woohoo 100th post.

ah yeah missed it. kinda thought the same tbh

i agree that we should c/c this flop a decent % but i believe that we should c/r a (slightly?) bigger % unless villain is extremely talented at detecting and differentiating between your c/c and c/r percentages. i'm saying this simply because i believe a flop c/r is the easier way to play the hand.
i would've found it quite important for you to let us know in how far villain is talented in this matter so that we can define the gap between the two percentages named above as accurately as possible.

I hope you have a better reason for preferring c/r over calling.

krumb gets it, borg not so imo

let's put it this way: the people that focus (or want to foucs) on checkraising flop vs checkcalling flop are people i probably don't want their opinion from anyway since they don't really seem to get it and most people that just immediately talked about riverplay are people that get it
ducy?

i think balancing your c/c range is awesome, especially against an opponent thinking on level 2, but I don't see the point in balancing if you don't call river too when you have this strong of a hand. also, about the c/r flop thing, i think it does work better as part of an overall gameplan given how much people cbet, how often you are going to want to c/r them, how you want to have strong hands when you're so polarized, and how strong you look when you decide to raise later streets after c/c flop. i'm all for having a wide c/r range in general, and filling it up with as much value and semi-bluffs as possible.

there's obviously a difference in EV between c/c and c/r flop and all i'm saying is that we should adjust our c/c and c/r percentages accordingly unless villain is sort of a perfect player.
i never said i want to put my focus on the flop play, all i said was that there is also room for discussion there.

CALL FOR INFO SPAMZOR....who knows maybe you are even good.

and a Double who knows if you don´t, you reg hunting, chain smoking, chocolate eating, turtle loving, Belgian non gender person.

not a big fan of chocolate tbh
when your next song coming out? cant wait tbh

i think spamz is hinting that he wants a song, and he beats 50NL, don't argue with him

not really, i already had the honor to be in one <3

also urubu and syous seem to totally disagree which makes me puke even more from this spot haha
i think its a click-a-random-button spot in that case

When something big happens I guess, might do something else in the meantime that I don´t think I´m allowed to talk about.

i'm being ignored lolz

thanks

and i understand that u took a certain line and that plus this river card converge to make the river the most interesting decision.

it seems like there has been a lot of discussion of villains hand-range in this thread but not as much 'second-level' discussion regarding what our hand looks like, and how this changes villain's range.

i don't personally encounter villains who will 3barrel such a board as a bluff but i also don't think it's likely that villain perceives the true strength of your hand. i don't expect villain to assign much % that we have 3x or better w this line on this board texture (altho this cld be a result of the stakes i play, too) and since i think our line looks a *lot* like Ax or worse, it seems pretty reasonable that villain wld bluff this river with a huge chunk of their range, including turning the A's into bluffs trying to avoid a split.

if we expect villain to be fairly barrel-happy, and that's why we're running this line in the first place, i do think there are enough elements in this hand for us to expect villain to build a bluff line around.

i'm not sure if i agree w urubu's statement that villain wld shove the riv instead of 4/5 pot to make us fold a split - some Ax hands cld see the riv K as a savior from a bad kicker, imo, and if villain knows we think they're aggro (which wld explain our c/c line) the split card cld reduce villain's urge to bluff at all.

some villains may expect us to lead the riv with a flush, too, since we may reasonably expect Ax's to check behind instead of making a move at the split pot. i think that's another argument for our range looking weak enough to bluff at after we check the riv.

Villain has obviously lots of Ax's in his range. If he bets most of his Ax's (even the weakest ones) on turn I believe he will think he has a fairly profitable bluff to get you off a split. Since your range looks exactly like Ax a LOT, + some flushdraws and 3x's. So if he decides to bet most of his Ax's on turn I think you should call river since his range will consist of lots of Ax's.

So I'm kinda curious what u think of his turn betting range (I could've missed it, although I've read the entire thread).

Only third post, sorry if there is an obvious answer to this. But I am interested on how this effected your thought process, if it did at all. It is still fairly early in this SnG and the blinds are still small to the effective stack sizes. Your original read was that the villain was nitty at the beginning, then opened up as the SnG went on. Did you think him being stuck/tilted significantly widened his bluff range this early on? Or were you thinking that since it is still early on it he would stick to safer tendencies and have more of a value range here on the river? Did the villain know you perceived him as nitty early on, in which case he might think that he could bluff more because of the respect you would give him?

Hmm, if you think there is no definitive answer and hence calling or folding is basically neutral ev... then doesn't that mean we should be calling here?

(obviously this is theoretical)

The thing about him betting Ax is that he doesn't have to just be targetting your Ax range as a demi-bluff. If he thinks you have a lot of pp with a spade on the turn then the 'value-demi-bluff' aspect might make him more inclined to bet. Plus you can have some kind of Ks hand that now has a pair.

I think spam cc the flop is fine to balance his range. Cr isn't bad either (on the flop) but I guess I would only do that against certain players (the really aggro and spazzy ones who think any aggression is bluffing) Also borg... don't question spam. spam questions you.

anyways... I think op is pretty much never bluffing here and I think his value range is most likely AA, 3x, flushes, 45 (pretty rare... Idk is he really pfr with these type of hands), and AK. He's going to be checking the river with all his Ax's (most of the time... idk this discussion about cash players being able to fire out another barrel with Ax just doesn't seem to make sense to me).

also his bet sizing seems to want a call more than anything but this is rather useless information given his betting pattern since any good player isn't going to be betting out here as a pure bluff


But I think your perceived range is really like some Ax hand. I do see you doing this with 3x occasionally and I think a fd seems unlikely when you check the river. I'd fold and it would be a pretty hard one to make.

Though I wouldn't fold against the fish at my stakes because they truly are ******ed and will fire here with a very VERY wide range.

Ok I took a whole day after reading this post to come up with a reply, but I really think that this comes down to weighting the hands in his range based not only on the number of combinations but the probability that he takes this line with each hand type. Now obviously bet/bet/bet in position doesn't narrow down his range all that much (at least not as much as if he had responded to a raise, had to raise himself, etc.). I feel like he obviously has lots of flush combos, a few combos of 54, AK, and some Ax.

If he's a good reg he probably has a decent idea of your range here, and knows that there are a lot more Ax than anything else in your range. So given that he has that information I would assume that as a thinking player he would realize that this is a good spot to turn Ax into a bluff to try and get you to fold a chop.

I feel like by under-repping our hand this is a spot where we could have easily induced a bet by a weaker hand going for value (AK or 3x which we now unfortunately chop with). It's also a spot where we could have induced a bluff by Ax as I addressed earlier. However it is obvious that there are a lot of value hands villain can have here; boats, flushes, and straights are all possible.

Imo this is a call that is going to be slightly +EV. So we should expect to lose A LOT here, but long term I feel like we will be +EV.

does no one else agree that he could be value betting thinly on the turn but bluffing the river? with a hand like 88 or smthn.

i really dont understand y this is a bad spot to be bluffing either. we look fairly weak and will float flop pretty wide i would think

nobody here pointed the fact that mathematically it all comes down to "is he capable to do it w/ Ax or not?"

he lays us 30,77% pot odds and

- we have a masive +EV call if he does bets Ax on the river:
{Qd3d} 64.45%
{AK,3*,*s*s,22,AA,A*} 35.55%

- and a sligthty -EV if he doesnt:
{Qd3d} 25.48%
{AK,3*,*s*s,22,AA} 74.52%

so spamz0r, is he sick enough to make this bet or not?

jack u hafta add in 54

EDIT: and take out some of the 3x hands and hands villain will fold pre

yeah wateva, it doesnt change anything,
also wanna point out that i dont see a pure bluffing range for villan as theres no real missed draws + the read that he doesnt 3barrel much

mmm I seriously don't think op will be betting out Ax as bluff because he's seen spam cc with really strong hands before so I don't know why the op couldn't be thinking that spam is cc with some weak 3x or something.