Well played. Too strong not to 3b, can't fold to 4b, without reads 5b or flop-donk is spew...

Is it not a fold to 4-bet without reads since we assume most villains are 4-betting AAxx at 100PLO?

I wouldn't say it's too strong not to 3b. Yes, it's a super nice premium looking hand but if we're up against AA we're 36%. Since villain opened UTG then this should increase the chance of being up against AA and having to 3b/fold a hand this pretty just sucks.

Our hand has such great playability and can dominate a lot of stuff on flops that 100bb deep it's fine to just flat to the open. 140bb deep or more I'm 3betting every single time though. I mean 3b is fine too but I would 3b less than pot.

As played I think I fold to the 4-bet although with this strong a hand it's close. If I'm continuing usually it's because I think villain is quite a bit wider than AA - we need 42% to GII and BE. The problem with flatting is IF we do so because villain is wider than AA then we can end up making big mistakes post flop. For example on the flop we got it's obv correct to fold if we believe we're up against AA but if villain has a hand similar to ours (like AJT8ss) then we're making a huge mistake by folding) - so I prefer to just get the money in pre which is good for the image!! The same thing can happen on any paired flop (say 662r - terrible shape vs AA, fine shape vs a lot of other stuff)

However, with smaller rundowns (basically any non Ax excluding KQJTds) I'm flatting all the time instead of shoving. These hands are much less likely to make mistakes post flop and so saving the extra $ when we miss is important.

No, you are making a mistake only if you check-fold with >26.45% equity on the flop.

If on 662r, you have <26.45% equity, check-folding increases your EV relative to getting it in pre even if you sometimes fold against Axxx.

That is a terrible and very wrong assumption to make. Fun players prolly 4bet close to AAxx, but +90% of the regulars at PLO100 on P* has a wider 4bet range than AA. Some regs, in particular some eastern european regs, 4bet most KK as well as a lot of Axxx hands in this spot. Against those I ship it in and expect to flip or be a small fave against their range. I literally see winning regs 4bet AKQ5ss, AJT9ss, KK74ss, AT86ds here

3bet/folding this hand readless on PLO100 is flat out ******ed - sry, but it is

Huh, I know that? Not sure where I said otherwise.

My point was that if you think villain can be quite a bit wider than AA and you flat the 4-bet then you're often going to have more than 26.45% equity vs his range on flops but still fold incorrectly. Therefore, it makes better sense to just GII pre. With smaller rundowns it's less likely you will make a mistake because under cards to the board have little equity whereas over cards to the board can have plenty of equity.

@ Oink: You are correct that players can and do 4-bet wider than AA. However, most of these situations can be attributed to CO/BTN and BTN/blind battles. Since most people have a tight UTG range it follows to only 3bet UTG opens with a tight range. Thus it follows that UTG shouldn't be 4-betting very wide at all and is going to be predominantly AA heavy. Basic stuff really.

edit: And I would love to play against so-called winning regs that 4-bet said hands after opening UTG and being 3-bet in the blinds.

Nvm, it sounded like you were concerned about avoiding hand-vs.-hand mistakes, not hand-vs.-range mistakes.

@ Ivanovic

I dont know what to say. Your assumption is just wrong. Its just not true what you say. It is a minority of regs in PLO100 on P* that does not auto 4bet AKQ6ds, KKds, AKKss, in any position and as said some will 4bet lots wider.

People are just not as AA heavy in these games when they 4bet as they use to be

There is plenty of them and they play a lot. I would say there is about 5-8 of these "russian" regs and they play a lot. So now you know where to find them

Do you have any hands you can post? (showing this UTG 4-betting this wide) I'm by far the most aggressive reg where I play (I'm only playing PLO50 mostly) and I 4-bet a lot and with the hands you listed. What I don't do is open UTG with them and then auto 4-bet facing a 3bet from someone that is clearly 3-betting me with a tight range. That's just -ev poker.

Also

There is no reason to be a douchebag here. I know they are winning thanks to a certain tracking site. So please stop posting subtle claims that these guys arent winning and that I am making stuff up. If you want to argue with me about this thats fine, but dont be a childish prick. Lets argue like adults. Ok? Thanks

Sorry, I didn't mean it to sound like that. Just struggled to believe it, that's all. I don't usually post sarcy remarks like that!

That being said resorting to insults yourself by calling me a douchebag and a childish prick isn't taking the moral high ground. As I said above I'd be grateful if you could show me some hands where this happens.

Hand 1: Pretty loose I'll agree. Maybe he thought you were 3-betting wider than usual and wanted to fight back. Once in a while it's fine to do this - and being OOP flatting with this hand and playing post-flop isn't going to be that easy.
Hand 2: SB's wasn't a pot 3-bet and given what he showed up with I'm guessing they were 3-b happy and un-positionally aware so I can see merit of 4-betting wider.
Hand 3: OK, so UTG was fairly wide with his 4-bet but you seem active enough and flatting OOP with his hand is much less appealing then flatting IP. If you were BB I imagine UTG always flats instead of 4-betting.
Hand 4: UTG min-open almost definitely induces much wider 3-betting from players IP so it's reasonable for him to assume QQ with an A blocker is ahead.
Hand 5: Again min-open inducing wider 3-bets I guess and prob hoping he can isolate shortstack CO.
Hand 6: Seems a bit loose but going to assume with what BTN showed up with that he was targeting BTN and so seems fine.
Hand 7: CO's really wide 3-bet suggest they're not positionally aware and are too aggro with 3betting so again UTG seems reasonable here.
Hand 8: Again it's BTN doing 3-betting and QQJTds is pretty strong anyway dominating a lot of stuff.
Hand 9: Meh I don't love stacking off with AKKK.... pretty crappy hand but we got an A blocker again against a liberal 3-better. And we have one nut suit so probably OK.
Hand 10: It's 200bb deep and 4-betting is fine.
Hand 11: Judging by MP's hand 4-betting this seems totally fine. Also again 200bb deep.
Hand 12: Only 5 handed so wider ranges from MP anyway but again it's BTN that's 3bet
Hand 13: Finally something other than an IP 3-bet! Although this time again it's an MP open. His hand dominates a strong Ax Ds hand though and if SB is 3-betting all sorts of rubbish then 4-betting this hand is fine. (It has less value in flatting in this case because our hand doesn't flop as well as a hand like AKJTds does.)

Again, none of these hands show enough similarity with our hand to prove otherwise. It's not just about UTG but about villain - good players are going to 3-bet a tighter range vs UTG when OOP than a lot of people in your examples did. (but a lot of them were IP) And also, IP vs OOP makes a big difference since OOP you're much more happy to just get the money in and let the variance do the talking. IP like with UTG vs BB then UTG is going to be happy to just flat a lot more often.

Seeing all these hands though makes me realise that a 3bet is still pretty mandatory.

Ivanovic

I just took a bunch of 4bet hands UTG and MP for these guys since you were questioning the truth of my claim that regs exist that 4bet super light. I wasnt looking particularly for similar hands to the one in OP.

Getting back to the jist of it: putting people on AA when they 4bet is a bad idea, even as low as PLO100. Thats all I really responded to.

So the suggestion to 3bet/fold this hand readless is a very bad idea (Which I am not even sure is right even if villain has AA 100%, I never fold even if I believe villain is AA heavy).

Even if the AKKKss and AQ74ds and so on are not std (and they are not) you can pretty safely assume that UTGs range here very often is at least AA, AKKss, KKds, AKQxds, AQJxds

Will a random PLO100 guy 4bet 100% with KK75ds or AKK6ss? No definetely not. But the frequency will be significant enough that you cant fold to the 4bet. Not only that, I am 100% sure it will be a pretty big mistake.

So getting back to the preflop decision: I am reiterating that a fold preflop is really bad

Yeah but the hands you posted up aren't equivalent to this situation. I agree that putting people solely on AA when they 4bet is a bad idea in most situations. However, UTG vs BB is one situation where we can be pretty sure that UTG either has AA a lot or another hand that has us in bad shape (AKK and KKds) simply because they're IP and flatting is going to be more profitable with almost all hands except AA/AKK/KKds

That said I change my mind from thinking it's a close fold to agreeing it's probably still a mistake to fold this hand. Pretty much any other Axxx hand is a fold but we pretty much have at least 37% with this hand and only need 42% to GII and be BE. We also only need 33% to call profitably. I think overall flatting is probably better than shoving in this case since if we believe villain does have AA (or AKK/KKds) a lot then we're unlikely to be making post flop mistakes.

As said: I was just finding a lot of losse UTG 4bets by these guys, since you were questioning my claim that they 4bet those hands UTG.

Looking for specific spots where someone opens UTG and is squeezed from the blinds wont yield a lot of results as it is a spot that does not happen to frequently.

You are by the way incorrect when you assume that I am an active guy. I am not an active 3bettor by any means

That said, I agree with your post above. And I also overestimated how loose people wil 4bet specifically in this spot, you are of course right that UTG vs BB squeeze will yield the tightest 4bet ranges

@ Hand in OP: 5-bet jam with A-blocker and premium rundown.