Villain is a middle aged guy and a break even reg.
The type who doesn't put much money in the pot unless he got two pairs or better.
I'm a winning TAG in my 30's with a solid image.


2-5 and 500 effective


He opens to 15 on the button and I 3bet to 60 from the SB with KTss.

(125)Qd7s6d
Cbet 60 and he calls

(245) 7h
Checked through

2c
And I shove all in for 380

Can I get this player type off a queen here?

He certainly has more pairs than a Q and might have more calls than you'd like when you take this line/this board.

I doubt that's a question anyone here can answer, it depends heavily on the exact specifics of this guy, your image, the dynamic between you etc. You rep absolutely nothing, so the question is purely psychology, it's whether or not this guy thinks you're capable of making this bluff.

not a convincing bluff line. rationale on 3b him pre? is he positionally aware? was it folded to btn? how does he respond to 3bets?

Unless youve got certain reads to exploit him pre K10s is not making you money from SB 3b vs BTN. KJs is fine in a vacuum vs any non nit but unless you got serious reads he sucks post or folds too much pre K10s is just a muck.

Flop is fine.

River is spew what are you even repping besides QQ or slowplayed KK/AA, if he somehow even had 22 here ever i wouldnt even be surprised to see him call off bc this line makes 0 sense for value. He can have so many calls here besides Qx

KTs is a fine threebet in that spot, it's like a top 9% hand. You can't fold 92+% of your hands to button raises.

It's not uncommon for players to check AQ or overpairs for potcontrol on the turn, or slowplay a full house so there are quite a few hands that could shove river for value.

This hand never played out, it was just a scenario.
Wanted to ask for some thoughts before I spew it off

I just don't think competent players ever takes this line as a bluff: bet - check - overbet shove
Such an unlikely bluff in todays games, so I wonder if it gets a ton of folds.
Personally I would hate life if I faced a jam on the river with Qx here, and fold.

Overbet bluffs are underused in general, yeah. You can't do stuff like this very often before you start getting a reputation for it though.

i dont think KTs is top 9%.

You can also have like a 12-15% 3b SB vs BTN (which is standard) and it doesnt have to include KTs

This is Equilab's version of a 12% range:



If you don't want KTs in there, or QTs either presumably, what are you replacing them with? Small suited aces are better for when you're threebetting as a bluff, but worse here for when we want playing strength rather than blockers against super-premiums.

I disagree with the orthodoxy of literally never calling out of the SB. This would be a fine hand to flat. Plays well enough if the BB comes along, keeps in many dominated hands from BTN opener.

Flat is fine too, I think folding is crazy though.

I think flat is better than 3b

That’s a terrible range. They’re 3-betting KJo at 100% freq but a bunch of premium SC like 109s, or even A2s-A8s at 0%. A10o should also be a mix not a 100% freq 3b.

I’d do like A5s/A4s, 109s, 65s-98s and A8s can be mixed 0-100% depending on opener, the better hands of these mixes goingg to be at higher frequencies on average than the lower ends

Ofc K10s can be ok as a 3b vs some players but in a vacuum there are better hands to be 3-betting than K10s out of the SB vs BTN

I mean of course I agree you want to have mixed strategies with the weaker hands but other than that I disagree with your whole approach there. There are two possibilities of how BTN will react to a threebet:

1) He'll continue with a tight range
2) He'll continue with a wide range

If 1), he's just going to be straight up overfolding and you want to be threebetting with like everything. If 2), you want to be threebetting a merged range. Using a polarized range and subbing in junk like 65s for KTs is just putting yourself at an equity disadvantage for no reason.

The only time it would make sense to use a polarized range is if BTN is a nit and only raising with a tight range in the first place.

^ i have personally never 3b 65s/76s vs a BTN open. It was just an example

Im just saying that range is pretty awful bc KJo plays bad postflop and there are so many better hands to choose as 3b’s. I mean i guess A10o is ok but i’d prefer A8s, atho A10o we can do like 25-50% freq. The fact that equilab is giving KJo 100% but wayyyy better hands like A2s-A8s and 65s-109s 0% is pretty bad

The diagram wasn't a suggestion of what to 3b, it's just what is considered "top 12%" based on equity vs random hands. But to the above, my point is I strongly disagree that stuff like A2s and 65s are "wayyyy better hands" to threebet in a button-open scenario specifically. KJo is better because it flops top pair way more often (edit: and just has better equity, I should also have said). Stuff like 65s is only better in scenarios where you are either assuming an unreasonably tight button open range or assuming that he folds most of his open range, in which case the entire argument is moot because we should just threebet everything.

Just to illustrate what I'm talking about, equities:

	KJo	65s
Top 5%	31%	29%
Top 10%	35%	33%
Top 15%	42%	35%
Top 20%	46%	36%
Top 25%	47%	37%

Against tight ranges you can argue that we don't want to be dominated, we'd rather have a deceptive hand etc, but BTN cannot be only continuing with 10% of his dealt hands here, or he's just going to be overfolding. And once BTN starts becoming looser than that, the equity advantage of KJo (in preference to 65s) starts becoming really pronounced and you don't want to be using stuff like 65s, you are just straight up giving yourself less chance to win.

The small suited connectors arent good or valuable in hu situations.

This is incorrect. A5s has ~30 equity vs QQ+,AK. KJ has ~25% vs that same range. QTs is somewhere in between at 28%. And that's without factoring in card removal. I will say KJ/QT probably have better playability.
Fwiw i wouldn't mind a 3bet with any of those hands vs a standard button open, or even a slightly nitty one. All three hands typically do well vs any reasonable calling range.

River shove is spew. This is just not a runout that we are gonna win on often. And betting 1.5x pot doesn't accomplish much. Ironically we can fold out quite a few Axdd by betting 150.

Confused about what in your post contradicted what I said, you just repeated it.

Raw equity is moot when KJo has way less playability than A5s/A4s. E.g. more profitable flop cbets turn barrelings and even triples, flopping draws to which we can barrel with equity and FE is massive in 3b pots.

This is flat out wrong, there are so many boards/runouts you can barrel with 109s-65s vs KJo or even cbet. KJo is a give up on so many flops so you’re kust x’fing all your equity OOP. Raw equity isnt everything

OK. I am giving you conventional wisdom here FWIW. For example, here is a 2017 thread on the subject from Poker Theory:

"Linear" meaning just the strongest hands, equity-wise. It's a mistake to treat btn/blind situations as the same as any other 3bet situation.

highly dependent on whether the player in late position is adjusting their opening ranges by position at all and if so by how much. in many cases in low stakes games it's suboptimal to adjust your defending ranges from the blinds versus LP opens because the players are raising almost the same range in LP as from EP, and open limping or over limping a lot of the hands you might expect them to raise in LP if they were positionally aware.

folding, raising, or calling are all viable with KTs from SB vs. button opens, depending on the player and action before them (i.e. presence of limpers).