Since when is 200bb deep?

Your 3 barrels will be at a much lower frequencies otherwise you will be over bluffing substantially, and when a regular is contemplating hero-calling he can discount any thin-value so essentially it doesn't matter how bad his bluff catcher is. Additionally, with the remainder of your range you give villain the option to realize his equity for free.

Compare this to when you are betting a much wider range for value. You will be able to include a lot more bluffs into your range and thus 3 barreling at a higher frequency. And villain will not be able to realize his equity for free for the most part.

Aggressive poker is simply harder to play against compared to passive.

These threads are kind of lols tbh. If hero posted that he had an airball and was contemplating a 3 barrel bluff, I bet more than half the people saying 2 streets is the max amount of value you can get with one pair would say V is never folding a J here. Especially with the comment that V has not won a hand in 2 hrs and is down $500.

I mean the way he played the hand postflop. If QQ is at the bottom of your pf 3bet range you need to open up a bit IMO.

What's your pf 3b range in UTG+1 vs. an UTG opener on an action table (presumably 9-handed) vs. a player described as not getting out of line or being overly agro? Please share.

...

This thread just reminds me how much I miss the extreme left portion of the Dunning Kruger chart.

It’s not, but it is to someone like Mike where average stacks are seemingly 40-60 BB’s.

Probably JJ+, AQo+, and some frequency of A5s, 54s and KQo depending on how active I have been. IDK about you but when I get 3bet and I'm holding KK I am not instantly putting my man on AA. I'm instantly thinking about how I can get this guy to put as much money into the pot as possible.

Don't you think betting yourself will make you more money in the LR. Checking at some low frequency seems good, but I think betting the hand more often than checking it will net you a lot more money. You are depending on a lot of factors to build a pot. First you need to have an overpair and TP type hand, which won't happen that often. Second you need to have someone betting at you. Third, he needs to be bluffing or value-betting a worse hand. If you just bet the hand yourself, sure you will fold out some of his air sometimes but you will be extracting value from his worse hands, you will be able bluff more effectively with your air and you won't allow V to realize his equity for free.

Also idk what you are doing this hand as you played your hand to induce villain to bet and then ended up folding to a normal sized river bet. What kind of advice are you seeking for by posting this hand here? What were you trying to learn? Seems to me like you are just defending the way you played the hand and can back it up because your soul read was supposedly correct this time.

+1

Do you ever get to the DFW area? Would love to invite you to some of my invite only games that can get 400+ deep. Not because I want to take your money, but to take side bets on how long you would last at the table before someone would kick the ever loving **** out of your ass. Setting the O/U at 20 minutes.

Your 3betting an UTG raise from UTG+1 against a solid player who shows no sign he's a LAG or getting out of line with 54s and A5s?

You're right it's not deep, but it's not like we have 100 big blinds and can get the money in a lot easier. My buy in's are 200 to 250 bb's but it doesn't mean I'm happy to get it all in with a pocket pair.

No I'm from NJ

That explains a lot.

What a gem of a thread. Sad I didn't see it until now.

Pretty much this and also whatever shorn7 said.

I've read your threads throughout the years, and not many of them indicate you know how to play "standard" hands. Ofc that in of itself isn't bad. Sure you have good live reads and whatnot which allows you to win at a high clip despite your ranges being whacky and not being mathematical based, but your bet sizes/barreling frequencies are clearly nowhere close to "standard". If anything, if your winrate is that good despite you not knowing "standard" play much/theory, just imagine how good your winrate would be if you did. It's a shame that you are too complacent though. It really is.

FYI, most players in this forum aren't even playing close to "standard" either, so your whole "oh i play different and have low SDev, so my nonstandard plays must be the best" doesn't hold any weight. Lol at your lines being "beyond standard lines"

What are you even talking about with line ranges. It's literally just 1) his river range and 2) his river leading range. His river range is extremely wide but his river leading range isn't, which a lot of people tend to confuse. e.g. he could defend 70% of his range ott and arrive with 70% of his range otr, but only lead out with 10% of that 70% range as a donk otr. just bc his range otr is wide doesnt mean we have an easy call here.

I agree with alot of this.

FWIW i often have (one of few posters) defended Mike on this forum, as i think he have gotten an unfair amount of flaming compared to the results/winrates he is delivering. He deserves credit for the way he have stomped the games over a pretty long period of time now, regardless of how he does it.

That being said, he is always very defensive when people have other opinions or when facing criticism. Its a shame that you go into this defensemode as a default in nearly every thread Mike, cause it kind of blocks the flow of the natural discussions. The threads always goes into this dynamic where you are defending yourself no matter what,and the other posters get tilted because you are always this defensive- then the cycle just keep going like this.

I don't think QQ is strong enough to 3bet pre against a villain this nitty.

Post said "$1k deep", signifying V had decent IO to call with scs.

I agree that every time I post a hand it turns into some argument which is why I rarely post HHs anymore. Here's what happened when I asked my friend about this hand

Friend.."why not bet the flop?"

Me:.."I was worried about AA/KK/JJ...Im not ahead of anything but AK or some trash that has very little chance to outdraw me and wont call a flop bet in a 3 bet pot. Id rather keep the pot small. I hated the T on the turn too but he checked again so I should be ahead so I made smallish bet"

Friend.."I can see that...but as played you have to call the river"

Me.."Yeah I shouldve called the river for sure. I got lucky on this one"

That's the essence of this hand. I shouldve called the river bet because my hand was so under repped. I shouldve lost more money on this "cooler" type hand. I just got lucky that he seemed to be worried also. He has to be worried about the same premium pocket pair hands as I was. He beats nothing but AK that's in a normal EP 3 betting range. I dont understand his river bet at all.

I got lucky that both of us played timid and I saved money. Somehow here people turn that into me bragging. I dont know how that always happens. Ive said about 5 times now that I should've called.

If I dont 3 bet from this position I have to fold or its going to go 3-5 way to the flop. I dont think he was a supernit. I just think he was being overly careful just like I was.

Would you not 3b AK/AQs pre? If so, the flop texture is perfect to continue. If the V is folding TT/99/88 to a cbet, then your 3b range is too tight. You'll then be able to exploit this (V folding too much) during the session.

I don't think that's exactly the reason you should call the river. I think the flop check is fine, turn I think 70ish is better than 50.

The reason the river is a call is mostly to protect your range. We want to have some airballs in our range by the river that villain can bluff at. We want to have some part of our range that villain can Target for bluffs

That being said, you can argue that there is no GTO on the river. He who folds when behind and calls when ahead on the river wins. After all, someone has 100% equity and someone has zero.

The "standard" advice is call river but standard is just breakeven by defintion.

I don't like this thread because it seems like a veiled brag thread but it's a beautifully played hand considering the actual cards but the advice has to be call river because it's the GTO play for breakeven. Folding is another level. It's a very high level read, not many people should be expected to make

Yes I would 3 bet those hands. Id also bet the flop with those hands most of the time.

If this were a table full of GTO players or 2/5 crushers, then maybe a fold makes sense here. On a standard 2/5 table, though, this is an awkward line by your opponent which is too often a weak, last-ditch bluff attempt of a hand with no SDV.

V also may have checked back the flop with the intention to x/r with AJ. He also may have hit the turn with AT. In both of those cases, with Mike underrep'ing his hand, his opponent may have actually thought the river was likely to check through and decided to make a bet with what he thought was the best hand, hoping 88-99 would call a bluffy looking bet.

I don't think anyone is saying that a river call here is super profitable, by the way. Just that it's a must-call. It doesn't matter if you're a crusher, you always call here unless you have some sort of incredibly accurate read on someone you've played hundreds of hours with.

My guess is that he was planning to check raise the flop (since we know he had KK) but it checked thru. Then the T hit the turn and now he beats even less hands. He loses to AA/JJ/TT and only beats QQ or AK and can only get 3 outted by AK or 2 outted by QQ so he checked again to see if I would make a delayed Cbet with AK.

Hes obviously not folding KK to my $50 turn bet so he called. I just dont understand his $150 river lead. It makes no sense to me at all.

The way the hand went down, I was probably just going to check the river back because I have showdown value and I thought he had AK until he fired the river. It confused me (hence the title of the thread). I almost called and, again I most likely should have. The only thing that tipped the scales was something he did when he put the bet out that looked very confidant. I cant even say what it was. He just looked very confidant.

PS...when I see a guy make a play like his $150 river lead that I dont understand, I dont immediately say "wow this guy sucks at poker". I study him closely to see if hes a winner and if so, I try to figure out why hes making moves like this and decide if its something I should add to my game. This has worked very well for me in the past 2 years and made me a much better player. This is my form of "studying" and what people do here is the exact opposite which frustrates me to no end and leads to these arguments every time I post.

Maybe the reasons why your posts always lead to these arguments is because you post a hand like weren't sure what to do. Then proceed to get a lot of advice from people of what they would do. In this case, I think everyone agrees you should snapcall. Then you state that you knew exactly what to do and you back it up by claiming an exceptional winrate. So idk what the point of the thread is if you are just going to ignore all the advice and just defend your way of thinking and argue that our mentality is incorrect.

So congrats on your soul read, but this is a strategy forum as far as I know, so idk again why you are asking questions on the hand if you are just going to make decisions based on a physical tell.

Please post a hand with an actual tough spot, not a cooler between two nits doing their best to get the absolute minimum value of their hands because their hands 'beat nothing' cos villain can have AA or JJ and if you bet you are only getting called by better (just lols). I find it hard to believe you have an exceptional winrate if this is your mentality when you play a big pot with anything less than a set.

+1 and +1 to nit on nit violence.