20/40

Villain is a good player who tends to three bet me lighter than he probably should because he thinks I’m lag.

I open utg+1 with KQ he three bets two seats over and I call.

I check/call a flop of JT6

Turn is T

This maybe one of those it doesn’t matter spots. I tend to c/r here but I wonder how much fold equity I really have.

*Biased -EV Order if LAGTAG villain similar from 20/40 Half Kill*

Chk/c > C/R > donk 3 bet turn > dunk call turn

Think KQs has SD value on enough river run outs unimproved since typical 20/40 LAGTAG villains tend to 3 barrel cbet FTR too light at times as aggressor.

I play bad so C/R turn is probably correct?

Not certain how many combos of C/R for value here since Tx, 66 I typically fast play flop vs light PF 3betters that rarely fold river sans utter garbage

I mean, I'm waaaay behind his range here - any pair is ahead, any ace is ahead, and any bs like JT, QJ, KT yadda yadda hit the flop. It's not like he can have 54s here. It's all about whether I can get the weaker part of the range to fold by taking a more aggressive action. I don't think I can show down king high here if I miss.

Giving waaaayyyy too much credit for villain.

Checked with villain. Heard this game was quite epic with a NL Donkament semi pro stuck in middle calling 3 cold PF unless that was a different hand.

Not really sure how wide villain's range is since villain comes up with pretty bad BS in my biased opinion at times as PF3b but yolo (not certain how sober villain was which kinda changes things though tolerance probably too significant to make difference )

Yeah probably can't SD K high here but I'm a calling station fish and not a fan of EVER folding vs villain based on game history personally

Must be wrong villain. This one never drinks.

I think villain decided to not drink & play to increase EV during sessions. May smoke a cigar, hookah, etc though which I imagine Villain still does.

Might be wrong villain in which case, my apologies.

Per 6+ tabling expert 5/10 - 10/20 LHE Cereus prop

C/R flop
C/R turn

Seemed fine as default based on how wide villain range is after MP pf 3B. Villain rarely chks back flop although started to more often but only vs specific opponents.

Could be wrong villain if this game wasn't in Midwest

What kind of range will this villain be three-betting you with preflop? I assume they are range-betting the flop; how honest are their turn c-bets?

How many tens do you have in your range given the flop play? Would you have check-called the flop with JT or AT? T9? With JJ? Do you open 66 in early position?

I am not a great LHE player at this point, but I rather think that this flop is one to fast-play, with an OESD and backdoor diamonds. (I don't think I would fastplay KQo; but I might not even open it in EP.) We're out of position; let's take control of the hand early.

I don’t think your trying to get him to fold anything. This is more of you balancing a strategy so that he will continue to pay you off in future when you do have a made hand .

I'm a fan of fastplaying the flop, as I would do with many hands, and barreling down all the way.

55+, KTs +, AT+, and some mixed big card bullshit for villain

For me, TT, KTs, ATo and the ocassionately T9 or JTs

I think the flop and turn are both super close. I usually c/r the flop here if villain's range is really so wide (though it's pretty dumb of him to 3bet light vs. an UTG+1 at a 9-handed table). The turn is interesting because we actually rep something with our c/r. It's mostly a matter of what we think villain would do with AQ/AK/underpairs. And this is such a unique spot that our read is going to be a very rough estimate.

There are definitely players who have almost nothing but AJ+ or KQ once they bet the turn. They would usually check back an underpair or AQ/AK. Against these players, check-raising is obviously suicidal since they are calling down 100%. There are also players who barrel turns excessively and will be like "Oh darn, guess I'm beat!" with their underpairs and AQ/AK. Against these players, you definitely want to c/r though following through on the river is questionable. Barreling the river mainly makes sense against a player who both bet-calls the turn with AQ/AK and folds brick rivers which is pretty rare.

It's tempting to get into that mindset where it's like "but if I don't c/r here, I never have any bluffs on this board!" Not having any bluffs can definitely be okay if villain is going to let you get away with it. People who will make this read on you and fold AJ or *gasp* QQ mainly exist in supernit live cultures or maybe they are primarily NL players (NL players tend to overfold postflop). Most players will just be like "He's aggressive, gotta call him down!" without thinking too deeply about how you play this specific spot.

I prefer a c/r on the turn against this guy, as his estimated 3betting range is pretty absurd against an UTG+1. But it is a tough spot since such spewy players are usually so showdownbound. If he calls down underpairs or AK, we are just lighting money on fire.

Really excellent post. My thinking exactly and better said. I think this guy barrels his who range when I call the flop, never folds a pair, and peeks AQ/AK but folds to a river barrel.

Something I didn't think of... based on your estimated range, this guy would almost certainly 3bet any suited ace. Spewy players love small suited aces. This would make it a pretty clear c/r and barrel river imo.

For reasons I can’t explain, I think he would call A8s and below.

grunch

Why not cap pre for value and initiative?

I don’t cap anything here (and no cap heads up) as part of overall strat.

Calling with our entire range here is standard. Having a 4-bet range leaves our calling range capped and easier to play against. It is easy to make up the lost bet on later streets.

Fwiw, "initiative" is a fake concept from a GTO perspective. And even from a practical, exploitative perspective, it mainly applies against opponents who overfold. People used to cbet 100% on the flop and barrel like crazy on the turn and river because people overfolded. Once more advanced players learned to properly defend themselves against players who try to "grab and push the initiative" or whatever, the "initiative" types became regfish.

The villain in this hand sounds sticky and spewy... the type of player who will take our "initiative" and shove it down our throats. For this reason, we actually want him to have the "initiative" since he is going to make spewy barrels while we just sit back and thank him for the easy money.

Also, KQs does not even come close to having an equity advantage. So we cannot 4bet for value. 4betting would have to be for balance if you use a 4betting strategy here.

Balance is better than initiative heads up anyway. Against a competent opponent, they are playing in position on you with a tighter range than what you have. The situation alone should give them the advantage in terms of card strength so we shouldn't give them extra information by going for 4bets with our strongest hands or worse totally spewing and 4betting way more wide than we should.

I see a lot of players try to run people over with a crazy 4betting strategy and their opponent just needs to close their eyes and call them down super wide. So ironically they lose a ton of hands to the fish and make it up against the nitregs. Then the nitregs will be convinced they made a good fold to the maniac when the maniac is just always pressing the b/r button.

Exactly. The sum total of the information we need to decide how to play a situation lies in the ranges: ours and the villains.

All "initiative" means is that the player with the alleged initiative has a at least relatively uncapped range. That range should be more polar, with strong hands and bluffs. The player who is calling will have a condensed range, more linear.

When we open and the villain three-bets (or when we defend our big blind head-up against the opener), when we flat 100% of our continuing range, we are denying a fair amount of nut advantage to the villain. Indeed, if the flop comes low when we defend our big blind, we will have the nut advantage, because we will have just as many overpairs in our range as the villain, and we will have all the sets in our range and the villain won't.

Thus a villain playing well will have to check back on the flop more often than if we just called when we have a four-betting range, and we will be able to realize more of our equity with our draws.

In big bet poker, because the pot grows exponentially with each round of betting, missing an early bet can cost a lot of profit by the river. This is limit poker, the pot grows linearly, and missing a small bet before the flop really doesn't cost us much, just one small bet.

(Not arguing with you, @Unguarded, just expanding on the point.)

Rofl.

Hopefully you'll make it to game tonight eventually.

Best friend (not OP's villain who I thought) told me lineup tonight

Probably better than any Commerce game lineup I've played with multiple experts tonight sans few LAG pros missing

PS: Unguarded, DonJuan, SeanSnyder, anyone really, please let me know if willing to slum it at 20/40 half kill since I'm 90% sure willing to start playing live again if anyone willing to come to Chicago

OT: 10000% disagree your logic no cap HUHU.
In my biased opinon, Minus EV in that 20/40 lineup. Multiple experts who will just chuck it and go 5+ bets with 56s+ for kicks based on mood/tilt/etc sober since YOLO

Otoh with no capping strategy we can avoid getting into the question of which hands you can cap for value against your opponents range. I mean if we're 4betting JTs, what does that mean when we call? Our range is going to be really weak and easy to play against.

+1 kinda since I agree from theoretical logic.

-1 in this game.

This 20/40 is similar to a Zoo where players just randomly decide to go full blown 100 VPIP / 100 PFR mode based on level of tilt.

Last example was extreme exaggeration. However waaaayyyy too much EV being lost when you start no capping strategy in this game.

Ranges are too wide for villains in this 20/40 game where having no capping strategy in Minus EV.

Can agree to disagree Ninefingershuffle and anyone else. For those that do, I hope you can visit Chicago sometime for an Epic game possibly best in Midwest


OT: One of best threads ever in which I wish DonJuan commented somewhat goes into EV lost no capping although example 3max

200/400 Recap: Hand #4 - Medium Stakes Poker Forum - Medium Stakes Limit Holdem
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/5...d-4-a-1753073/

This wasn’t against one of the zoo players, so not applicable. Also, even if it was its heads up and I have king high, they really aren’t going to five bet me with anything wild. In multiplayer hands, sure, four bet. Heads up since they bet flop 100 percent, I do t think it is worth it

grunch

i think most players check behind unpaired hands on this turn so you're targeting specifically 88 or 99. seems like a cr wont work much.

i also have an unwritten rule that i never try to bluff anybody off ace high on a paired board

i dont think id ever bet AK on this turn