100BB effective stacks, 9-max live low stakes (1/2, 1/3, 2/5, 3/5) NL

EP raises to 5BB, MP calls, button calls, Hero calls in the big blind

Flop (20BB pot) 359

Everyone checks.

Which of the following three scenarios would you be least to most likely to (or would need the strongest to weakest holding to) call down against:


Scenario A

Turn (20BB pot) 8

Hero bets 12BB, EP folds, MP folds, Button raises to 33BB, Hero calls.

River (86BB pot) A

Hero checks, Villain goes all-in for 62BB, Hero?


Scenario B

Turn (20BB pot) 8

Hero bets 12BB, EP folds, MP folds, Button calls.

River (44BB pot) A

Hero bets 23BB, villain raises all-in for 83BB, Hero?


Scenario C

Turn (20BB pot) 8

Hero bets 12BB, EP folds, MP folds, Button calls.

River (44BB pot) A

Hero checks, villain overbets 65BB, Hero?



Assume that Hero's absolute hand strength could be as weak as 66 (3rd pair on the turn) and as strong as 89 (top 2 pair on the turn) plus every hand in between (better than 3rd pair but weaker than top 2 on the turn).


Sample Answer

Scenario A is the scariest, I would only call with 89 and fold everything else. Scenario B is the least scary, I would call with my entire range, 66+. Scenario C is in the middle, I would call with K9 or better and fold Q9 and below.

I'm not saying that this is what I think. I'm just giving an example of the format of response I'm looking for.

Least scariest is C because lots of players would do this with a busted flush draw.
A and B are both lines repping strong hands.

BTN is not repping much in scenario A other than 67 that hit a gutter. Most players would bet 9x on the flop when checked to so I wouldn’t give him much 98.

B and C both look like busted flush draws. If he has 42 than nice hand. The only tricky and luck box value hand he can stumble into is A8. That is certainly the hand I would run into if involved in this pot.

People must hate playing against you. You must play like a bulldozer.

My question is: What is the weakest hand you would call with in Hero's shoes in each scenario?
See the sample answer in OP.

You have to start with what hands a good player would even call preflop with and go from there.

The weakest hand I can see calling preflop with and taking this line with would be 98s. No way I would ever have 66 here. So since you said our strongest hand can be 98. Ill say that is the one and only hand I can have here, get to the river here and call with.

Scenario B looks the strongest to me. A lot of players at the level I play at simply won't do this with a bluff. Maybe 20% of my player pool is even capable of bluffing in this spot.

Thanks for playing my game

98s is your answer to which scenario? All 3 of them? So if you had JJ in all 3 scenarios you would get to the river and fold? But if you had 98s in all 3 scenarios you would call the river?

One pair.

You beat his bluffs and lose to his value. All of your two pair loses to his value so you are bluff catching vs. a polarized range.

So you could see yourself stacking off as light as 66 in all 3 scenarios?

Yes, especially with 66 since we block his 76 gutters.

This kind of answer is kind of why you should kept it open for discussion rather than having a black and white answer.

johnny is right in that the weakest hand one should call is the one that can beat bluff catcher. You will be stuck with this kind of answer when in reality, you are really trying to determine which line reps the narrowest range by villain.

I would say A > B > C.

Here is another way of looking at it. Expand outward from nuts to worse hands.

Scenario A, how much further can you really expand from 76?

Scenario B, plenty to expand including all flush and straight draws, even bluff catchers such as PP. Although the river raise is pretty narrow in most instances, I would still think there is more hands using this line in V's range than A.

Scenario C, similar to scenario B, except that V is not making a river raise, so that pretty much kept most of V's range from turn.

sounds kinda like youre trying to build a "system" like a script to follow every time you're in XYZ circumstance. Dont do this

What do you mean black and white? I am definitely trying to have an open discussion about this.

So if A > B > C in terms of narrowness then can we also say that his ratio of bluffs also increases as his range widens?

Thus, if Hero's entire range is bluffcatchers then we should be calling with a larger chunk of our range when villain is more likely to be bluffing.

Therefore, we should only be folding our worst single pairs in C and mostly calling and we should only be calling with the top of our range in A and mostly folding and lastly B is somewhere in the middle.

Is this analysis correct or what's wrong with the way I'm approaching this?

If you are betting the turn with 66 and call the raise from scenario A, you have a bad leak. Scenario B is a losing call with 66 also. Hes going to have AdXd way too often and plenty of other hands that beat you that were slowplaying.

Scenario C I could see it.

Without some idea of villain what to call with doesn't have an answer.

Take scenario A for example. If villain is an OMC nit there is nothing I'm calling turn with that I would have checked flop with except 67. Villain will have two pair+ and has a chance of having a set that should have bet flop but didn't because nobody seemed interested.

At the other end if villain is an aggro bluffy or spewy type then his turn raise can be air or a draw. In that case calling the river with any pair sometimes is reasonable. The ace on the river cuts the chances of a total air bluff and runs the risk of being beat by an AX flush draw so only calling the worst pathological bluffers on a regular basis with worse then AX.

In general A > B > C. A lot of villains have no bluffs or hands worse then two pair in situation A. B is often backing into something but bluffs are possible. A nut flush draw is much more likely then A so calling with good AX is reasonable and often calling with two pair. C is the good hand or air bluff line and will have the most bluffs. This is only one I would call run of the mill villains with worse then 9X.

Scenario A: A8dd
Scenario B: A8dd
Scenario C: 97s

Scenario A and B are just never bluffs most of the time IMO, so never thrilled calling with anything except the straight in those spots.

Scenario C looks far more bluffy, so can see calling with any pair in that spot. I've mentioned 97s as the bottom of my calling range since I wouldn't be leading out worse on the turn into multiple players, so not getting to the river with stuff like 66/77 as you mention given turn action.

Thanks for the responses!

Good point about the different player types.
For Scenario A, you're saying that against the OMC you wouldn't call with worse than a straight? You would fold 89 or a set on the turn? You could definitely have these hands on the turn since I don't think it's right to always donk lead these hands on the flop into 3 opponents, especially since UTG has an uncapped range (i.e. Hero is probably better off going for the check raise with a set on the flop).
Against the aggro spewtard you would call with "worse than Ax", does that mean you would call with as weak as 66/77 on the turn and river?

For Scenario B, against the average player you say you would call with "good AX and two pair" Which unpaired AX are you calling the turn with?

For Scenario C, you would "call run of the mill villains with worse then 9X". So are you comfortably calling with our weakest one pair hands all the time in this spot?
For Scenario C, I disagree that we would never bet the turn with 66/77/87/86s in this spot. We figure to have the best hand after the flop checks around so making this bet for protection + have gutshot outs in case we do get called by better.

You are shifting from judging lines to judging players. Having a wider range doesn't necessary mean there are more bluffs. A loose passive player can have a weak and wide range without having any bluffs in his betting range.

Ratio of bluffs would increase if said player is an aggressive player, but again it doesn't necessarily correlates to his perceived range.

However, when comparing apple to apple, passive player vs aggressive player taking line A, aggressive player would have more bluffs than passive player. And again, we are now discussing player type, not line.

Technically if we only have bluff catchers in our range, all of our hands have the same strength. So the question is how frequently we should be calling, not what part of our range should be call.

I'm not saying to call all 3 spots with the same range. I'm literally asking what range would you call with against each line. If you need a player type, let's just say it's against the average unknown low limit rec player.

Also, why did you create an account just to reply to my thread?

Actually I would call all 3 lines with the same range, but call A far less frequently than I would call C.

lol that's a bs answer and you know it. You're saying that you would be willing to stack off 100bbs with your entire range that bets 12bbs on the turn vs. an unknown opponent regardless of what line they take. And how do you determine these "frequencies", do you just roll a die in your head, or look at the clock and see what position the minute hand is in?

Also I can't get over the fact that you literally created an account on 2+2 just to troll this thread...

Just because you don't understand the answer or that you already made up your mind, does not mean anyone is trolling you.

First of all, do you understand what "bluff catching" range means? Without going into the whole merging discussion, it simply means that your hand beats bluffs and bluffs only. In other words, it doesn't matter if your bluff catching hand is bottom pair or top set, it has the same value in your range.

Second of all, do you understand what frequency means? When people say that a value bet just have to win 50% of the times to be EV neutral, it means that the frequency of V's calling range is 50% weaker than H's hand and 50% stronger.

That's a 1:1 bet, hence 50% frequency threshold. A 1/2 PSB bet just needs to be good 33% of the times to be EV neutral.

Vice-versa, if V calls bluffs correctly with higher frequency than H is bluffing (in such case, H would be bluffing at an incorrect frequency), then V's call frequency would have direct correlation to EV. A simplified explanation without consideration to size of bet.

So if you don't understand why calling in all 3 spots with the same bluff catching range makes sense and that EV is determined by frequency, then you may take my words above or do your own research.

Forgot about 88, that would be a call but it's unlikely I check any sets on the flop. 98 is debatable depending on how fishy OMC is. If he can turn up with worse two pairs then it's a call but most OMC have no worse two pair on the turn.

I'm not a fan of check/raising, I would usually lead those hands in this situation. OOP against multiple opponents and a board that missed his unpaired cards this is a case where UTG likely does not c-bet when he wiffed and may not c-bet his middle pairs.

Rarely but yes. It's a weird situation for those villains because they don't likely check flop if they have any pair or draw after the flop checks to them. But they may have something like JT that improved to a draw on the turn and they have enough total air that some calls are warranted. I don't usually try to pick off bluffs with hands that can be losing to villain's bluffs. Villains can have some random garbage 8X that is bluffing and still beat hero.

AJ/AT are the debatable ones, it depends on how wide I think villain calls preflop. Calling with better unless I have a read that villain is strong and folding worse. Also folding if I have the Ad and villain can't have the nut flush draw.

No. This situation is bluffy enough that hero has to try and pick off bluffs sometimes against average villains. The ace on the river cuts the number of calls down because nut flush draws now beat hero.

OP, what are you trying to model here? I don't understand the premise of why you are asking this Q as all poker situations are multi-variate and cannot be answered definitively given just the info you provided.