1/3 live.

Hero opens to 12-15 UTG. Two call with a wideish range. Villain who is a middle age white guy, haven't seen him play many hands in the 1.5 hours I've been there, certainly hasn't made any aggressive actions, raises to 80 from the HJ with 125 behind. Hero expects the villains behind him to fold if he calls or jams. My image is probably neither tight nor loose.

Probably KK. Can't mess about when tight LLSNLers threebet.

KK is the bottom here. Anyone who sits at a table for an hour and a half and pulls something like that is gonna get me to throw away pretty much anything.

AKs/QQ+ for 100 bigs and 1.5 hours of history.

If i have real history (several sessions) or a lock read, drop the QQ combos and the club/diamond AKs combos.

This ain't bridge, 5-card minor suits are just as good as 5-card majors.

Cards are like women. Stick to the pretty ones

As an aside, like the other thread of yours today your preflop raises are getting called by lots of opponents. Unless you are a super expert or feel super comfortable postflop with these results, you're most likely going to get slaughtered. Just food for thought if you're constantly getting yourself into multiway commitment decisions with hands as weak as one pair.

What's our image? Have we been fairly quiet or putting in a lot of raises from lots of positions?

I'd probably flat with AA attempting to invite fish into the pot (unless stacks are so deep where I wouldn't be comfortable with that). KK probably sees enough meh flops where I'd just shove now. JJ- I'm most likely folding unless I've been opening a lot from everywhere and this guy looks to be in a frustrated going-home type of mood. Which basically leaves QQ and AK. AK is doing alright against QQ- with some dead money, although it's probably just barely profitable; we're going to have to run into our fair share of AQ/etc. in order to make it profitable for the times we run into AA/KK (which is a big part of a low action 3betters range). QQ is pretty borderline too and again image dependent.

Basically, unless me or the opponent have very laggy images, I'd have an extremely tight range here. ETA: Pretty on-board with the other suggestions of KK+ until reads dictate otherwise.

GcluelessNLnoobG

KK+ should be nearly automatic.

FWIW, not seeing him play a lot makes me play a bit wider against him, because players smart enough to play tight are more likely to be smart enough to be aggressive. So im including QQ and AK and not too worried that its wrong. JJ is marginal.

In theory, a casual who has been card dead for hours and has bled off 1/3 of a buy-in is going to have a wider 3betting range than one who has been getting hands but has never 3bet before.

Still, no reason not to just ABC here and shove KK+, AK. I don't think I have a flatting range here.

But I'm not questioning my understanding of the universe if I get it in with KK and they roll over pockets 8s because card dead players do go on tilt, and after folding 94o for 20 orbits 88 starts to look like the nuts.

AA only imo. Villain rarely shows up with less than KK+, so even with Kings, you're basically hoping to chop imo.

+1

+1, though I'd go with AKo for 100 bigs too.

Call QQ, KK+ yeah push. AK call seems borderline but he's not folding so either call or fold. Would mostly fold. I'm surprised by AKo get it in here...I would expect QQ+ here, AKo you're a 40/60 dog and there's not much money in to get you the extra 10%. Suited puts you 42/58.

I had QQ and thought it was really close. I'm actually surprised so many people think QQ is a fold here, I thought I was being a super nit for laying this down. In the past, at this stack depth, my default has been to go with it but that hasn't worked out too well for me. He seemed pretty relaxed so that was kind of the tie breaker that pushed me toward a fold.

Default at these stacks QQ+ AK

Maybe lighter. Theoretically V should be pretty wide here but there are different kinds of short stackers who vary widely in their aggressiveness. Some guys might have QJo or 33 here while others only big pairs AK.

The weird thing is he didn't shove. He's put in two thirds his stack. Why? Is he trapping with KK / AA or is he actually planning to fold to a 4 bet? I know the latter possibility sounds ridiculous but bad short stackers will make plays like this.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

The issue with live poker, and i believe that this will always be true, is that spazz is always a factor. Even i forget this.

This is a real hand history from a few weeks ago. I have significant history with villain. So when i say i know his 3bet range here to be KK+, you need to trust me. He is ultra OMC, aware of position, aware of my range.

2/5 $1.1k eff

Straddle, hero utg1 $40 w red QQ. Villain in HJ calmly slides out $150. Btn whale cold calls.

Honestly this is a standard fold for me, the straddle has created an lol sizing spot and we are pretty much set mining without odds, but with whale and relative position i make the call.

Flop $450 9TJ all hearts.

I check, villan bets $300, whale folds, i all in. This is basically the only flop where i dont flop a set that im not getting away from.

Villain snap calls and tables 99.

Turns out he was tilted from a previous hand (i had just joined the table) and decided to yolo 99 to my utg open in a straddled 10 handed game.

So its actually very difficult to range villains in live poker bc of tilt and boredom. Basically just because youbsee someone 3bet KJo it doenst mean their 3b range is KJo+. It most likely means their 3b range is still QQ+and some AK but **** it they have seen 92o for 3 hours and KJo is getting raised.

So their 3b range is like QQ+,AK, spazz.

So while its correct to be quite mubs to 3bets in general, we still should be wary of overfolding. Not because of wide 3betting ranges which dont really exist in live poker, but bc of spazz

$205 isn't even 100bbs here.

$80 isn't 2/3 of Vs stack, as $69 is only 1/3 of his stack.

Less than 2 hour hand sample is pretty meaningless, especially when we don't have any show down info on V.

Shove it in and enjoy the Profit with QQ+ and AKo+.

In the original HOC, Harrington wrote that he always assumed at least a 10% chance of a pure bluff. So for close decisions with an expected range, he would call because of the bluff factor.

In this case, it is still a fold with QQ. Just not as much of one.

My bad I thought it said with 125 total not 125 behind. Still think QQ+, AK though.