SB: $25 (100 bb)
BB: $41.44 (165.8 bb)
UTG: $24.05 (96.2 bb)
MP: $15.90 (63.6 bb)
CO: $25 (100 bb)
Hero (BTN): $25 (100 bb)

Preflop: Hero is BTN with Xx-Xx
3 folds, Hero raises to $0.58, SB raises to $1.99, BB folds, Hero calls $1.41

Flop: ($4.23) 2 2 3 (2 players)
SB checks , Hero ???







SB: $25 (100 bb)
BB: $41.44 (165.8 bb)
UTG: $24.05 (96.2 bb)
MP: $15.90 (63.6 bb)
CO: $25 (100 bb)
Hero (BTN): $25 (100 bb)

Preflop: Hero is BTN with Xx-Xx
3 folds, Hero raises to $0.58, SB raises to $1.99, BB folds, Hero calls $1.41

Flop: ($4.23) K 7 3 (2 players)
SB checks , Hero ???


Hi, we have one same scenario with two different boards.
This spot is a big guessing game for me.
I have no idea how much I want to/have to stab. I don't know what to decide on.

What size of stab do you choose on which board?
And the main question why?

Thanks!

My standard would be ~40% pot (or smaller down to ~30% pot) in both cases, but this is in the theory section and I can't prove theoretically why I'd do this.

dry boards / paired boards small sizing.
drawy boards / low boards large sizing

most importantly, shouldnt really be stabbing on boards that favor the PFR much

This is not true, once he checks he's acknowledging that his range isn't favored anymore becauss checking a favoured range doesn't make sense. Our stab frequency is close to 50%

if villain had any semblance of a balanced checking strategy, him checking would actually give us 0 info... and all we'd be left with is knowing that his range is favored on those boards, and thus we shouldn't be stabbing..



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjqSdCp6bwc

^song about what just happened to you in our argument

1/2 pot on the first one and 1/3 pot on the second one.

For the first one, a smaller sizing gives your opponent attractive odds to call with pretty much anything unless you have a 2 which isn't likely. For the second one, you can have a king so your opponent won't be happy calling a 1/3 bet with queen high.

I would have to think this is an over exaggeration.

There are clearly hands that will always be better bets than checks and would imagine they wouldn't show up in a checking range so checking does give us info.

But given we in some way capped our range by calling preflop and the fact that villain's balanced range still has hands that likely are at the top of that range I could see where your comments are still true.

Also the flip side of a board that favors villain's range is that it doesn't favor ours so I agree with your comment that bad boards for our calling range are probably stabbed less frequently than boards that are definitely good for our range.

I think it's more important to think about which hands you stab with, rather than the sizing.
i.e. You might arbitrarily decide to bet 1/2 pot in both cases, but then you have to think which combos make sense for that size.
I doubt you can profitably bet at a very high frequency (i.e. "range-bet") unless you go very small, as the pre-flop caller's range won't have a clear range advantage even vs villain's checking range on either of those boards.

i mean theoretically if hes betting and checking at equilibrium, him checking should not denote weakness. right? obv vil isnt gto

but one thing i do notice is that solver really really dials back the stabs on boards that favor the PFR ,like a lot.

if u think vils range is totally out of balance and check = weak then yes ofc by all means exploit him. i would use the same sizing i would choose to cb that board with. ie dry and high = 1/3 wet and drawy 2/3 - 1.5x

Just put the damn thing into a solver, and notice the stab frequency is very close to 50%. Why is people trying to have a discussion on this without even studying this spot first?

If you range is very strong, and villain never stabs, you of course cbet anything strong you have to build a pot. So now he has an incentive to stab. This means you should of course check some strong hands to help with the defense of your range, but not so much that villain should almost never stab.

About checking a balanced range not giving information. Yeah sure whatever dude, I forgot that the solver checks and bets the exact same range so it never gives information away.

Yeah he does denote weakness when he checks at equilibrium. Again, if he were strong, he would bet. A gto range will of course not be as weak as some unbalanced ranges and will have enough strong hands to defend correctly against heavy action. You can't just check a strong range at equilibrium because a checkback would be a very easy exploit

if hes betting at equilibrium hes at indifference threshold, right?

and for your imformation yeah i have put it in the solver. every day after school i ran like 40 flops and then put all the aggregate data into excel and analyzed the results of when solver stabs so yeah um i think id know but w.e

Which sizing?

What does your calling range look like against the SB 3bet?

You should be checking back at a high frequency imo. When you do bet, you should use a smaller sizing (<25-50%% pot), just given the dry static texture.

Even if the SB is really unbalanced you probably don't have much of a range advantage on those flops. Take a free card and pot control with most of your range.

Your question assumes we use one sizing here? The solver will use multiple. It probably won't overbet but anything between 25% and 80% is likely to be used. All of the betting ranges will add up to around 50% of the initial range and 50% will be checked. I'm not kidding, you give the solver different sizes and provided at least one is mediumish the solver will bet 50% of its range. If we were to use only one size I guess 40% is okay but I don't like to think about this that way

Not necessarily, no. Some hands will be pure bets and some will be pure calls. Even then, the stronger hands will tend to bet at a higher frequency, while the bluff catchers type hands will tend to check at a higher frequency. I mean, it's really obvious that the betting and checking range will be different right?

OP -

vs check - ur strat is like 60% checking and bet sizing prolly 60% pot. Hands like 99-QQs would be the worst checks and should be bet large - 65-pot, they are your most efficient value bets and also get protection and value from the tons of AK, and general Ax, Kx in 3bettor range + his FDs. The same will apply for SB actually. Offsuit AK checks back mostly but stabs are 60%ish with Ac and with AQo...prolly around both A or Qc and some Ad but mostly checking 3 times for every 1 time you bet.
Full pressure with 33s,22s obv and also **** suited stuff like T8s, with JT and QTs only firing with diamonds or clubs. Mixed strategy with big bets mainly altho 60/40 in favor of checking back.


As 3bettor:

50% Checks & rest of the times u can bet small like 20% but probably overpot bet. 125% pot bet. Almost pure with hands that get value + protection like 99s-JJs**, all suited connectors at least the bigger ones like T high also betting large more often and only hands like AK suited or offsuit check more but NFD should lean towards oversized bet more often. Like AKcc should not have checks at all, fist pump LARGE BET. Same w/ A3s but A4,A5 should be checking most of the time with only flush combo going ham

**99-JJs are the most efficient bets (for u as well when he checks) because they still get calls from a lot of AX, KX, all FDs and lower pairs - BTN unlikely to have overpairs QQ-AA that don't have a bias towards almost always 4betting, in any case, across the distribution of calls vs 3b from SB, there will be lotta Ax, Kx and weaker pairs, connectors.

All good Kx flush draws, even backdoor so like KdTd should overbet. AKo, AQo are tricky. Can't recall all combos but AdKx should split between X or bet anywhere between 20%-40% Pot.



2nd board OOP should bet that 2 tone static sort of board with not more than 40% of his range checking and bet sizing might be collapsing toward small (20-30%) but hands like AA should bet Pot. All combos of AKo should do exactly what AAs do. Bet Pot. No checking.

If OOP checks ur ratio is 1 bet for every 2 times u check back, but checking is all just hands like suited Ks, As except A5 and A4. All suited combos bet pot. QJs QTs, JTs bet this sizing as well, so does offsuit big Ah like AK, AJ, all combos of KQo and suited mix between pot or check with 2 times a bet for every time u check. AQo, AJo should strictly bet with Ah with AJo going as big as pot. Bet big with 77s, 86s, 65s,54s, 33s Pure checks will be JJ, TT, QQ and 99 with some suited bigger Ax assuming u 4bet AKs, KKs+ 100%



Agreed, the second board, our strategy is checking mostly, even if it is 2-tone.
232 2-tone has about 60% xb as well. Sizing will depend on combos but pretty sure when OOP 3bettor checks esp on 3c2d2c our sizing is big. Pot+ with anything you have - wont go wrong.