H (BB): TAG image, up $150, mostly quiet so far. $650
V1 (UTG): Typical rec fish with a short stack. $100
V2 (SB): Young aggressive Asian player. $700

Preflop:

V1 UTG limps. Folded to V2 in SB, who raises to 20. H has AJ in BB and 3-bets to 50. V1 shoves for his short 100 stack. V2 calls. H calls getting 5:1.

I really hated all the action with my RIO hand, but getting 5:1 I felt that I couldn't fold yet.

Flop ($295) A64

Check check.

I think betting will get hands that dominate to call and hands I beat to fold, so I play it slow, with an eye on the diamonds.

Turn ($295) 8

V2 bets out 200. It's a large bet in absolute terms, but a standard value size given the pot size. He's betting into an empty side pot, so he must have something. I hate it, I was really expecting him to check the turn so I could value bet, but he took the initiative at first opportunity after I declined to build the pot. I'm still highly afraid of being dominated with my RIO hand but decide I need to call and evaluate river. Should this really be a fold?

River ($695) J

V2 checks. H bets 200. V2 crying calls.

Effective stacks are 350. I amazingly binked 2 pair. The flush came in. But I decide I need to bet for thin value here since I now beat his most likely big ace holdings.

I'm pretty iffy on how I played this hand and would appreciate all feedback! Thank you!

I don't like the three bet pre without some very good reads. I'll call here IP and let aggro hang himself most of the time.

I play the rest of it pretty much the same, except if he's aggro enough to be able to CRAI that river as a bluff sometimes, I just check back river.

I don't like preflop. I think that a fold is okay (UTG is shoving a lot and re-opening action for an aggressive V who has already raised in SB) and a call could be okay, but I'm not sure why we are 3! here (Do we think we have ATs crushed or are we trying to fold out AQ??).

I definitely like checking through on the flop. We have a dry side pot, so if V calls, we're beat almost always.

Turn: I probably just fold, but I don't hate the call.

River: I'm betting this for value, even though flush came in.

This seems results oriented to me. What makes you think that a "typical rec fish" is limp/shoving for $100 "a lot." Where I play, they are much more lickely to limp/call, with limp/fold being next most likely.

I think it depends on how V got to 100 (I'm making an assumption that this was not an amount that he was able to buy in for and had to lose money to get to this point. People who are down love doing tricky stuff like limp/rr UTG).

Even still. If UTG calls then we're caught between a young aggressive player and a short stack. If UTG calls 20, then he has 80 left. V is now able to bet 40 into a pot of 60 and if UTG shoves, then action is re-opened again. I just think we are getting ourselves into a fairly tricky spot with a RIO hand.

Fold pre. Call shove though given the odds you are getting.

Check on flop is good.

Turn is a super easy fold.

Bet on river is good.

If you're behind on the turn the EV of the call is -186.96. If you want to call because of implied odds you need to bet (and have the bet called) 2,367 dollars on the river just to breakeven.

You have three outs (that's best case if no one has a flush draw). So you need to win 200 / (3/46) or 3067. The pot is 695 so you need to have villain call a 3,067 - 695 or 2,367 dollar bet on the river.

200 * 3/46 is 13.04. You lose 186.96 with your turn call if you're hoping to hit a 3-outer.

As long as you know he is raising midpairs, small pairs, big cards, some SC, then i 3 bet always.

But your 50 sizing is terrible. Raise to 70 since you hand is not much, and you should build some FE into the equation. 50 doesnt fold anything and we dont want to givetons of implied odds there at all.

ANL, in the vast majority of similar HHs in the past, you would advocate for a small 3bet with hands like KQs (2.5x or less IN POSITION) because you thought that establishing the initiative and then barreling postflop would be profitable (while also making weird assumptions like Villain ALWAYS 4betting 100% of his KK+ combos).

So how can you say that 3betting KQs small IN POSITION versus a tight player's UTG range be good? And then you come here advocating that 3betting AJo small IN POSITION FROM BB versus a SB 4x iso-raise is bad?

Have you finally come around to the consensus that your previous 2 years' worth of recommendations to 3bet small with non-premiums versus strong raising ranges (in the mistaken belief that establishing initiative is important) were fundamentally flawed?

Check out this other HH where ANL advocated 3betting KQs small against a tight old man nit UTG raiser:

Hmmm, well where do I start. I still advocate 3 betting 2.5x with less than premiums vs the avg. wide opener who I can figure doesnt know my betsizing. (Most of the time since myself I am used to a transient population.

Here with the AJ on the other hand we are OOP? Are you comparing apples to oranges? Im totally confused since these are two TOTALLY different scenarios. One is in position and the AJ is OOP. So....

And yes, I would many times 3 bet small an early raiser that just visually appears to be possibly the type that wouldraise AK AQ KQs TT JJ+ (doesnt look like old man coffee and nit type)

Why?

Because this game is ALL about what they have and what they will do with it.

What will the avg guy do with AK AQ KQ TT JJ and even QQ some if i 3 bet? If you disagree that he will call those hands the vast majority of the time OOP then we have no more to talk about because I say the AVG. player will only call these. I dont base my answers on the avg tougher 2+2er type. I base my answer on the avg. routine guy unless i know different.

When he flats OOP I can own him in so many ways I wont go into here. Its HARD to get a flop you like when you hold TT JJ AK AQ KQ. And when you dont, I win. Even when you flop only a piece, I win most of the time there because I will sniff it out with optimal betsizing and then steal it if I determine its second pair and not top pair.

This isnt close. Its like standard issue for me (and a ton of others) and works SO MUCH better than flatting the KQs not knowing who else is coming in the pot, not having any idea of villains range as I narrowed his range with the small 3 bet). If you are not on button with the flatting hand you allow the players behind to call and then your creative play post when u miss just went out the window.

BTW, this is such a standard online spot that everyone and his family knew it years ago. Live players for the most part are so cally and try to hit the floppy that it is really tough for them to win optimally.

---------------

Weird assumptions of the villains usually having KK AA when 4 betting? Well, what can i say. When i have 50-60 players telling me on a regular basis at everything up to 2-5 that the avg. villain HARDLY EVER 4 bets period and when they do it is AA KK. I dont know what club you play at but yes I say that the avg low limit player does not have much of a 4 bet range at all. And the ones that do stick out like a pink elephant in the living room.

----------------

I stand by all my decisions and you cannot generalize them either. Each hand is a unique situation and due to many factors a play may be good in this hand, but not another. (Even though its basically the same overall situation) Anyone playing rote strategies for general situations is just not playing optimal for the various factors in the hand in question.

Wow, sorry I have to LOL. Initiative is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT to have in all but large multiway pots. Wow, its the engine that runs my poker car! Anyone playing NLH with most of the focus on hitting the flop just has not gotten off the ground IMO. Oh yes, I know about most written material on live poker does not conform to this, which is why NLH live is and most likely always will be great.

OK really. If you think INITIATIVE is no big deal, then we should just cut it off here, You flat you gotta make a hand very very often since you allow others in the pot among other reasons. When I have initative I can win both by making a hand and simply betting which forces them to hit the flop. Thats so clear cut that I dont know any other way to put it.

Im sure that you win AT. I know ur not just sitting behind the computer rattling off a rant. Im just stating that I believe 100% that I can outperform anyone who attempts to flat the KQs hands vs avg. players in most postiions by 3 betting them. (My sizing will differ on situation obv, and I hope you dont mention balance as a reply here too since mostly balancing against the avg. live player does nothing other than exploit yourself IMO.

Also, if you compare AJo and KQo both IP with 3 bets-----the AJo wont nearly play as well as the KQo so i will in fact play them differently in many spots.

Question 1: Was this hand played at the Commerce? Because if it was, AJ is a 3bet here from the BB all day every day, I don't care what anyone says. If you get 4bet you dump it(a legitimate 4bet, not from someone who has lost most of their buyin and is probably tilt-shoving their last remaining stack), you just lost the minimum, EZ game move on to the next hand.

I would actually size my 3bet higher so that UTG can't min-raise all-in and so you have no option except to flat, flatting an all in when you have the option to raise makes your perceived range look weaker. Even if UTG was not at the table I would size my 3bet higher. A 3bet to 50 has like zero fold equity here and your hand is not that monster that you're just begging to bloat a pot.

I think the only hand combo we're realistically losing to here on the river is 88 so it's pretty much a value bet on the river all day. Turn is probably a fold but one reason we 3bet AJ here is we're still going to get calls from A9, AT, A8s etc at most live tables. Since we gave up the lead on the flop(which is fine on the two tone board when you love to see a safe looking turn land) villain is probably thinking any pair of aces is good because right now our perceived range is looking like a scared 99-KK that hated to see an ace flop.

How can anyone take you seriously when you don't even pay attention to the HH?

If you 3bet AJo in BB versus the SB's 20 raise, then you are 3betting IN POSITION because you have POSITION on the SB.

So yes, we are not talking about IN POSITION versus OUT OF POSITION. We are talking about IN POSITION in both scenarios.

Please work on actually reading hand histories before you offer any advice on them.

I am not going to waste my time debating your incorrect theory posts on initiative when you can't even bother to get basic details of the hand history correct.