During play it occured to me the flop on the hand below, is not particularly great for our range given the preflop action. When it gets checked to villain I feel as if he can overbet with any two cards having gone though my whole range in detail, with us being OOP and a capped range.

My question is, from a GTO perspective, is it acceptable in specific circumstances for villain to be able to make a profit by betting any two cards on the flop?

With the villain bet size vs pot size, we need to defend 46.4% of our range, looking at my range I find it difficult to defend this wide in this spot.

So I analysed this using Pokersnowie and it seems to agree with me, it recommends folding 64% of our range and only defending 36%.

Thoughts?

yes

It just doesn't seem right in this instance though.

Villain put in a relatively small (1/2 pot) reraise, with position and can just profit by over betting on low card flop textures?

What stops him from just speculatively doing this extremely widely? From the cutoff we're pretty wide ourselves and don't have enough strong hands to put in a further reraise, to cover of he can profit by investing so little...

depends what his range is.

4 betting more and check raising more flops and calling more flops.

----

Also, think about the opponent's ev of betting the flop vs checking back the flop. It could be that this particular opponent is actually missing significant checking value due to his flop overaggression, which although is immediately profitable, is not necessarily as profitable as checking.

What limits do we ascribe to flop texture? If oop player is balanced, she should have *some* combos to check-raise with on even the worst board.

I would guess that true GTO is never to do anything 100 percent just because of flop texture.

If I understand your question correctly, I believe this should answer it. This is taken from an article written by Adam Jones on out of position strategy. Here is what he says:

"It's acceptable to overfold, even from a GTO point of view. This is probably one of the bigger mistakes that more advanced players are making in recent times. The application of the minimum fold equity formula leaves players making pretty big mistakes in their range construction OOP.

Let’s say we face a 2/3rds pot cbet OOP on the flop. If our opponent’s bluff works more than 40% of the time he is generating automatic profit. So it’s common for players to make sure they defend over 60% of their range. 60% to make sure that villain does not make automatic profit, and then another 5% on top to compensate for any equity villain gets to freeroll when we just call.

So the short version of the story is, we now have a player who is only folding 35% to cbets OOP and is using “GTO” to back up his decision. Sadly, he’s not going to do very well in this situation, because he has applied GTO principles incorrectly. It’s very important to remember that the minimum fold equity formula produces simply an estimate which we must adjust based on a range of factors. In this scenario it’s very important to keep in mind that our opponent simply has a huge positional advantage. It is actually impossible for us to prevent him from generating automatic profit. It is important to accept this and factor this in to our range construction.

There is a decent chance we should be folding more like 50% of the time to cbets when we are OOP facing a 2/3rds pot bet. Is it really true to say that our opponent is generating automatic profit though? Not exactly. It’s true from one perspective but untrue from another perspective.

If we focus purely on an isolated hand where we are out of position, then yes, our opponent is making automatic profit. The mistake is to think that the way we counter this is by an adjustment to our defending range in this specific situation. It’s not. The way we defend against this is by generating automatic profit when we ourselves are IP and firing a cbet.

Our opponent will either need to overfold himself, or defend a range which is wide enough to be unsupportable on later streets. So if we take two optimal opponents and factor in both scenarios, one in position, one out of position, then no automatic profit is being given. So the idea behind GTO modeling is not to create unexploitability in one specific scenario but to create an equilibrium which exists across the entire game."

The link to the full article is here: https://www.pokervip.com/strategy-ar...poker-strategy

Hope that helps!