So people @ my skypergroup aren't really keen enough on things like this so figured I'd post this here to get some feedback + suggestions.

So scenario is MPvBtn srp, flop: 6h5h3c.

MP open: 22+,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,J8s+,T8s+,97s+,87s,76s,65s,54s, ATo+,KQo
Btn flat: JJ-55,AQs-ATs,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,98s,87s,AQo

Equity is prettymuch 50-50, but MP seems to have a advantage in the top 20% of ranges, while btn has a bit more OK hands. Position is very valuable on this board, so protecting checks is fairly hard by check-calling -> xr often.



First we determine how Btn is defending against bets.

So we assume MP bets 75%PSB. Total combos: 95 -> need to def around 57 combos, we will be defending by raising a fairly significant amount so don't really need to be defending a lot more than 1-A as MP's bluffs will have close to 0 equity when we raise (discounting 3bet bluffing range).


BTN:

Flop: 7h 6h 3c

Total combos: 95

Well flat all combos of 77 to protect our flatting range against overbets.

Raise value: 98hh, 66 (3), AJhh AThh,

Call: TP+ : 77(3), 87s (3), 88(6), 99(6), TT(6), JJ (6) |30| FD: AQhh KQhh KJhh KThh QJhh QThh JThh T9hh (8) 98s (3) AQcc AhQx (3) |45|

Raise bluff: AxQh (3) AJcc ATcc KQcc KJcc T9cc [8]




So Btn needs to be feeling around 16 combos vs 3barrels, the strength of the 16 combos changes a lot on different textures and thus a lot of MP's valuebets OTF can't be betting fairly often 3 or even 2 streets as the texture is very dynamic.

--> We can't have that many bluffing combos for every valuebets OTF.

MP:

Flop: 7h 6h 3c

Total combos: 242

Bet(high-value): QQ(6) KK(noheart)(3) AA(noheart)(3) 33 (3), 76s (3) |18| ->(like 30 bluffs on this texture.)

Bet(low-value): 88 99 TT JJ (24) 97s (3) 87s (3) |30| -> 20 bluffs

Bet(draw): OESD: 98s(3), FD: 98hh A5hh A4hh, A2hh KQhh KJhh KThh K9hh QJhh Qthh Q9hh JThh J9hh J8hh (14) |17| -> 10 bluffs

Bet(bluff): T9s (3) T8s (3), AJ(7) KQ (7) A2cc A4cc A5cc A8cc A9cc KQcc KJcc KTcc K9cc QJcc QTcc Q9cc JTcc J9cc J8cc, 55(6) 44(6) A3s (2) AK(8) |57| OK

CBET% = 122/242 = 50%, seems OK


XR (value): 66(3) (77)3, 54s(4), T9hh, T8hh, AThh, 98hh = 14 -> 22 bluffs

XR (bluff): 65s (3) A6s (3) AT(7)(hx,xh,cc) T9cc T8cc AQ (7)(hx, xh,cc) |22|

XC: AQhh AJhh (2), AhAx (3) KhKx (3) AK(8) (hh,hx,xh,cc)), A3hh, A7s (3) = 20


Checks defended: 56/120 = 46% OK?





So MP:s cbetting range is heavily polarized compared to Btn's flatting range, which makes sense. Btn still has a slight range equity advantage, but is pretty much worthless if we look at the equity distributions.







Haven't really analyzed turn cards other than just fastly scrolling through few of them and have a some idea how they change the strenght of ranges, but not in detail. Also haven't really analyzed Btn:s bet vs missed CBet, which is pretty important to tweak XC and XR ranges, but will maybe add it later.


Feedback appreciated, and if you have a skypegroup that does **** like this, would appreciate an inv as I'm planning to do something like this atleast once a week. :3

How were these ranges chosen?

Apparently MP opens 22, 54s and J8s but doesn't open KJo for example.

I prefer to start these discussions when one of the players isn't a fish.

Also, why does the button not flat with A9s, but he calls with 87s and 55?

Preflop ranges are my "default" ranges.

54s and J8s play IMO better as open than KJo and gives my overall range better board coverage. The decision whether to open KJo or not is pretty irrelevant as it will be prettymuch +0EV as will 22 and 54s.

87s can realize it equity way better than A9s and is IMO superior to A9s in this spot, even though A9s has a bit more raw equity. 55 is just the bottom of my range of PP's, one could go higher or lower, the decision is prettymuch irrelevant and depends on the games you play.



All of these things you asked is pretty meaningless IMO and can't really be solved in any way if one is correct or not.

Well done. I agree with the ranges (though, my MP open range is ~18% and has KJ in it).

I've been wondering about this for some time... is it better to cb high pairs (AA, KK..) and check lower pairs; or is it better to cb lower ones for protection like you did, and check the higher pairs as slowplay in such spots?

another thing is, do we preffer to cbet AA with a heart or without?

I usually play pairs the way you described, but am not 100% sure what's optimal.


btw, you were using flop: 6h5h3c. at the beginning, then you were making ranges on 7h6h3c flop.

Yeah oops both of the pics of equity distributions are on wrong boards lol : DD. The analysis was done on 7h6h3c.
Pre rangevrange



Cbet vs flat.



And this shows a completely different equity distribution on the cbet range vs flatting range. Not sure if I should be cbetting way less bluffs and a bit stronger valuerange?

Bet vulnerable pairs for protection as we can fold overcards, we are going to be checking like every turn with them. And then we are planning to bet big pairs for multiple streets, unless the board comes a heart, 8 or 9 which makes AA essentially a bluffcatcher. On dry run outs we are going to be betting the big overpairs for 3 streets.

I think that on boards like this where it's hard to have a xc:ing range we should be xc:ing the heart ones and bet without heart.

KJo is far stronger than J8s and 54s and flops better hands more often, so it plays better imo.

A9s is +EV from EP at full ring and is a top 25 starting hand. 87s is nowhere near that. A9s has very little problem realising it's equity imo.

Saying ''it depends on the games you play in'' is a lazy cop out so that you aren't forced to explain something that you suspect is actually wrong.

Solid OP. You put a lot of effort into your post and as far as I can tell you've constructed some roughly balanced ranges. But keep in mind what you're doing is creating a medium between GTO strategy and proper exploitative strategy. A GTO strategy is going to be mixed. For each hand you're likely range is going to be looking like 80% bet 20% check, or something along those lines, its pretty unlikely you'll be performing an action 100% of the time with a given hand (though that still can't be proven without solving the game). Also for proper exploitative strategy, against normal competition, you won't be doing things like flatting 77 to protect your range against an overbet. You should *almost* always just be raising it right away for straight value.

You didn't put A8/9/Khh hands in any range for MP.
I assume they are XC?

Yeah mostly doing thing like this just to see like what ~hands could be reasonable XR or XC on boards like this between similiar ranges etc.

Obviously not going to follow this 100% when playing.



Yeah obviously, but it's also a good way to recognize spots where I can overbet as a preflop aggressor if Btn flats on a board like this, as I know his range is very vulnerable most of the time as he will be raising sets like 90% OTF.



But still the equity distributions between cbet and flatting ranges seem weird to me, is that a problem that cbetting range looks very weak?

Edit: nwm, it's the 3 combos of sets Btn is flatting that makes the lines a bit weird as we are betting the lowest set so the line will look weird as his overset has significant amount of equity vs MPs lower set.

AKhh is std xc. A9hh and A8hh are actually bet's and somehow i missed to list them even though I filtered them in my flopzilla model.

We are talking about flatting ranges here.

MP XC flop, turn goes x/x, River is A, MP has no bluff range.
You think this is a problem? I sometimes XC some hands like 89 on the flop, so I have some bluffs on such runouts.

Don't think it's worth it as that happens only so infrequently, just bet smaller then.

And?

A better hand is a better hand, whether you flat with it or raise with it.

I'm sorry bud but A9s >> 87s so flatting with the far weaker hand and folding the far stronger hand makes absolutely zero sense at all.

OK....


It doesn't matter at all what kind of range we are going to be up against.


On a serious note, the equity of 87s vs my MP range is 38% and equity of A9s is 48%, that's somewhat significant difference. But 87s will realize it's equity better as it can often be semibluffed and be turned into river bluffs better than A9s (IMO). If 87s realizes it's equity 26% better, it's a better flat than A9s. And as I already stated that can't really be solved so it's pretty much a judgement call. Tbh both hands aren't probably ++++EV flats, and it wouldn't probably matter much if we'd folded or called both in this scenario

But you are folding a ++EV flatting hand, (in A9s), which is just fishy and it throws your example ranges out quite a bit in terms of realism.

A9s gets it's main value from hitting top pair and therefore making the best hand a lot. Domination issues are very rare thanks to the blocker effect. A9s also gets it's value from over flushing people, and the 9 helps make lots of straights and straight draws in the 'playing zone'.

87s is getting eternally overflushed, it rarely makes a good one pair hand, and the fact that it is a bit better at making straights and straight draws than A9s is, does not get anywhere near making up for the weaknesses of the hand, and so A9s realises it's equity way more.

I think K8s is stronger than 87s too, for what it's worth.

fwiw in this scenario getting overflushed with 87s is more unlikely than getting your TP overkicked with A9s.


But whatever, everything you've posted is still irrelevant to the topic...

Pre-flop ranges look good.

I think the c-bet frequency is way too high. On 763tt, MP is OOP on a dynamic board where he never has the nuts on the flop. I think you should check all your overpairs, bet some sets and A7s, 87s, A6s, A3s, and balance with some non-nut flush draws, and overs+BDFDs (e.g. KJcc, AhTx). You can check-raise some sets, overpairs and NFDs, but check-calling works too. Mostly, you'll be bluff-catching made hands, and keeping the pot small OOP.

If villain is bad enough to call 3 streets with 99/88, then you can obviously bet your big overpairs for value.

I don't like it when people make these kinds of comments, and I see them a lot.

For instance someone could also say ''If the villain is bad enough to call 3 streets with King-high, then we can obviously bet our small pairs, Ace-high and good King-high hands for value.''

what software are you using ?

I disagree with pretty much all of this, and think you might be trolling. This is also irrelevant to what OP wants to discuss.

I think your ranges seem pretty solid OP, but on a board like this I think the BTN should defend more aggressively than the minimum defence approach dictates.

Can you explain your reasoning for this?

It's a good flop for BTN's range vs MP, and the board greatly favours the player in position.

But this also leads to MP having strong Cbetting range (in the model I made it's a bit too weak, and fixed it a bit).

What changes did you make? In the pic you posted, BTN's flatting range vs MP's flop cbet seems pretty strong.