Hi!

BTN is 25/15, BTN steal 57%.
SB is 29/6 Fold sb vs stl 60%, Donk flop 10% over 305 hands overall.

SBs bet seemed weak and our hand needs plenty of protection + we can comfortably fold vs a 3b. Fine to raise this OTT?

Thanks!

weak or trying to extract a few more $ from you with his boat?

Protection? Against what? Flush- and straightdraws that will have problems to valuebet the river? I don`t know man. I would prefer calling and have a look at SBs reaction on the river. Buy maybe that`s bs and someone can explain why.

Would sq pre

I'd 3bet pre given btn stack size. i'd assume a 29/6 player to be a passive rec so his donk into 2 seems strong, we do have the NF blocker but i wouldnt be to happy to bluff with it vs this kind of player, there is still a short stack left to act and our hand lacks playability in future streets so i'd probably sigh fold.

As played, ott sb probably is betting his hole range with that sizing so wouldn't assume he is weak and for the same reasons as above i'd probably just fold.

Easy call imo. Raising creates a lot of problems as you are repping trips and better. SB could still be betting top two or an overpair+FD. He will likely play straightforward on rivers since you should have plenty of boats in your range as well. You should balanced with T3, 63, 66, and some combos of TT that didn't raise flop. So really you are close to the bottom of your turn continuing range, which makes it a bad spot to raise for value. Still too strong to fold though, especially since after calling flop this is basically your nut card other than an ace. Another note is that plenty of people lead sets and two pairs, so your villain has boats in his range too.

Focus on the main mistake of this hand which is not 3-betting pre then you won't find yourself in uncompromising spots like this. That will have a bigger effect on your win-rate than analyzing this turn spot.

If he 3b pre we would be talking about the flop instead

Have to disagree, the EV of raising this turn spot is much * the frequency >> the EV of not 3betting * frequency

Most likely, we all know people don't fold to 3-bets in PLO But it'd trigger a substantial change in action and analysis, for example, SB donking into a 3-bettor and OR is completely different to him donking in this spot.

But my premise is that this situation should have a frequency of 1. The EV gained by 3-betting in future situations * frequency could be infinite. I'm suggesting to OP that re-evaluating his 3-betting frequency is this kind of squeeze spot, which occurs very often, would be of benefit to them.

I like OPs call pre. These are bad Aces, we play out of postion and BTNs stack isn`t small enough to achieve anything big here. You usually get two callers and if you hit your A, it`s an action killer. There is not much else we can hit on the flop to be happy about...

yeah i have no idea why people want to squeeze this kind of AA preflop.. please explain me in detail how are you going to play all the flops. Very rarely someone will give you action on A high flop unless its monotone or has straight possible and he has a better hand than you/some strong draw and on the other ones there are only few flops u can pot/call.

i challenge anyone thinking squeeze pre is better than call to convince me HOW it actually is better.

It´s all about balancing... You also need some dumb moves in your range to avoid getting classified as clever reg. In the long run this will improve your winrate because... that`s a secret... You don`t know that concept?

How to play these AA? easy: 52% barell as much as you can, 37% insta-muck before it is even you turn, and 28% of flops you x and hope for a showdown and if you face a bet you fold and write "lucker" or "fish".

Thats some very convincing arguments! Thank you i will start right away!

I agree that pf flat > 3bet.

I'd love to hear arguments for a 3bet though.

- Your range isn't capped nearly as much when 3-bet squeezing over a BTN raise and a SB cold-call (provided you're balancing your range effectively)
- This means your hand isn't as face up post-flop as it may be in other 3-bet spots and also allows for aggressive players to 4-bet wider from the BTN
- Even with a weaker AAxx hand, you're still holding two valuable nut flush blockers
- Depending on opponents, there's always still a chance you end up playing a heads up pot vs SB in position with a strong hand
- AAxx as an over pair still plays reasonably well post-flop.

Maybe some others can add to this list?

i understand your points, but i would like to ask mention a few points:

flush-blockers: Isn`t it true that these blockers are espacially valuable on a montone board and lose a lot of value on two-tone boards. I think that hands like toppair+k-flushdraw will still raise you a ton if you c-bet. I would say, that almost all two-tone non A boards are really ugly to c-bet.

HU against SB? How often? isn`t the truth that this is very unlikely?

plays well post-flop? I mean most of the flops will be two-tone and reffering to what i said before, we will have difficulties to play flops with confidence.

And by the way: I understand that we all have different opinions here and it is good to share thoughts. But when it comes to this particular holding i like, understand and prefer the suggestions of tom chambers who says: "call against a raise OOP. This hands plays much better for multiway-set-mining-value." Maybe we can use him (this statement) as a referee here.

I prefer the 3-bet preflop. If you are playing in games where everyone puts you on AAxy you can flat it, but an important question would be whether you are (fistpump) squeezing hands like T986ss in those games. It would be somewhat inconsistent not to.

#1/#2 seem irrelevant. No well constructed 3-bet range, no matter how tight, will have issues with board coverage or being face up. E.g. for something really tight like top-3% (heh), premium AAxy practically balance themselves due to the sidecards; by the time top-notch ds rundowns and KK/QQ/etc. are added, it's not a problem at all. (But I'd doubt the relevance of that altogether, because both opponents are literally recs.)

#3, eh, this seems odd to me, since on the spectrum of [complete napkins . . . suited aces], nut flush blockers are much closer in value to the napkins. And they are more valuable in a single-raised pot, too.

#4, you still play a three-way pot way more often.

#5, probably the most solid reason, but like many of the other reasons this should be naturally baked into some sort of EV calc, not a standalone reason expressed in a nebulous verbal way.

Anyway, this seems like the wrong way to justify the 3-bet. And this is coming from someone who prefers the 3-bet.

I think raising turn with this hand is a fundamental flaw. I'm not saying it's terrible in this spot, but I do think it makes little sense from an over-all strategic point of view

ProPokerTools Odds Oracle Results (2.3 Professional)
Omaha Hi, Generic syntax
PLAYER_1 AsAdJc5c
PLAYER_2 57%
PLAYER_3 40%
600000 trials (randomized)


All-in Equity

	Equity %	Wins Hi %	Ties Hi %	Wins Hi Count	Ties Hi Count
AsAdJc5c	44.1835%	43.4203%	1.5328%	260522	9197
57%	27.7818%	27.0340%	1.5020%	162204	9012
40%	28.0347%	27.1702%	1.7355%	163021	10413

How often do(es)
PLAYER_1 have the best 5-card hi on the flop
70.5095% (423057)

I think noone questioned that we have and equity edge pre in this hand. Doesn`t change the fact that the playability full stacks isn`t the best.

And about your 70% best hand stat... Are you aware that this doesn`t mean that you have 70% equity on the flops. It only means that you usually have the best 5-card high but this doesnt mean you are ahead this much.
The average "equity" that you have on the flop is the same like preflop. I am only saying you know...

Your 70% looks great, but isnt really worth a lot.

I'm 3-betting most of the time pre. Call turn. Raising turns our hand into a bluff

but why? WHY???

You gotta tell me how you would play on EACH and EVERY flop!

I challenge you!

Gotta chase that backdoor quaddraw on the flop!

What's SB flatting range here?