??

I've read through all the responses and we will agree to disagree but thanks for letting me talk about the hand. It's sometimes more fun to replay the hands online because sitting at a casino is pretty grueling and i need to get the most out of it, and i'd play gladly for no money.

the GTO solutions always involve a solution for each player, that is, there is always a solution for each player in the hand,

so the bet sizings can be 40% or 60% or variations on that. I'm not going to argue the math on this because GTO solutions are a serious point of contention on this site, but the computer will tell you that variations of this solution will always work. It's fairly easy and intuitive to understand that every flop is a confrontation between draws and made hands where made hands are worth 60% and the draws are worth 40%, in other words, one of the players is a 3:2 favorite on an average flop, therefore the draw wants 40% and the pairs want 60%. Even though there isn't really a draw present on this flop, i'm still betting 60% because he has to float to protect against the times I'm FOS or will slow down with hands like TT

This duality is present in every hand, it's just logic and math.

There was another way to play the flop, which was bet small flop, bet turn, that solution is also correct

anyway, the river was the J of diamonds, I raise to 1K and villain folds before i had even looked up

agree to disagree with everyone on the flop/turn play, but thanks for the input

Your turn check might be a small mistake because it indicates that you aren’t finding enough double barrel bluffs to balance your boats/quads. I think we should prefer 5d4d/KdJd/JdTd/KdTd for our double barrels. KJs is also nice, double blocking Qx and single blocking AK. If you aren’t bluffing all of these hands, I’d guess you probably are underbluffing turns.

Bigger mistake in this HH though, by far, is the river raise IMO. You’re overplaying a non-nut flush on a paired board sitting 500BB deep, and Villain is totally uncapped with like 7 combos of boats/quads and up to 7 combos of the nut flush. What worse hands are you hoping to get called by when you raise? This is the biggest mistake in the hand. Criticism of flop/turn is nitpicking in comparison.

OP, I won’t belabor this further and I suspect you will ignore this anyways, but this post is like 100% wrong and not close to being right (other than paragraph 2, which is worded oddly but correct if limited to HU). GL

Sorry to be harsh but this is all nonsense. You don't seem familiar with GTO at all despite presenting as if you do pretty confidently. Maybe it all seems logical and intuitive in your mind but it makes no sense at all to anyone else and I have no idea where you could have gotten these ideas from.

KT, this is about your range as it should be. Stick with that and then have some of the better minds here talk about it.

*You 3b a very Ace heavy range sprinkled w SCs.

*You are extremely A heavy and Q light on this flop and bet very very often.
*On a Q turn all of your Qx combos are at least a boat, I think 7 combos total incl quads, but you still have like 50+ Aces, and a few backdoor diamonds.

Now, how do you proceed? Instead of the GTO sht, it's really...

Browni, should my range look like this ever? Am I betting too much w too many Ax? Should I have more Qx that isn't a boat?

jvds, I'm not altering my range, if this is how I often arrive at turn, what action benefits me? Should I care about my opponents range here that called 2/3 pot?


^^These questions will provide helpful/actionable answers--- You start thinking: maybe I have too many Aces? Maybe I need more Qx? (maybe not). Maybe I need to bet less otf if 60 Ax (maybe not) so I arrive at turn differently.

Far Far Far better than stuff like "This duality is present in every hand", "every flop is a confrontation between draws and made hands where made hands are worth 60% and the draws are worth 40%"

A question I want answered (it stumped me earlier).

How do I proceed if I've gotten to the turn on AQ3Qs w 7 boats+, 30-50 Aces, and 7 draws ... adding in... AFTER having been ckc for a 2/3 psb otf from UTG open-caller?

i was thinking about this a little more after QS posted the sim results and i think the main decision is whether we want to bet AK (in addition to our boats). i think i end up that we usually dont, which was not my first reaction. i have Vs range on the turn roughly as:

29-38 combos Ax (depending on if he calls AJo pre; assumes AJs-A2s 100% call and AK is 100% 4b)
6-12 Qx (depending on KQo; assumes KQs/QJs/QTs 100% call)
~6 boats+ (50% AQ, 100% 33, 0% QQ)
12 gutshots (KJs/KTs/JTs/54s all call with bdfd, ignoring OPs holding which blocks one combo 54s)

assuming that if we bet 3/4p, V continues with 50% of Ax (15-19 combos), all Qx+ (12-18), and diamond draws (4), then our bet is pretty thin and probably bad if he ever raises or donks river. if we expect V to be stickier with Ax/gutters then we can probably get away with betting, although it seems like it is mostly going to be better to just xb and value bet against his weaker river check range. betting gets a little worse if he is flatting AK/QQ some, but it doesnt move the needle much.

in terms of bluffs, we do have some gutters (although it sounds like OP wont have any KJ/KT/JT) and other 0 equity stuff that would like to bluff (in addition to diamonds), but we probably cant support those hands with just boats+ in our value range. would probably prioritize: low diamonds, high diamonds, JT, KT, KJ, others.

if V is good then we will be put in some tough spots on river after turn checks thru, but i dont think theres much to be done about that.

i kinda got lost with the last 3 posts but i think we just raise every hand on the river and check back every turn is super profitable

obv i didn't realize this at the time, i'd love to say i'm a poker guru and had planned on raising any OTR but we either have the nut low on the river or the effective nuts

can't say what i would have done on a blank, but probably would have bet if checked to, actually 100% but my river plan didn't involve raise any even though it plays itself, it surprised me how fast he laid it down, only came to the realization that i should bluff raise after the hand

i think betting small OTF then betting the turn is ok too, but big bet/check back i think is fine

You don’t have the effective nuts on the diamond river. You literally have something like the 40th nuts with a nut low flush. Effectively you have the 14-17th nuts because Villain has 33/AQ/Adxd with this line. Raising for value with the 14th nuts and lots of money behind is pretty thin!

On a blank non-diamond (say, offsuit 6) what value does your raise represent? As I mentioned in my post, I would snap off your raise with any Ax from Villain’s perspective because it looks very FOS after you check back turn. You’re basically repping quads and that’s it.

Just because he folded this time doesn’t mean a raise with ATC is a good play. That’s results-oriented thinking.

[QUOTE=ChaosInEquilibrium;57227365 I would snap off your raise with any Ax from Villain’s perspective .[/QUOTE]

we basically eliminated aces from villains range

i think a lot of people here bet small on the flop, that makes your hand very flexible for the turn and makes a lot of sense. i did something people don't generally do. I bet high on the flop. I think everyone is betting the flop. The sizing matters tho, but i don't think the high sizing approach is wrong but it's always going to be an auto check on the turn when the queen comes out when we size it high. We should never really have a queen unless its AQ exactly and why bet the nuts on the turn on this board?

basically he shouldn't have any aces and i shouldn't have any queens

So, let's say we bet 100% of the time on this flop 1/3 of the pot, what sizing is good for the turn? I admit that i don't bet small on the flop because no bet size makes sense to me on the turn for this particular card. it seems like the one card you absolutely have to check back....he has a lot of queens in his range, way more than we do, so it's WA/WB and checking back your entire range might actually be best regardless of your bet size otf

so if we bet small on flop and large on turn that's going to get a ton of folds, but has reverse implied odds for all your Ax hands

just sayin

KT Art,
This AQx is one of those classic flops, along with AKx, that favors the preflop 3-bettor, and accordingly a lot of players will mix between 1/3 and 2/3 pot sizing. Many other boards only allow for the small sizing, but not this one. This has been verified by sim analysis.

I would have to run the sim but I imagine that AQ keeps betting the turn from your perspective. You’re trying to build a pot with a strong hand and keep getting value from Ax. Turn Q doesn’t change much from Villains perspective if he’s holding Ax. He’s still losing to AK, he’s still losing to AQ. Only difference is AK won’t keep betting, so your range will look more bluff heavy if you keep firing with AQ. Def bet turn with AQ…not sure what sims say, but I expect they agree.

Agree that you shouldn’t have any Queens, but strong disagree that Villain can’t have any Aces. Why would you say that? Every action taken by Villain is consistent with him having a hand like AdJd,AdTd,Ad9d, etc. Even the bet-sizing on the river, on a paired board, is consistent with a flush.

Why can't villain raise/call a 3-bet and x/c an A-high flop with Ax? Why doesn't villain have a raise/call range in your other thread? Why doesn't it make sense to bet AQ on this turn? Really can't piece together most of the things you're saying.

lets agree to disagree here Jvds and not go into the solver solutions here, a lot of people don't understand that the GTO solution is 0ev for both players

we have 2 solutions on the flop that are both correct, 1/3 pot, and 2/3 pot, but there are more streets to play, we are trying to max out our value while minimizing our losses

most people here are betting small on this flop, totally correct, with a small bet you are merely betting the turn more frequently, with a big bet you are checking back more frequently

my double barrell range is very high at this session, i've been 3 betting and double barreling a lot because people are in stack nurse mode at this table, v is the only one actually playing poker

he has eliminated most aces from his range pre

we already know he doesn't have an ace, no Ax plays this way pre

makes no sense to bet AQ because he's drawing dead and folds too much, all of our A high hands are bluff catchers, i think this hand works better from a range perspective than what i actually had, which i admit i didn't think of until after i hit my flush, but i do have a rule to always bluff the nut low, so i should have bet higher on the river, 1k was too small, but villain probably folded a jack on the river, def a better hand than 45 anyway, and i didn't see it until hindsight, that was my mistake

hand plays completely different with a 1/3 bet OTF, so unless 2/3 is.a sizing you would use i don't think i'll convince you

solver says 50/50 mix between small and high bet size, we haven't heard what it says for the turn when we bet high but i'm thinking it will say check back always

This is frankly nonsense. GTO preflop charts have AQs-ATs as flats from UTG, facing a 3bet squeeze from the BTN. AQs will be 4bet at some percentage, but nevertheless all these hands are overwhelmingly flatted.

Also, if you're 3betting as aggressively as you've indicated elsewhere in this thread (you're 3betting ATo, really? -- don't do that, please, for real), Villain has probably picked up on that and is defending wider than normal. Wouldn't be surprised if he defends all his AXs that he opens UTG.

Why would Villain bet half-pot and turn a hand like Jx with showdown value into a bluff on the river?

Honestly, none of your reads make any sense here. They flatout go against the way any logical thinking player considers the game. If Villain is at all competent, he's not making any of the plays you ascribe to him. 4betting all his Ace-high preflop, betting half-pot with Jx on the river ... this is all nonsense.

This is wrong, QuantumSurfer already ran the sims and his results said to follow up with a bet on the turn 15% of the time after using the 2/3 flop sizing. Not betting AQ on the turn would be a big mistake, leaving tons of value on the table.

Here is what a "standard" defense strategy would look like from UTG facing a BTN 3bet. (Go to page titled "UTG RFI vs 3bet")
This is from Jonathan Little's book (100bb stack depth):
https://poker-coaching.s3.amazonaws....lop-charts.pdf

Notice that your opponent is going to play all of his AQo and AQs-ATs as flats in a vacuum.

this is not really relevant here but: if both players are playing gto (ie both sides of a nash pair) in a HU match it will be 0ev for both players (ignoring rake); however, that does not mean that gto is 0ev on a hand by hand basis (for example, when one player has AA they will have >0ev for the hand). in 3+ player games there is no guarantee of a gto solution at all, so we usually just start thinking in gto terms at the point where it becomes heads up, and make assumptions about what ranges the players will have at that point. there really isnt a relevant analog for the 0ev result from the full HU game, so it really isnt helpful to think about it that way. because of the way the hand played out, you will have arrived at this spot with a stronger range than V, and be in position, so even if you both played gto from here, you (your range) would capture more of the pot than V.

no, there was one solution provided, which included betting 30% and 70% with different hands in our range. betting 30% with eg AQ would not be part of the solution provided.

this is not related to the solver but is an okay reason to underbluff the turn. i still think you need to bet 54dd though.

as others have told you, this makes no sense and is almost certainly wrong. it also drastically changes how you would want to play a lot of spots in 3b pots, so its not a harmless thing to be wrong about.

No it isn't. Look at the EVs of some outputs. Just because two optimal players will never get an edge on each other doesn't mean EVs are zero on each flop for each configuration. In fact, that's rather rare. They just average out to zero when you take into account all positions/actions and possible flops. In this instance, one player 2b and called a 3b OOP. If he never defends, his play shows a -$30 loss. As long as there's a way to lose less than that by calling and seeing a flop, he's going to defend, even though it's less than 0 EV. This is true for every instance of someone defending their bet/raise or blind. Someone always is going to have a range/nut advantage and that person usually has a higher EV on that particular flop. A 3bettor will usually show a higher EV than someone defending. It averages out to 0 (assuming perfect play) because he's going to be 3b you in position as much as you him.

well, there is actually a solution for every flop and there are (at least) one solution for every player, therefore a heads up pot has at least 2 solutions and a 3 way pot has at least 3. so yeah, there are 2 bet sizes that are 0ev for both players on every single flop, there is a precise bet size for one player and the other, it's just not that easy to calculate but they average 60/40,

that's just an average, the computer likes alternating bet sizes in a vacuum

i can understand betting the lower sizing in live poker, in online poker i almost exclusively use the high sizing because i'm multitabling and want more folds to save brainpower but there is nothing wrong with sizing this down. I just chose not to this time, and it's not incorrect, the reason is because i've been repping the ace all night (i've actually had it multiple times coz i'm opening all aces) and at some point they have to call so why not make it large?

@ KT,

Mindblowing stuff here. WP.