What do you think about this line? I don't really care for it, considering I really wasn't sure whether or not to continue betting on the turn or not. I hate playing OOP. 2/5, $600 effective, 9 handed. Hero has a TAG, maybe nitty image.

OTTH

Whale open limps +1, we $25 +2 J J (probably should start going $30 +BB/limper in these games I'm starting to find), villain that I would best classify as being on both the loose and passive end of TAG calls LJ, and loose player who seems to have some concept of hand ranges and post flop play calls HJ.

Flop ($87): K K 3. We bet $35, LJ calls, HJ folds.

Turn ($157): 2. We check, villain bets $65 and we call. Upon further review I think I like to continue for a small sizing and target pp's + FD, and fold to a raise/if called, x-f river. I feel like this isn't a good time to use the overbet because that will essentially only get action from Kx. What do you think?

River ($287): 9. We check, villain bets $90 - puke. Hero?

More pre as you offered 24-1 to the Vs.

I could get behind the cbet HU but not into two ranges here. better to check the flop I think.

AP: prefer to check turn as you’ve condensed his range to FD, perhaps 88-TT and Kx after the flop bet. Agree with you that overbet doesn’t make a lot of Sense.

MDR probably says river is a call and we’re getting 4-1, but I’m having trouble finding the call button given V’s line. Against a computer I suppose this is an easy call but against a human it ain’t.

Against this sizing I’m calling. You only need 20% equity to call. Vs a VERY conservative range of [QQ(50% combos), JJ-99, Ah9h, K9s+, KJo+] you have 25% equity and fwiw I think a K would bet larger here.

Edit: Should have included 33, but even then you have 23.5% equity

I just wanna add one more thing - it’s important when deciding whether or not to bluff catch to determine how many combos of POTENTIAL bluffs (or dominated value bets) V gets to the river with.

Here: V gets to river with something like [ 66-JJ, Ah2h-AhJh,Qh9h+,Jh9h+,Th8h+,9h7h+, 8h7h, 7h6h, 6h5h] which is 45 combos. He only has 21 value combos so you only need him to be betting one of his 45 worst combos about 11% of the time.

This is a stark contrast to (absurd example incoming) if he only got to the river with worst combos of TT. He would then need to be betting TT nearly 100% of the time for calling to be correct.

Ckc riv standard af

Next hand

What!?

So if we were 6k deep we’d need to raise 400 over a limp?

Against the small sizing he is using both on the turn, but especially on the river i aint folding in a million years. We underrepped our hand, and is up against a whale. I am snapping the river bet on this runout and the small sizing.

I'm on the other side, folding pretty easily as played. Described as a passive opponent, betting turn and river when checked to on a board that hits Hero PFR range, leads me to believe we are behind.

Pre - adjust sizing during the session, based on the table dynamics.

Flop - I'd check and delay cbet if checked through.

Yeah, this was mainly about flop and turn - I just didn't include my action otr so that it wasn't a line check.

In response to Samo though, he was passive for a TAG. He was far from being a traditional passive player, he wasn't playing face up. I do like the idea of a delayed c bet though, this is a weird board to play OOP.

C’mon man! The obvious point was to avoid playing JJ multi-way oop 120bb deep. I’m sure a crusher like you can handle it, but most of us cannot.

How much are you advocating raising pre though? I can get behind $35-$40, just to try and get it HU, but more than that and we're narrowing ranges a little too much and start getting really bad SPR's

I agree $30 pre is better.
Any bigger and you’re pissing away value with top hand %, OOP or not.
Rest is standard.
X/call river standard.

Yes enough to try to get HU based on table dynamics, player tendencies etc. Of course, the issue will be giving off sizing tells and balancing your EP range in these spots.

I agree with Xtrascratch that x/c river is standard. But I would also empathize with you in that it's hard as f*** to make this call live in real time and easy only from my computer.

I also agree with Samo about the delayed c-bet, except we are oop and it makes the hand play entirely differently. I agree with Amanaplan that river is standard x.

Thanks for sharing this hand. It's a common and gross spot in games like this. Balancing/sizing an UTG/EP raising range has to be one of the hardest things in poker. It would be great to have a broader discussion about this.

call river, bet turn

i agree with the idea of isolating bigger pre

I think it's a pretty mistake to choose sizings that cannot be bluffs at any point, including preflop. It actually isn't hard to play against a range that's too strong, and that's something you don't want to broadcast with any meaningful stack depth.

As for JJ itself, it's a fine hand for multi-way no matter the position given how often it flops an OP or top set. I don't disagree with the endeavor to reduce SPR so that you have easier/more profitable stackoffs w JJ on those flops, but not at the cost I laid out above.

+1. Also i would add that bet sizing tells is one of the biggest and most common leaks i see in todays LLSNL games. Its incredibly transparent and easy to exploit in a number of ways for any decent/good player.

Thanks to you and Amanaplan for these observations. I reference this problem in the final paragraph of my comments to OP above.

I’m just stuck trying to construct a balanced ep/UTG raising range and sizing that would avoid the pitfalls you both correctly outline.

Any thoughts ?

Imo the easiest thing to do to start would be to use 4-6x sizing with your entire range and vary your sizing based on the table dynamics/your specific hand.

If you have a hard time playing OOP with a hand like JJ you should likely be playing a pretty snug range from early spots. You can expand your range if you find yourself feeling comfortable with whatever you start out with.

I’m guessing something like 88+, AQo+ for opens should work fine for you.

Thanks! Indeed this is what I do at or below 150bb. But I’m encountering difficulty in deeper spots at 2/5 and my 1/3 home game which plays 200bb deep. Do you just randomize your open sizing to avoid tells or do you try to exploit the tendencies of your Vs even deep?

I appreciate your help.

Just choose a size for your ranges and don’t even think about the hand. ‘My EP raising range over 2 limps is 7x’, ‘UTG open range is 4x’, etc etc

If I’m the first one to open I’ll go a bit smaller with certain hands and a bit bigger with others.
If I’m raising over limpers I usually am around 6-8x depending on how many limpers and who specifically I want in and not in the pot.
I think Amanaplan is right to suggest a static opening size though, I like randomizing a bit based on a couple factors, but just simply static 5x’ing or whatever UTG would work fine.

I play in some games that are passive enough to let me get away with ridiculous **** like 3x’ing suited wheel aces, prime sc’s and the odd low pp without much fear of getting 3! ever.

Thanks! This makes a lot of sense and is something one can implement in real time without giving off tells.