SB: $209.60 (104.8 bb)
Hero (BB): $280.46 (140.2 bb)
MP: $567.79 (283.9 bb)
CO: $231.63 (115.8 bb)
BTN: $152.36 (76.2 bb)

Preflop: Hero is BB with K A
MP raises to $6, CO folds, BTN calls $6, SB folds, Hero raises to $34, MP folds, BTN calls $28

Flop: ($75) 5 9 8 (2 players)
Hero bets $246.46, BTN calls $118.36 and is all-in

Turn: ($311.72) 2 (2 players, 1 is all-in)
River: ($311.72) 9 (2 players, 1 is all-in)


Villain is a 49/22 fish with 50% fold to sqz when hes the coldcaller and fold to cbet in 3bp 40%.
I mean vs this guy its a shove or a check/fold because he isnt really aggressive but is definitely stabbing here and there.

Think I just x/f this flop but it's close. Give us some better back door equity or if villain can actually find a fold with say 5x, 22-33, 44, 66, 77, chops and some ugly club draws it'll probably fine. Would probably just b/f a regular amount if villain isn't super aggressive because you aren't obligated to call if you get jammed on.

Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk

+1

First, let's break down your "reads" a bit, as I think this line of thinking is a HUGE mistake that's in the way of a lot of your improvement as a poker player. I don't mean that to sound negative because just about everyone who has posted in SSNL and MSNL has made the same mistake several times, and still makes the mistake!

Over what sample size are these reads? (Rhetorical)

You also mention conflicting reads. 'He isn't aggressive, but he does bet sometimes.' So... I'm just going to go into this one assuming that we know as little about this calling player as the statistics and the language indicate. You're welcome to correct me if you have some hand examples that would prove much more informative than the numbers you've posted.

With lower sample sizes, which is just about always, and for specific positions and multiway action, statistics are very difficult to have carry a lot of weight without comparing them to a massive group of population data. Even then, specific situations and emotions that might affect a player's decisions cause all sorts of noise in your data. 100 hands among 2 unknown players, all hands measured from different positions and with different stack sizes and against different players is about as meaningless as it gets in poker. The data is so noisy that your sample size is almost certainly insignificant. With that out of the way...


The squeeze pre-flop is sized too largely. It's partially why you're having trouble finding a flop bet size that makes sense. You, ideally, want to marry post-flop possibilities with pre-flop folding equity in spots where you want to squeeze. I'd recommend $24 for this spot. Your size is so large, in fact, that you've nearly committed yourself pre-flop against the button with any hand with which you might squeeze, assuming the button could jam ace-king. You're offering yourself such good equity in this situation that the other player can go "well, he isn't bluffing" and just toss everything that doesn't do well enough against a range of hands like TT+/AQs. In other words, who is looking at this squeeze with KTs and feeling confused about what to do?

Onward to the flop given that you've blasted the pot pre-flop, forcing your opponent to have a rather defined range of holdings; whereas, a pre-flop sizing like $24 forces your opponent to call with some hands with which you dominate and fold some hands that actually do have decent equity against your particular holdings (since you'll also have TT+/AQs types of hands here, as well). The smaller size also allows your opponents to 4 bet bluff. The larger size is mostly shove or fold territory, especially for the player who is presumably not as speculative with the majority of his holdings. On the flop, you smash all-in. Why? That bet size doesn't force your opponent to make any/many mistakes. He might fold 44. He's probably always folding AQ... so why jam?

When you make the pre-flop re-raise smaller, you're offering your opponent a more complex game on the flop and one where you have the stronger hand more often on the average board texture. This particular board texture is awful for your range and great for your opponent's hand range. You shouldn't be betting the board texture often at all because of how vulnerable your entire range is.

You'll want to continuation bet some bluffs here, of course, but ones that will do well on future board run outs AND ones with less showdown value. So, consider a hand like JT... if you get jammed on, no harm. You toss it. The turn can offer you a lot of profitable semi-bluffs or top pair hands that can now be the better/best hand. If you bet/fold a hand like AK, you might have folded the best hand or a draw with enough equity to continue. That would be a mistake on your part and not be a great way to play poker!

Thank you very much for your long post.
I have 1.5k hands on this fish so the stats definitely give us some idea of how he plays here.
I like your points about the squeeze size in particular but im abit confused why u said this board hits his range particularly well after we said that my large squeeze lets him have a rather defined range that is going to be stronger ofc. For this reason he might toss SC's pre already and I wasnt sure what to do against a bet or two so I ended up just shoving to deny some equity and knowing that I have relatively high EQ to sometimes win.

thoughts ?

You're welcome

1500 hands can be deceving because there's a LOT of noise in the data to be filtered. For example, how many of those hands are facing a squeeze bet from the positions you're in and calling it pre-flop? 10? And what's a sample size of 10... basically meaningless.

What's easier to rely on in such spots is the way the population plays, or perhaps extrapolate from what the player has had in similar (not the same) instance that you have seen get to showdown OR NOT. In other words, there are more accurate ways to narrow down your opponent's holdings than these "1500" hands, which truly amount to a sample size of what's likely smaller than 10.

Let's say your opponent's range is heavily weighted toward AQ and medium pairs 88-JJ. What is moving all-in accomplishing against that hand range? Looks to me like it's just getting you stacked or folding out the only worse hand you'd be facing.

Also, think about your value hands and your bluffs. How do they work on this board? Should you EVER jam all-in here? What's the point? We just showed that bluffs really only fold out AQ and does that need to be done my moving all-in? Also, how many bluffs do you have here after that pre-flop sizing? It's not like you need to be perfectly balanced here by any means, but it's just some food for thought for future similar scenarios because you can often use intuition to construct what is likely a powerful and nearly correct hand range and bet sizing strategy for particular spots just by considering range versus range implications.

I agree that Pre is too big

As played I'd just c/f