Only 57 hands- 31/26, 0% fcb (only 2),

check flop? As played?

Plenty of draws possible as well as sets etc. have Ah. Think over pairs more likely to just call but not always.


SB: $137.28 (274.6 bb)
Hero (BB): $50 (100 bb)
BTN: $50.93 (101.9 bb)

Preflop: Hero is BB with A A
BTN raises to $1.12, SB folds, Hero raises to $5.50, BTN calls $4.38

Flop: ($11.25) 7 5 6 (2 players)
Hero bets $7.50, BTN raises to $45.43 and is all-in, Hero ?

Yeah x/c looks good with Ah.

Pre looks too big

3b size IMO is ok, unless you have some blind defense Hx with this guy and your larger sizing is a tell. In that case keeping it around 4.5x perhaps.

I'm also c/c flop and depending on his agg% which should be somewhat defined after 57 hands at 31 VPIP i'll know what I'm doing to his possible turn/river bets.

dont cbet, as played not folding now.

Reraise is large pf, but it worked out. I like your line here assuming you called the shove.

Checking with the intent of calling this flop is too passive. Leading into the flop will take it down often and we have enough equity against his reraise shove range in this spot to not fear getting it in.

Check raising is a fine play if we are reasonably sure they will continuation bet too wide here, but I would need a specific read to do that.

No

It doesn't seem so clear to me to get it in here, as played. Villain has all the sets, all the 89 suited, and 76 and 65 suited as well. Against that range, we don't have the right odds. We need the Villain to be pushing his overpairs and flush draws, and we strongly block the latter.

Ok, looked at some more math, if he is just pushing sets, 89 suited, 2 pairs and 88-99 we are basically getting the right odds, even with no Kxhh. Get it in, but still not a great spot.

I like the Cbet, for what its worth

I do not understand why this is so clearly the wrong line.

You stated that as played you would call the reraise, so why is the lead so bad? The alternative is check calling the flop and we will have no idea where we are at in the hand. Do you think checking induces a lot of check backs or bluffs / weakish value bets?

It's a scary board, and we have the nut flush blocker. I'd rather put the pressure on the Villain in position who has cold called our very large 3 bet pf and call a shove knowing my equity against his range is not that bad.

C/c widens our opponents range, means we're not exploitable by check/folding too many hands, and gives maneuverability to get away on turns/rivers which are perceived to be better for our opponents.

Check calling will always widen the range, it doesn't mean it's necessarily good or bad. The board is also very draw heavy which means we have tons of hands we can check call with and have a very balanced style to avoid being exploited.

Maneuverability in this instance can be defined as "give opponent a free card" on this draw heavy board. When we lead here, we can expect many folds and calls instead of the reraise all in. If we bet and are called we can certainly fold to some really scary turn cards, but betting allows us to take the initiative in the hand and try to take it down now.

we are going to face a lot of raise on the flop because villain has way more nutty hands than us. we cannot expect many folds on this super drawy flop. we will get owned on tons of turns/rivers.