Villain had been playing way too many hands, I guess 50-80% (I wasn't exactly counting)

He was calling a lot both pre and post, but I never saw his hands because he always lost.

He was limping mostly and opening/raising with the stronger part of his range.

I don't remember him showing too much aggression post-flop.
I haven't seen him bluff either.
Been at the table for 3 hours or so together.

I'm still not paying as much attention to the game as I should, working on that!


6-handed
Villain: 400+
Hero: 300

Blinds 1/1
Villain BTN straddles to 3
SB calls
Hero in the BB raises to 15 with QQ (both red)
folds to villain
Villain calls
SB folds

Flop: (33)
974r

Hero bets 10
Villain calls

Turn: 974r Tc (53)
also puts a club flush draw on the board

Hero bets 25
Villain calls

River: 974r Tc As (103)

Hero checks
Villain bets 100
Hero ?


I really don't like checking here on the river, since it's just begging to get bluffed.
I still think checking is better than betting though, don't think anything worse would call.

What about flop and turn bet sizing?

Will post results later.

I think flop, and especially turn is way too small. I wouldn't go lower than 15 here, and would even consider 20-25, even with pot size. I think V can have a lot of double overs on this board, especially with how good of a price you were giving him to tag along. And because of that, I think turn is too low as well.

AP, I sigh fold here, personally. But this might be a variance train spot. This feels like a weird value bet here though, because this sizing with your river action makes me think he doesn't want a call, and doesn't think you have an ace. I want to talk myself into a call, but gut is telling me it's a fold.

The only question is if he can be bluffing more than 1/3 of the time. Nothing you've reported says he bluffs this often. A lot of players will slow play sets. I can let this go.

Unless you've seen something to indicate villain is capable of making moves, I'd heavily discount bluff potential at this level - well below 33% necessary to call in this spot as previous poster points out.

A9, A7, T9, 97, J8, 86 and all the sets through turn are in range. I fold.

The villain did "feel" like the type of player who would make these random bluffs.
This certainly felt like a bluff.
I'm often correct when I get these feelings, but not always.

Flop and turn are definitely too small. River is a call if you really feel it at the table, but from here it's a fold.

I'm used to playing against at least somewhat competent online players.

I like my flop bet size.
It keeps villain's range wide and gives him the opportunity to call with a lot of hands, which I like.
Betting large is just going to get hands like QJ, T7, A4, ... to fold.

Why do you think a larger size would be better here?


The turn is actually a bit of a scare card for me. Since I definitely can see villain show up with J8, T9.
Betting large is going to push his range more towards those strong hands.
Betting half pot gives weaker hands another opportunity to call.

Why would a larger size here be better?


I definitely wasn't feeling the bluff on the river 100%, I just thought this villain was certainly capable of bluffing a lot of hands, especially on this card.

I ended up folding because I couldn't really find many bluffs that get to the river.
No straight or flush draws that make sense.
So not sure what villain could turn into a bluff on the river.

He did end up showing his hand, which I'll post later.

He's calling $10 with his entire range, which is fine, but he's probably calling $20 with a similar range. If you think you are ahead, you want more money in the pot and you do want to make him pay something for his draws -- especially since you are the one who thinks a T is a "scare" card. If that's a scare card, almost anything is, so you definitely want to bet more on the flop.

On the turn, now you've got a flush draw and more straight draws. Either check or bet bigger to have him make the mistake. Not much bigger, but I go at least $30 - $35.

Regardless of his hand, with your description of this guy, folding river is fine/good.

Preflop: Good.

Flop: Bet $30ish

Your opponent is loose, so you can take maximum advantage of his leak by betting pot-ish, which he will probably call with a wide range of hands that you beat.

Turn: As played, $25 is good, but you can probably go a little larger to $35ish.

The T is not a great card as it completes a straight, puts a draw on board, and may have made 2 pair for your opponent as T9 seems to certainly be within his range. That said, you are still way ahead of most of his holdings and his looseness will lead him to calling you light. I'd like to squeeze a shade more value out of him here, but $25 is certainly not a mistake.

River: As played, bet $25ish with the intention of folding to a raise.

The A sucks because it hits a portion of his range (flopped pairs w/ A kickers) and it will also scare him away from calling with his weaker holdings. Still, you may be able to get him to call a very small bet with a small pair, and $25 is less than what he would likely bet if he has hit a pair of aces or better.

As played after the check, fold. Your read is that he hasn't bluffed, so when he puts out a big bet now you might as well go with your read.

Just my opinion...

Well for one thing, 107 might not necessarily fold, as well as some of those hands. A lot of pairs or draws on a board like this will call 1 time because you can have a lot of overcards here, and will just be cbetting everything. But for another , because you need to get paid to give them the chance to suck out on you, and there are a lot of turns that will complete a straight draw or throw an overcard to your queens. NOt saying you need to be scared of getting sucked out by 86o, but you need to recognize that there are a lot of bad cards that can come and you need to protect your equity. The lowest I would even think about is at least matching the raise, but 20-25 is probably correct. In position, sure you can size down.

Exactly why you should be betting more. If he can show up with J8, he can have a lot of two pairs on this board as well, and maybe even some 9x that will call thinking your just firing with air on that flop.

The river run out is what it is. But the question is that was this spot avoidable? Did he have a better hand on turn/river you could have scared off, or at the very least, make it a sucker's bet for him to chase? Like as played, I am chasing every single turn here with ever Ax, every potential gut shot just to see the turn. Especially when I have position. The reason this turn/river spot is so gross is keeping him wide on a wettish board, and vulernable to an A or K didn't seem like a great idea. Unless your goal is to induce him to fire his bluffs, but then, we folded....

I ran this hand through GTO+

Gave myself a 25.6% range


If I give villain a 50% range (including all the top combos like AA)

Solver is betting 33% pot 25% of the time and checking 75% of the time.
It's never betting 66% or 100% pot.

With QQ it's betting 33% pot 42% of the time.

Without any adjustments solver is always checking the turn.
(But villain is folding a ton on the flop, including the hand he showed, so this is not reliable.)


If I remove the very top of villain's range: AA, KK, QQ, AK - JJ, TT at 50% and 99, 88 at 75%

I also removed the 100% pot flop bet here, so only 33% or 66%.

Solver is now always choosing the 66% size.
Betting 56% of the time and checking 44% of the time.
QQ is being bet 75% of the time.

Villain is actually calling much wider now, including the hand he showed up with.

Solver is again choosing to check 93% of the time on the turn.


When I make villain's range a bit tighter (without top of range again)

Solver is again choosing 66% pot every time, betting 61% of the time.
Betting QQ 81% of the time.

Villain is once again calling a bit wider.

On the turn we are now actually only checking 71% of the time.
Betting 50% pot only 13%
Betting 75% pot only 16%


When I make villain's range wider (70%), then removed AA, KK and AK at 50%

Against this very wide range the solver starts mixing.
31% of the time it's betting 66% pot
54% of the time it's betting 33% pot
15% of the time it's checking

QQ specifically is:
36% of the time 66% pot
53% of the time 33% pot
11% of the time check

Villain is calling about 66% of the time against our 33% pot bet.

On the turn solver is once again checking 75% of the time and betting only 50% pot size the rest of the time. Not choosing the 75% pot bet ever.


Then finally I gave villain a 53% range, without AA, KK and AK at 50%, this seems the most realistic.

Solver is mixing again.
37% of the time 66% pot
25% of the time 33% pot
38% of the time check

QQ specifically is:
49% of the time 66% pot
20% of the time 33% pot
31% of the time check

When we bet 33% pot villain is calling 69% of the time.

We are once again checking 72% of the time on the turn.
Again the solver is always choosing 50% pot over 75% pot bet on the turn.


Key takeaways:

- The wider villain's range is the more often we can choose a smaller bet size.

- The tighter villain's range is the more often we choose a large bet size. But we're also mixing in checking much more often.

- This turn is pretty terrible for us and we should probably be checking a lot, mixing in a 50% (or maybe smaller) bet size. Definitely not a large bet size.

- The more "top of range hands" villain is 3betting the more often we can bet into him when he didn't 3bet. But if villain is not 3betting the top of his range, we should be checking more often.