3-handed at the FT of the ACR High Roller, 530 buyin. Payouts 16675, 10150, 7613.

Blinds 5k, 10K with 1K ante. Wasn't aware that button was Moorman until after results were published on P5s. We haven't played a lot of hands together so I assume I'm just some rando to Moorman.

Moorman on button with 387K. Random in SB with 372K. I'm in big blind with 691K.

Moorman min-raises button to 20K and I flat Ts7c in BB.

Flop: 7d 10d Ks. Lead, check call, or check raise?

lol, who gives a **** who BTN is if you didn't know it at the time you played this? reads? what have you observed of Villain?

seems pretty standard c/r for value + protection, bottom two pair is somewhat vulnerable and we will have a good number of semi-bluff c/r on this board out of the BB so seems good to c/r this combo for balance.

i don't really know why we would donk here, having a donking range out of the BB in this spot is something I never use in my own game and while I haven't studied it in depth I can't imagine it's good to split ranges vs. good players.

Would be c/r here, val, prot and bal. What were your reads on him to this point? Any non-std sizings etc?

No reads. He had come to the FT short and doubled up in a couple of standard spots and made a pretty standard call with 66 cutoff vs button reshove. Not a lot of postflop play. Only potentially relevant hand is when we were 5 handed, i 4-bet jammed A2hh cutoff vs aggro button's 30 bb stack when i was 2/5 and button was 3/5 so he might perceive me as someone who is willing to risk significant portion of stack to put ICM pressure on others

You're suggesting a check raise. If we don't want to split our range, shouldn't we be check-calling our entire continuing range?

Everyone is so constructive and tactful here on twoplustwo.

I meant splitting our flop range into a donking and checking range. If we have a donking range, a check/calling range, and a check/raising range, generally unless you're very careful about how you're constructing these ranges at least one of them is going to be exploitable. For instance, if you want to c/r your sets on this flop, your leading range will necessarily not have sets in it, which will prove troublesome on certain run-outs long term. If you always lead your flush draws and never c/r them, you won't be able to have flushes in check/raised pots on turns and rivers and that will hurt you. Etc. etc.

I understand what you meant. It just seems to me that if we're most concerned about not splitting our range, we should be check/calling everything. And that if we want to have more options available to us, it makes sense to have three options and not two.

The more options, the harder it is to balance.

I'm pretty sure the EV of our whole strategy will be much greater with a c/r range than without, considering we have hands we want to get a lot of money in with and draws that we feel are too weak to c/c one/two streets but that have a lot of equity. I feel like there are other reasons but that I'm not necessarily able to articulate what they are.

Check raise and try to play for stacks on many runouts

I check, Moorman bets 21K, I check raise to 65K. Chris calls. Turn Qs. Bringing BDFD. I'm assuming most people want to bet now, but now we're at an awkward SPR. His stack is around 300K, with 180K in the middle. Bet too small on this super wet texture and we're not charging draws properly. Bet too large and we set up an SPR on the river where it would appear difficult to have a lot of bluffs.

Wug turn sizing?

~75

The q is much better for ip than oop

I don't know if you really need to keep betting here

could you just post the actual HH?

i think I agree with ampefund on 75k

i doubt I would check this turn, while the Q is better for your opponent the double flush draw only expands the number of bluffs you have here, and he has a good number of hands (AK, KJ, combo draws) that we want to charge ott.

I did a little work in equilab cause this is a sort of interesting flop spot and I'm starting to think we need to c/r flop to 95k or more on this texture.

You're going to have around 45 combos of c/rs for value
{
T7o, T7s, 77, AKo, KQo, and 15 Kx combos of your choosing
}
And you're going to actually probably have like 90+ combos of bluffs
{
J9s, 98s, 96s, 86s, QJo, J9o, 98o, 86o, Q-high or worse diamonds that don't have a 7 or a T in them
} (94 combos)

So if you're going to have a 2:1 distribution of bluffs to value, you're going to want to put a pot sized raise in. Not a bad idea either cause then there will be like 250k in the pot and about the same behind OTT. I think this is a good way to construct our ranges and size accordingly here.

Good post thx

Think you should add combodraws into "value" category in your calculations.

yeah, i think you're right...as played, what do you think of overbet jamming turn 300 into 180k?

nice post jim

i think this is a god awful turn card to do it on
i have same thoughts as ebet, wondering if you even need to bet this card. weird spot now but i probably just bet/call like 70k??

Can we c/f?

You could elect to cf some sizings imo he certainly won't be Val betting worse here and draws likely xb

checking turn is pretty bad imo.

check/folding is utter insanity.

how on earth are you guys ranging Villain? he's opening BTN 3 handed, thus has every single suited king and probably K8o+ if not wider.

"V won't v-bet worse and draws likely xb"? what is that based on? he could v-bet AK or KJ although I agree he probably doesn't. him checking back draws is a dubious assumption.

hero will have 3:1 ratio bluffs/value cause hero 3bets 100% time AKo, so you have to exclude 9 combos if you wanna do correct calculations.

ch/call flop