Posting this hand for my friend.

Alec Torelli opens $30 UTG1, HJ (looks like a solid pro, good demeanor, 3 bet 3 times in 2.5 hours no showdowns) 3 bets to $90 I cold 4 bet button to $230 ($4800 effective) AxQh button Alec folds lj calls

($505) Ah9h3x checks

($505)6x hj leads 125 call

($775) 2x hj $1400, Thoughts on all streets, thanks.

It really comes down to whether V is capable of using this size for bluffs.

Solver will want us to call the majority here, as we have some weaker AXs like A5 and A4 that we can fold.

V understands that we are capped at one pair hands here (very low frequency of sets) and really don’t have a lot of bluffs when we check back this flop (maybe we check range here in 4! Pots, but does V assume that?).

I usually tend to be tight in these spots and would fold, but in my 5/10 games it is just really rare to have players that use big overbets as Bluffs on the river, even more so in 4! Pots. People play to scared to turn hands with sv into Bluffs here.

It could be a strategy to fold the AQ combos containing hearts, as we block more of his Bluffs and calling the others. V is very capable of having AK here and could even use this sizing to get us off chops, which makes me even Moreno inclined to fold.

Is AQo typically in people's 4 bet range vs. a good player opening and a good player 3-betting?

I'm calling, because F his 2x bet.

I'm pretty sticky and now that we've been passive post flop and the overbet looks bluffy, I'm shrugging and calling.

What's your image?

I'm not folding river. I feel like these spots play a lot easier when we bet the flop small with our range. However having a flop checking range is totally fine.

If this was a thinking pro capable of a 2X river bet overbluff, moreover against a player he knows as competent, then why would he not get a significant amount of your money into the pot first before doing so for some actual value? Especially since you 4bet pre and have many strong hands in your range.

In general I fold until I’ve seen a player spew off with overbets.

you're capped, he's not, imo this is a fairly trivial fold unless you have a specific read.

btw, what does Torelli being at the table have much of anything to do with this hand?

I enjoy names, as we can better profile the player.

Much better to know it's him than some generic descriptor mid-30's white male pro etc...

How is he capped and villain isn’t wat are u talking about
Your saying the oop player has more combos of 333 or smth? This post makes 0 sense

anyways op ur supposed to start with 1/4 pot with ur entire 4b range and take it from there
As played I guess I’d just call the other guys line makes not much sense at all

I prefer fold pre given the tighter positions and lack of playability.

As played don’t mind checking range on this flop, as Ah on board means so few draws.

Turn is obvious call.

River I think fold to large sizing with heart as you actually have a lot of AQ and AK (and AA) if checking range on flop.

just curious - how does betting flop small in this particular hand help us out?

let's say we downbet flop.are we just betting turn and river? checking turn and (still) calling an overbet on river? bet turn check back river?

^ my thinking as well. No draws or potential overcards. I guess bet bet check gets us to cheap showdown as a block.

Shows the issues of 4 betting this hand. Sure we get some folds pre but even if we hit flop, it’s not really a value hand against Villain calling range.

I’ve heard people say this term “downbet” it’s not a thing
let’s replace that with “optimal sizing”

1. A smaller betsize produces a higher EV for the IP 4bettor. The oop player has a very not fun time with his pairs that aren't an ace and has to fold some call some vs a small sizing. Also our hands that want villain to fold get to deny equity from hands like suited broadways that aren't a flush draw.

2. Because our range is so narrow and Ax heavy the optimal frequency for betting is close to 100% so we can simplify to betting our range small so we don't have to worry about balancing that small amount of checkbacks as the optimal checkback frequency is often a very small % of a lot of different combos which is very difficult to play. (we sacrifice a little EV of our strategy in order to simplify it and therefore makes the hand easier to play imo)

Disclaimer: I haven't run this exact spot, but similar ones.

Very good post, Jarretman.