is very ninja. (Literally -- my daughter is a blackbelt in ninjutsu and she would love the way you play.) Remember, "not taking the bait" is a feature of an organism that is either not hungry, not aggressive, or has its aggression under firm control. None of which is the case with villain.


So the SPR now is what, 3ish? Some people are speculating on what it would take to fold, others are saying "no, you have to go all the way."

Personally, I think you can get literally get pot-committed in a tournament. But in a cash came, pot-commitment is a privilege, not a responsibility.

Here, where as I previously mentioned it is highly unlikely villain has anything, it would be my privilege.

Call.

Once you actually call his flop ck/raise the cat is out of the bag that you have something as I don't think he expect us to have the capacity to bet/call with air just to take it away later. That's a pretty advanced concept.

As a result he's likely going to play his hand pretty faceup. If he improves on the turn i'd expect him to bet again pretty big, I expect him to check his bluffs, and I expect him to value bet small (~half pot) his strong queens. So, we should be looking to call most bets half pot or less. Folding to bigger bets as most of the time bigger bets are flopped sets/turned two pairs.

Preflop: With stacks this big against Villain, we're never going to be able to setup a terrific SPR where we can just stack off postflop with TP. Although I guess if there is some possible looser player in the mix (in the blinds, etc.) we can maybe tailor our raise size to his stack (i.e. 10% if possible). Otherwise, our goal here should just be to get it HU with Villain, so let's attempt that. With 5 players behind, and with Villian being limp/cally, I probably go on the bigger side to have a better chance at accomplishing my goal. I would typically go $20 here.

ETA: But if $15 is going to work (which it did), fine. My table is typically looser, and while I might open a decent amount for $15 (and never less), after just 1 limper I often have to bump up my raise size considerably.

GnicereadwriteupG

Postflop: We've setup a nice "biggish" SPR of ~12.5, and unlike PNLHE which seems to hate this SPR, I personally love it in my games. It basically allows us to bet/bet/bet 3 postflop streets for value against ABC opponents who are never check/raising a worse hand, while at the same time we're never getting committed for stacks *if* we keep our betsizes small enough (and I *do not* want to play for stacks). My plan would be to bet/fold small on the first two streets (say 1/2 PSB) so that I don't build a huge pot, and then I can figure out a good river value bet size depending on run out.

So on this flop, in a $30ish pot, I'd bet my normalish 1/2 PSB of $15 - $20.

ETA: I understand others wanting to bet bigger for immediate value, and of course there is absolutely no difference in Villain's calling frequency of calling say $25 versus $15 here. However, my goal is to make sure I keep the pot under control since I'm planning on betting 3 streets. So I'd still go small on the flop ($15 is fine, imo). Facing the min-check/raise is a little difficult. This guy hasn't shown any tendency at all to play back in this manner, but I guess it's possible he's doing this with a weaker hand, perhaps to "see where he's at". We're getting a good price. We'll be in position to evaluate the turn card/action. We have 2 potential backdoors, plus we can pick up some counterfeiting outs. To be perfectly honest, I rarely call check/raises with just TP/overpair (we are so rarely being exploited here). But this *might* be one of those times I do to see what happens on the turn.

GcluelessNLnoobG

I think stacking off with an overpair postflop with an SPR of ~12.5ish is pretty horrible. (although I'm guessing our styles are very different)

GimoG

Hopefully when we call this raise, what's going to happen is that Villain will differentiate between bluffs, which he'll bet smaller or give up on, versus value, which he'll make clear that he's trying to set up a river shove. This guy does not seem like the type who would jam on a bluff. So stacking off here would be very bad.

With <= 100bb pre and a heads-up hand, I'm stacking off with an overpair unless the board is particularly wet.

As our preflop effective stacks go up, then I start to play my overpairs much slower. But at 133bb effective, against a tilting villain, I'm still stacking off.

~~~

To GG specifically. Let's take your line exactly and see where we get:

Pre: 7bb, and 1 caller. Effective stacks 126bb.

Flop (13bb post rake): SPR is ~10:1. Bet 7bb and get called. Effective stacks now 119bb. How are we doing against V's range?

Turn (27bb): SPR is now ~4.5:1. Bet 14bb and get called. Effective stacks now 105. How are we doing against V's range?

River (55bb): SPR is now ~2:1. Bet 27bb and get called. Remaining stacks 78bb. How are we doing against V's range?

So in the end, we've gotten about 1/2 our stack in.

How about V's range OTR? Unless we get a particularly gross runout, we're always going to have plenty of equity against the vast majority of LLSNL villain's to just b/b/b.

Slightly increasing our bet sizing, to just 2/3 pot get's us AI by the river with a very modest 11/10 PSB (7bb pre, 10bb OTF, 25bb OTT, shove 91bb into 83bb OTR).

I can't see how this (increasing our sizing) changes V's calling range. I think not trying to get AI in this spot is losing 60-80bb of value. In fact, I've read many times in this forum where we outplay our opponents because, "Hero's bet sizing is better".

I think we have to reduce QQ from 3 combos to just 1 since he didn't raise pre. Of course, he can have all 22 and 33 combos. So 7 sets.

The 2pair combos are Q2, Q2, Q3, Q3, 32, 32, and I think we can discount all of these by half, so 3 combos.

There are 10 combos of hands that currently beat us.

But there are many combos of Q-big, and PP which we can get V to overplay if we're a bit careful.

This is definitely not a spot where I'm going to worry about running into a set.

The problem I have with the bigger bet sizes on each street is that we'll be committed by the river. If you *want* to be committed, that's fine, and your plan will definitely work (i.e. you'll be playing for stacks).

I simply don't want to be playing for stacks here with a largish SPR as I don't think the risk vs reward warrants it. We also might miss out on value that we could get others ways. For example, the villain *might* be able to fold somewhere along the line when they realize our bets our setting things up to play for stacks. Or we might be able to induce very weak hands (2nd pair, etc.) to stick around. Offset this with the times we lose less when running into a big hand, and I think this counters the value we lose when up against just TP.

ETA: Plus we just offered ~27:1 implied odds preflop. If I'm the Villain, I'm creaming my pants playing opponents who don't worry about running into a set in these cases.

GimoG

MUBS, IMO.

Winning the maximum definitely makes up for the times where we lose the maximum against a set.

Especially since we don't actually have to b/b/b if the runout goes badly. Since we have position, we can certainly check back the river if we decide to throttle back.

But we can't go back in time and put that extra 5bb in OTF or 15bb in OTT (as my earlier post showed, clearly making it $15 OTF would have been a mistake).

And again, in this hand there is a dynamic involved where V is in the perfect spot to make big mistakes. So we should be happy to let him.

Man I must really suck at this game because I'm not seeing the "gotcha" moment coming here.

We have AA on the friendliest board imaginable against a player who is likely to blow his brains out in frustration. Call the flop c/r (which could easily be AQ, QK or something like TT) and let's get it on a safe turn.

If V has Q3, Q2, 32, or a set, good hand boss

How many bbs deep / high of an SPR before we can't simply chalk up getting it in with an overpair versus a set as being a cooler?

ETA: And even though OP didn't include this until a couple of pages later, this is Villain's first check/raise in 4 hours. That doesn't mean anything?

Gwehavedifferingopinionsofwhatacooleris,imoG

To the first part... It depends, ldo.

I generally start to play different at about 175bb+. A big part of the decision for me is how deep is the table, tho, not just V1.

To the second part... Give me a range for V and show me why I should be so afraid.

Call. Against a super nitty nitty nitty aggressive villian who never raises with less than 2piar you might be able to find a fold here, but against this guy, never in a million years.
Raise exposes more chips while getting rid of bluffing hands, so really has very little value, especially against a villain who just tanked (he doesn't tank on draws) and raised us (he doesn't play draws aggressively)
To be honest we just wanted a call but seeing how he raised us, calling here is the best play by a longshot.