Huh? We are gonna pick off their bluff with KK.

What about a three barrel bluff? I don't object to calling down. I am curious if you think KK can handle all three streets. Most of mine seem to give up before the river, but not all, hence the conundrem.

I see, our best candidates to bluff catch are obv KK, QQ, and our bets value bettors are AX hands, hence we're not maximizing by mixing up the ranges like that. So if you were against an opponent who's aggressive enough to bet all three streets, it should still be KK,QQ.

i think KK no spades is a slam dunk donk check along with an array of other hands against the described villain.

while i think cbetting 100% (or close to it) is ok since it is probably giving up just very little and it will likely exploit many villains who over fold too much on a board where we're an equity favorite, this particular villain does not seem to fit that description.

Also, I think KK is one of the first hands i'd put into my donk check bucket for reasons phunkfish stated.

Still looking for thoughts about this question.

This.

Regarding the turn check raise question:

I like it sometimes with hands that don't block the button from holding strong hands. 88 comes to mind for check raise/4 bet and 98s comes to mind for a check raise/call but I'd usually just play bet or check here. The profitability of a slowplay goes down as the your range gets stronger, and here your range is quite strong. This is because your opponent should be inclined to check back with a lot of stuff due to the strength of your range.

Contrast that with the same action but change the board to something like 456r T which hits the button a lot harder than the board in the op. I'd have a pretty wide checking range there and as such I think it's necessary and quite profitable to have a corresponding value check raise range.

c/r the turn is bad because too many draws are present

This is way oversimplified. For sure you should have some hands you CR on any board where you ever check period.

I am shocked that people want to check the flop here. I can't imagine that could be good.

Well yes but any A is imo too weak for that .
I mean the number of value hands that we should barrel here is pretty high due to the high amount of bluff we can have in our hands or weaker draws that our opponents have that we want to charge him.

I mean if we really should have a c/r range here it should be a pretty small range since our 3bet range is not super wide.
So maybe a set or a pair of A with one of the flush draw might be fine but still, imo the risk is too high too loose value if our opponents check on this board or the possibility to get outdrawn.

I just ' Ike to keep my range as opaque as possible OOP.
My 3 bet is imo too small to start splitting my range to include a c/r here .

i think it just depends what your overall strategy is ahead of time.

what you and jon etc are saying about cbetting 100% because of our strong edge in range vs range equity makes sense

and what phunk and others are saying is that if you employ a preconstructed gto-like strategy then putting kk in the flop check bucket here also makes sense

as far as which of those two strategies is more +ev in this particular spot -- maybe it's doable to calculate it? not sure

Well I didn't say CR every ace on the turn, that's awful. You seemed to say you should never CR turn here and I think that's awful too.

What do you do with 77 and KQ on the turn here?

Every GTO simulation I've seen checks kings on this sort of board 90+% of the time. It just makes sense that kings are a weird hand to be betting vs a range that is quite polarized between 140 Ax combos and a ton of stuff that is crushed.

77 i bet/fold turn and KQ i c/c .

For it to be a c/r in my range it will be because I would play exploitative here , like vs a maniac or very aggro player .

Here I am not sure having a c/r here is necessary for a couple of factors.
Like this board hit our range pretty hard , making villain to fell into our c/r plan less likely.
Pot has been 3bet and so using deception is kind of pointless when the pot is not small ( unless other more important factor comes into play like facing a maniac ).
Too many draws that could cost us a lot by missing value if our c/r fails.
I would rather bet/3bet our best hand for value than going for the c/r if vilain try to semibluff the turn.
I feel my range for a c/r range here would be too narrow due to the lack of which hands are left in my range on this board.

I feel because we are OOP, if by cutting our range too much with smaller bucket , we give too much info about about our range and the cost seem higher when OOP imo.

But maybe some exception might be fine like top pair with flush draw but for now I did not really tryed it or analyzing it too much for now.

But usually on dry board I tend to c/r and wet board to fast play .


But yes, probably vs your opposition that work needed to be done but I am not there yet

Do people really 3bt 76s-T9s SB vs B at LHE nowadays? How can this be right when ace high will always go to showdown?

Because very frequently the button doesn't have ace high, especially in a short-handed game (granted, the OP was 9h).

If the button opens ~50%, then our hot-cold equity combined with fold equity can justify a 3-bet.

Fyp

I bet 3 streets against pretty much anyone here. I would call down raise against someone solid.

Checking flop seems very weak to me. Our hand is just too strong to miss that kind of value imo. Lots of worse hands should call down but won't necessarily bet 3 streets if checked to.

If you are the button what is the bottom of your call down range?

What hands are you bluffing or turning into bluffs on the turn?

I agree that against a lot of players, betting 3 streets makes sense if you are the SB. I'm just wondering what makes bet/calling down better than check/calling down from the turn onward against a solid player. Is he really bluffing enough on the turn? Is he calling down enough?

I ask because I may not bluff or call down as much as I should.

Thanks!

Checking can get value from undercards that pair, that now pay us off.
Checking gets value if villain bluffs too much.
Checking KK strengthens our check range, so that parts of our air can now check once and more bluff cheaper for only 1 or 2 streets instead of committing to a 3-barrel, and also allows us more information before bluffing.

Maybe in a single raised pot IP, this is true. OOP in a 3b pot, it should cbet KK more than 10%.

Live at the Bike alternative spot for reference

^ Can't he just always fold to the old conservatively dressed man on the turn, or the river. Oh no he can't, because he wears shades and is paranoid about the bluffing element of the game.

Checking the flop is suboptimal and unnecessary.

I bet the flop 100% in this spot. Basically, the hand begins on the turn. I would x/c the turn as well as any river but a K which I would x/r.

To answer your question, I'd x/r The turn with AK sometimes and my worst set a lot. I'd x/c with my worst Ax. B/3b AK and AQ and other obvious hands.

What is the play when you X/R AK and get 3 bet?