Game has been going for a little over a hour. Hero is perceived as TAG. I've never played with either villain before but I've seen them around. V1 has has been in the game for 30 minutes and got stacked. He seems component but is raising every unopened pot that gets to him. Hasn't shown down much. V2 is playing his second hand (I would label him as a LAG. He likes to play big pots).

V1 in SB ~750
V2 in MP ~400
Hero in CO ~500

V2 opens to 20, folds to hero who looks at KK and 3bets to 65, V1 cold calls and V2 completes

Flop: AK4 (rainbow) $200

Checks to Hero...

My main question is I'm never checking this flop back and I know it as well as my opponents. I think that just screams HUGE hand and I'll make no additional money. However I'm a little lost on the sizing I should make it. I know both of these players are thinking players and will put me on a range. I decided to go with a $110 bet and they both immediately fold. V2 says, "Did you have the set of aces or kings?" This got me thinking and I'm curious to hear feedback on what the right bet size is.

It takes a higher than normal level villain to understand that not Cbetting shows extreme strength, and your style of play has to feed into that read as well. Don't get me wrong cuz the Cbet is fine, but I would go for a delayed Cbet here, and it would likely be quite small if I was checked to again on the turn.

Hand is played fine. Bet sizing is good, you're just unlucky that no one had AQ. If no one has the ace, you're just not going to make much money in this spot. Oh well.

You played it fine, but V's seem to put you on a narrow 3-bet range which you should take advantage of.

Sizing is perfect, Nh.

This seems like a perfect spot for a delayed cbet. First, QQ is obv in your range here, so I doubt checking makes them assume you must have a monster. Second, there is just so little that ever stacks off to you on this flop. It's really only AK and 44. Unless they're god awful, they're not stacking off with AQ no matter what you do. If you check, you give them an opportunity to hit a lower set or to stab at the pot, and you increase your chances of getting a light call. The only real downside is that some broadway gutshots might be in V2's range.

Also, if they think your range is AA/KK/QQ/AK here, you need to be 3betting more often

I don't think Villains will bet turn even if they think QQ is in your range.

Yeah I don't think it's likely if they're even remotely competent, I just meant checking here doesn't automatically = monster.

Seems fine. Clearly neither had the money card (Ace). Full value pre, nh.

Either one of them has an ace or you're never getting paid on any street regardless of how long you delay your cbet.

Flop cbet should be automatic to get max value.

Thanks for the feedback. Thoughts on sizing? Should I make it smaller to entice 1010-QQ?

nah, it should be bigger to get value from AK (3 combos) and AQ (8 combos), and, God Willing, 44 (3 combos).

There are 18 combos of TT-QQ, but the chance of them calling any bet is pretty small on an AKx board. They're beating nothing.

I woulda bet smaller, maybe as small as 55. Given his question, I'd 3b much more often and never show .

This is just incorrect. If they both have whiffed pairs, delaying your cbet increases your probability of getting paid from ~0% to ~8%, even if you ignore any possibility of spazzing.

This is pretty good advice OP. Listen to this person.

You're automatically polarized on this flop given the texture, so a tiny cbet of like $60 is better. You could string along AQ\AJ for two tiny streets of value easier than you'll get one medium-to-big street out of them ($60 on the flop + $80-100 on the turn, more likely than getting called for $100+ on the flop).

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using 2+2 Forums

phenomenal point

V's aren't calling pre to fold an A high flop with AQ when they have a "read" that hero 3-bets super narrow range. If they are calling pre then they are calling flop. If they are calling flop to fold turn so be it, but I think there is more value in the c-bet than 2 smaller bets. All this hand proves is that hero can bluff more/open his 3-bet range.

I don't know I like the the sizing a lot, you are not scared of anything. With 2 over calls I really think the only person having a pair <JJ is V2. Hes the only guy delay C betting might give you value. But V1 most likely could have a combo draw hand like Q10/K10/J10/910s something like that (you said he likes to play big pots so we can only assume he is playing monster killers)... or 88-QQ now that I think about it. If it was HU I would maby delay Cbet but I think you got pretty unlucky a fish didn't call you with A10s+ or something. Then again I don't know many players calling a 3bet with AX that's not at least AK/AQ in a live game. only V2 will show up with AQ+

The bet sizing or whether you bet at all isn't terribly important in this specific spot. More importantly I think is how you take advantage of the information you gained from V2 with his comment and how you factor in that comment possibly changing your perceived table image in future pots (assuming other people heard it).

I think we're giving up a lot of room for exploiting our opponents if we just kinda shrug our shoulders and play hands like this "standard"-ly, where we just hope to run into the top of our opponents' value ranges and cooler them for value. Sometimes we need to do a little more work to really dig some more $$$ out of them.

Either your villains' flop check/calling ranges are elastic to your bet sizing, or they are inelastic. If they are elastic, then betting small is clearly better than betting big (it's kind of a judgement call you have to make at the table, but I posit that most average 1/2NL villains will call a $60 flop c-bet with far more than 2x the number of combos that they will call a $120 flop c-bet with, on this board with this action, ergo we make more money with the $60 c-bet). And if they are inelastic, then you kind of want to find out just how cheaply you can bet boards like this and still take it down (if you c-bet $60 and they snap fold, then you should basically up your preflop 3betting range against these opponents tremendously, until the point that they start adjusting their own opening ranges or 4bet ranges). Besides, you can always bet more streets if they stick around with AQ+. But if you lose your fish on the flop, that's it, you're done, no more value.

And the tiny c-bet on super dry boards like this has the advantage of possibly inducing action: basically no one at 1/2 is ever going to bluff over a $120 c-bet here, but if you c-bet $50-$60, it's entirely plausible that some non-zero part of the time, you can induce someone to throw in a min-check-raise to try and resteal, with their QQ/JJ or w/e. Not saying this is super likely or even expected, but the difference between inducing bluffs 1% of the time vs 0% is actually pretty big.

EDIT: Furthermore, after the flop, our SPR is only like ~2.2. There's really no rush to try and get chips/stacks in the middle, if villains actually have AQ/AK/44. Doing it in 2 streets or 3 makes effectively no difference, imo. But manipulating our opponents into calling wider or even bluffing by betting smaller can make a pretty significant impact on our bottomline here. Keep in mind this is all hyper-specific to this board texture.

Sizing on the flop is too big given your hand strength, texture of the board, and opponent stack sizes.

Betting 60-70 range still gives you plenty of room to get stacks in by the river if anyone has a hand. Betting this sizing also allows you to steal much more profitably if you ever have a bluff in this spot. This is a board where the average LLSNL is only continuing if they have an A or better, a small bet accomplishes the same as a larger one.