So your afraid of being 4 outted at most so that justifies shoveling in 40bbs to make those hands fold and punt off 40bbs to hands we get called by. I believe this line allows you to gain 0 value for flopping top pair 2nd kicker.

Am I following your logic correctly???

It's no different than your idea of 3betting and cbetting.

And no, I don't think you understood most of my posts in this thread.

I have understood your posts and the logic in your posts is a big reason why ivr been very successful in this game. There are a lot of people who share your logic who are not bad players but they just turn thier hand face up and allow me to play perfectly against them. It's very reliable to bc there is no creativity or balance...but tbh there really isn't a need to be balanced in 1//2 and 75% of the 2/5 games so there isn't a reason to think outside the box.

you arent understanding his logic because hes not suggesting to balance. hes saying if villain never puts more money in bad its best to put in a small raise now which is correct. for example to those who want to check fold river they missed a bet or a check raise somewhere because this is the only card villain could bluff.

You definitely don't understand most of my posts.

I'd be curious to see the ev difference between a chr otf and a ch call lead turn line

Do you think villain's calling range differ much between us CR otf and donking ott?

What are we really targeting by giving away turn?

40bb or 4x c/r isn't very small. Shouldnt the concept of balance always be on our minds...especially vs an opponent who is a better reg in a hand we play a lot in.

2nd ya are ignoring the fact that this is a no fold equity game!!!! C/ring just bloats the pot OOP with an spr less than 1. He said that he sadnt looking to get called with his c/r, why out we doing this when it's likely we get called???

How do you balance TP2K? I don't know how you balance such hand...by occasionally folding it faced up?

Wait wait, so people don't fold and you think it's a good idea to bomb KQs OOP?

Bringing back an old quote:

Yeah I think alot of random pp or hands that pick equity will float the turn if we donk that will fold to a chr and if he does hit a set he will play real straight forward

ignoring the first part but no he didnt say was looking for a fold he said hed rather get a fold from hands that are only putting money in if they turn or river a better hand than letting them see the turn and river for free. if they want to call with little equity all the better.

Ya, I mean if I think they're going to call my turn donk bet with crap, why not make them call the same bet on the flop?

I don't think it's profitable at all to target that very small percentage of hands that would turn crap to call a donk bet, but would fold on flop because they don't even have crap.

Yeah I'm saying there's a big gap in the % of hands that call the chr vs what calls the turn donk, T9 ain't calling a chr but is calling alot of turn bets

At work and can't do the math but I'm guessing it's a really big % of hands given the board texture

Assuming he would have raised with all PP 22+. There are 16 different cards that could hit and destroy our KQ.

Let's also not overlook weird two pairs.

So if we're targeting randoms like T9, we can't overlook hands that would really hurt us.

Don't really get the 16 cards comment but we are WA/WB where he likely won't continue with most of his WB range but it can turn a small % equity but will rarely turn > equity. Like maybe 3 to 5% of the time he will actually turn a better hand with his WB range.

And we can just bet fold because he isn't going to bluff us really and even theoretically he can't since we can rep everything up to top set/turned straights.

In other words, you want to slowplay TP2K OOP against a decent opponent to extract value against very bottom of his range that might improve to 9 - 11% equity on turn?

Firstly op didn't describe him as decent just decent given the game conditions and that's exactly what I'm saying.

Also the WB range is small in % equity but huge in % combos

Your line makes sense if we had like 87

He also didn't describe him as a calling station donk...

If I assign V1 25.2% range from UTG, he doesn't have much of anything that would improve from crap to low equity slightly-better-than-crap hand.

Q 5 7

6 will improve all his range with 8 in it and of course 66, which literally doubles his equity to 28.5%, and giving him sufficient implied odds. And if it also turns a backdoor flush draw, it adds even more equity to his range.

9 would turn his T8 (bottom of his range) into OESD, and again there is the flush draw scenario.

Anything above a 6 will essentially improve his range significantly, whereas anything below that will completely miss his range and he will simply fold to a bet, and we gain nadda and had given him a free card to destroy us with RIO.

And let's not forget that he will gain bluff equity as well.

Bottom line: your plan is no bueno.

87 will probably never show up in our perceived range in this scenario, so I don't see how that's relevant.

Tbh it looks like you are proving my point and 87 was an example, but 99 works just as well

What point? Are you going to start putting weight into your end of discussion or am I just wasting my time?

First of all, do you even know what top 25% range looks like?

Lol you are such a tool

11t is on point in this thread.

The 3! pre is a laughable discussion but the idea of "protecting equity vs air" compared to "obtaining max value vs air" is an interesting conversation.

I would donk turn in this hand bc villains double barrel frequencies are just so low. Of course adjust accordingly for those who aren't.

I agree I would much rather c/r flop with 87. 99 in theory accomplishes a similar goal but we have less outs to improve when behind.