Do you think V would fire if 4th club comes up without Ac?

What if the board pairs?

How much is V willing to call if 4th club comes and if board pairs that doesn't improve his range?

Suppose that number is $200, why not extract that value on turn when it would be so difficult to fold to such small raise? LLSNL players can actually be embarrassed to lay hands down to small bets/raises.

I think villain does not call off on those run outs just like he doesn’t call a turn shove. So, the only way to extract more is call and hope for a blank. A non-flush deuce could get him to lead river. I’ve seen hands like this play out where river blanks and OMc leads and calls the river shove, though 95% of the time he folds. It you have a chance of getting that last river bet out of him by just calling.

What's wrong with a min-raise on the turn?

I mean...it eliminates the river problem.

I think he doesn’t call a min raise either. You need him to keep betting.

AQo is a problem hand at the best of times and if this guy really was an OMC, this is completely nuts calling even in position.

His range is QQ+ and perhaps AK (perhaps from any position, could be even tighter UTG).

What flop are you hoping for? An Ace, well you might get one bet out of him, that's it. A queen gives you problems, unless you can insta fold TPTK to one bet. Even in the unlikely event you flop AQ, you may get a bet or two out of AK, perhaps one out of KK, but when he has an albeit unlikely QQ or AA you may well lose your stack.

If V is folding to min-raise, then the right move is to raise flop or just about any flop.

I highly doubt V is that willing to fold.

I like your thinking about extracting value that I've seen you discuss on a few threads now. I used to be in the "better bet/raise huge because there is a possible draw out there" camp, and I wound up just folding all hands I actually want to call.

My only issue with using your strategy too much is that it's hard to play your entire range like this. If we are raising our best-made hands and our draws as bluffs, we want to be doing it with the same sizing. Would we ever want to min-raise as a bluff? Since the point of raising is the fold equity + chance of hitting. But, if we raise so little that there is almost no chance of them folding then FE is gone and it's just a bad play. Any half-conscious player will quickly pick up on our sizing tells if we play this way.

agreed -you are much better off calling with suited T9-type of hand against a tight player UTG raise.

FWIW, I am merely trying to stay in context.

Yes, in a tougher table, my lines might be exploitable.

However, there is no rationale to balance my lines in these discussions.

words have meanings. if we can't agree to call an older man who's drinking coffee an OMC, then the words don't have meaning. OMC is not a description of a playing style. "tight" "nitty". are. OMC is a compilation of words that represent three things.. age, gender and drink choice. check, check and check. period. saying "we shouldn't label someone as OMC just because they are old, male, and drinking coffee.. we should wait to make sure they are actually a nit" ... is just as absurd as saying we shouldn't label someone as Asian just because they are asian.. we should wait to make sure they are maniacally aggro...

point being.. these descriptors are stereotypes that serve as place holders until we get more player-specific reads. lets not make more of it than that. lets not make less of it than that

Agreed. Furthermore I would add that the original stereotype of 2009's OMC is outdated and not relevant in today's game. There virtually are no more true OMCs in today's games. Nowadays the OMC stereotype more accurately reflects and old man drinking coffee who plays extremely TAG

-1

OMC is an idiom

Grunching...

We're OTB. This is an easy call ott and move in otr, especially given stack sizes.

Also, against a true octogenarian, who opens bigger than table standard, easy fold pre.

Generally speaking: you dont stack old man coffees. Thats not how you win money off of these player types- they simply play too tight stackoff ranges for us to focus on stacking them.

You win money or gain EV from them by taking down small to medium pots with attacking capped ranges on scary boards, attacking bet sizing tells if you can identify that either pre or postflop- and generally just dont give them any action when they comes out with their ridic big sizings with their nutted ranges.Unless you get a decent price to setmine with a PP or something of course. AQ off is a super standard exploitative fold against an OMC with this huge sizing. Thats where the magic lies when facing off against these villains: their opening ranges are so incredibly well defined and predictable. Just let them win the blinds over and over when they raise it up with KK or AA after folding for 3 hours, and see the frustration on their faces because they cant get any action.

Good post but reading it put me on tilt while picturing these types of players and not just the old ones.