Loose Asian in hoodie (have seen opens with j8o, 76o etc) opens button off 1k to 35
I have sb and make 165$ with black 44
Everyone folds he thinks a sec and folds

Flop kkq two diamonds

So from what I know about this spot 44 we are typically drawing bluffs from this portion of my range- as this is about the worst Hand I can have here and ev of 44 looks better as a bluff - but haven’t ran a sim for this spot exactly so could be wrong

Anyway - not sure about sizing. I went ahead and bet 3/4 $265 -here thinking that this board looks good for me and I wanna start betting big - looking back I think 1/4 through 1/3 looks good with all my hands as a simpler strategy and then split my range ott but again not sure

Villain thinks a bit and calls
Turn 10h

I think a second and shove for like 600
- don’t think ev of check looks good at all and Basically thought I could improve on the ev of check by ripping

dark tunnel bluff (out of ten)

ya flop is gonna be mostly small sizing incorporating some big sizing at a low freq. 44 can be included in both ranges at a low freq.

Personally I'm playing this spot as a 100% cbet at 1/4 pot sizing on this texture.

Turn is spew with this combo. You have better bluffs like Ax, Ax diamonds, 78dd, 98dd, 67dd, 9x etc. I don't think this combo ever gets jammed on the turn.

Everything looks fine if you're approaching flop correctly until you get to the turn which is spew.

What are you doing with KQ/QQ on this flop? I think your flop sizing announced, "I have no hand."

Agreed. The line looks super bluffy.

Not that I blame you, for some reason I've been super spewy lately lol.

Just to be clear do you mean you think this line tends to get overbluffed or do you mean that in game, in Vs shoes, you'd just assume that lp16 IS indeed bluffing, meaning here rarely is ever has a nutted combo?

The latter would be a dangerous assumption. Neither of LP16's postflop sizings were suboptimal. Not necessarily referring to 44 in particular but cbet78% and barrel jam both perfectly optimal actions if ranges are constructed properly and It's one thing to say "I think youre overbluffing in this spot", but saying "your line lools bluffy" can be interpreted as meaning "I think you ARE bluffing" which is not necessarily always true here.

Larger flop sizing basically says "I have AA, AK, AQ, NFDs and some air", our sheerly strongest combos thats also do the best job unblocking his continue with worse range.

Thay being said 44 definitely do not belong in a larger sizing range at much concentration and sticking them in that range definitely is overbluffing.

AP theres merit to doing anything OTT, including ship, IP player cannot snap all Kx, nor can he cant snap all combos that have 13 outs, but we should very rarely be in this spot.

Originally, I was looking at it from Villain's shoes. However, I did not see the two diamonds on the board. From Villain's perspective, hero does have a lot of value in his range. He wants to make flush draws pay to see their draws. When the 10 hits, hero moves all in since the board is getting even more dangerous. It's actually a credible bluff.

I think if I'm hero though, I might give villain less flush draws and more trappy hands, and some Q's. If Villain is a thinking player, its not likely hes continuing on a board after a huge bet, with reverse implied odds. Villain probably knows we're not nutted yet, but it's still dangerous for him to continue. So I would give Villin credit more for a Q or a weaker king. This is likely why the bluff may not have worked.

Specify such reverse implied odds combos.

Because just to clarify what I wrote: in practice (in a vacuum), flop does look OK. Not taking this sizing with 44 with higher frequency is more important when considering overall range construction or whether OOP player is over/underbluffing. But in a vaacuum, the EVs of big bet vs small bet are gonna be fairly close (within 10% of each other I'd guess). It's not like the 3bettor is ever checking this flop (almost never at equilibrium), and yeah of course when IP player does continue things get worse and worse for 44 but if OOP player did indeed just want to win the pot right now OTF with a bluff 44 aren't nearly the worst combo to choose for large sizing because after all they do essentially double unblock all combo's we'd be targeting for a fold with the chosen sizing (better pairs like 55-TT, combos with a ton of equity like naked A-high's and J-highs, et al (even gutshot+2 over combos like Js9s cannot continue profitable I believe or cbet 78% pot).

But FDs, for example, for sure should be continuing (I doubt you can ever find an equilibrium solution where IP player ever folds any FDs vs flop action) so if you're implying that IP player is in practice folding combos like Th8h, 7h5h, et al then taking this sizing w/ 44 is really really good exploitatively.

Of course though if IP player is overfolding flop vs big sizing, then that changes how we should approach turn when he does continue.

You know, as I was typing my response, I realize that there are relatively few combos villain should be worried about regarding reverse implied odds. In our value range, we have mostly AK, and suited kings, but there are only 4 variations of AK and two suited Kings. We are NEVER playing KQ this way, so all those combos are out. The only suited Kings that may take this line is KJ
and if Villain has the Ad all he really has to fear is the Jd. I was wrong. Flush draws definitely continue on the flop.

Yeah this sizing is particularly bad for KK, KQ, QQ and also 88-JJ (the former too strong AND blocking too much, the latter just a bit too strong to be bluffing for this sizing and a bit too weak to be going to value for this sizing such that 88-JJ never maximize their EV via flop sizing this large

And I mistyped when I wrote:

We have more Qx than that--Qx heavily unblocks Qx and FDs and is so sheerly strong we have no problem going large w/ all Qx for significant frequency, it's not just AQ that's happy going as large as OP did.

Doesn't this hand show why small/med pairs make such bad 3bets, even vs wide openers?
Small pairs have such bad play-ability postflop.

I can get behind this play if V folds pretty often to 3! or 4!; but this guy doesn't seem like the type.

Given rake, being OOP, and poor-postflop potential of 44, are we better off folding pre?

I don't think we're deep enough to make this a profitable call (eg have the stack depth necessary to bluff shove profitably) , and getting called OOP in a 3! pot vs this guy seems bad as well.

No that's just results oriented this hand could've gone a million ways. OP could've bet smaller, or IP could've had 66 and folded. Or OP could've been more subtle with his title so as to not give away results.

Whether this combo is ideal to 3b at high frequency is debatable but I would imagine the equilibrium strategy 3b's all pairs blind vs BTN at some frequency. And one hand where the 3bettor takes perhaps too large sizing (albeit in theory, in a vacuum, perfectly acceptable sizing) with a cbet doesn't mean too much.

He tanked for 10y and sigh called with jj :/

Great call