Time For A Nap,

HLB implied that I played 1/2 NL as a flippant way to attack my logical argument. Whatever. I just don't see why he is mentioning the size of the stakes when he should be defending why we should be auto-cbetting $45 into about $56 on a 643cc flop with our whole cbetting range.

This is not nit-picking either. Cbet strategy is an extremely important part of the game, and cbet sizing is a really important part of cbet strategy.

Why wouldn't we focus on the situation that comes up all the time? (optimal cbet strategy and optimal cbet sizing) Why waste all of our effort on wondering what to do with the AQcc NFD+2 overs as PFR on 643cc flop when we get CRed and then get backraised for a cold 3bet over our call of the CR (which happens almost never)?

+1.

Because if i had a value hand, say a set or two pair i would bet the same?

Feel free to play however you want, but if your going to go and bet half pot on this texture and bet bigger when you have a real value hand, that is just so blatantly exploitable.

Might Villains be working together?

I never attacked you. I simply implied that at higher stakes most players dont have various different sizes based on their hand strength. Why? Because it gives good players a bet sizing tell to help them read your hand.

If im striving to play at the next level, why would i develop bad habits like betting raising bigger pre with my monsters, or betting smaller on the flop when im weak? Its really bad, unless you are capable of balancing your various sizings. Ie cbet bet half pot on 643cc with a monster. Or raise big pre with garbage.


Honestly im not even sure why you made such a big deal as to my sizing on the flop. That doesnt even matter. The real question is shove or call.

Yes generally when i cbet a flop like this my range will look like
Straights
Two pairs
Sets
Pair + draw
Occasionally overpairs
Flush draws
Straight draws


Since my cbet range on this flop tends to be strong, (as it should) i tend to bet slightly bigger when i cbet. If i were to bet smaller than it weakens my value bets when i have a strong hand.

Anyways can we please just get back on track
Dgiharris i like your feedback. Lets keep it going.

Shove or call?

The cbet sizing discussion is way more important, IMHO. If you can't see that, then so be it.

Almost no live Villains will put you on 2pair+ when you cbet that flop. They don't expect you to raise preflop with 75s/64s/43s/etc. Even if you do raise with those hands, they won't put you on them. So, your "perceived" range is weaker as the PFR than the preflop callers' ranges. Most live players (whether you like it or not) will put you on AJ-hi/AQ-hi/AK-hi/overpairs/etc. when you cbet that flop.

I'm checking back this flop quite a bit. Just not a lot of 1 pair hands we're getting to fold here, and not a lot of value from lesser hands, except for lesser flush draws, which is a small percentage here. Bet isn't bad however.

So we get called, check-raised, call the raise, and then we get a back-raise from the SB. This is basically the nuts, set+. Villain's first instinct was to slowplay but then the $$ went into the middle and he's in the process of blowing his load earlier than anticipated.

(I am possibly tickling my collusion-o-meter given the action and physical description of V1 and V2, though not as a first assumption).

Shoving is suicide here imo. Our overs are only very very rarely live (45, 56, and 77-JJ are all technically possible, but very unlikely). Odds are good enough that villain will pay us off for at least a moderate bet when the club comes, though he'll hate himself. Obv sucks if the turn bricks and he shoves, though his bet sizing seems wonky enough that that's not at all guaranteed.

WRT the calculation that you "need 40% equity to make the shove correct," this is totally false. You need 40% equity to make the shove +EV. But the purpose of poker is not to make any +EV decision, it is to make the most +EV decision.

WRT the discussion on cbet sizing, adjusting your cbet sizing based on board texture doesn't constitute an imbalance in your game that better players can exploit. You're adjusting your actions based on information available to everyone! It's only exploitable if you're adjusting your actions based on information that only you have.

ETA: and "exploitable" does not mean "bad". Poker is about maximizing profit. At lower stakes you often maximize profit by exploitating the mistakes of others, and all exploitative play is exploitable. Injecting "balance" into your game when there is no need is like encrypting a message so that a dolphin doesn't intercept and exploit it. It's a mistake and it costs you money.

Also this is pretty lol imo, there are lots of strategies you can employ to exploit lower stakes players that won't necessarily work as you move higher. It's not developing exploitable habits, it's finding ways to best exploit the games you currently play in. As you move up, adjust.

+1

V looks pretty nutted making a less than 3x backraise over a 3x c/r from someone tightish and a flat call.

I would just flat. We don't have any FE(let's be real here) and we're not raising for value.

On the topic of c-bet sizing, I actually don't mind the bigger sizing to start building a pot when we cooler someone's flush or straight or w/e.

But ATsai is right in that sizing for balance reasons is suboptimal. Balance is only necessary against players who can 1)correctly deduce what our different sizes mean, 2)figure out a plan of attack to exploit it, and 3)have the testies to execute that plan. And there aren't that many players who can do all 3 of those(hint: they won't be the fish).

Because even if you have a 51/49 advantage and you have the proper bankroll, then you should always roll the dice.

It's one of the perks of playing live. I see it everyday and exploit it every day with my small sc's. That's why I think the best situation here for hero is to flat flop because I think V will bet around 400+ ott and with the pot size compared to bet size and implied odds makes it a call.

I love calling with pairs and gssd's against V's who bet small and then getting paid off simply because of this reason.

Im happy with my betsizing otf. Betting half pot just to build a pot in case we hit isnt my style. Were cbetting for fold equity, bigger bet accomplishes that. Otherwise id have simply checked this back.

Lets move on:
hero calls $200 more on the flop


Turn $900
6 4 3 9 cc
Villian bets $300
Hero calls $300

River $1500
6 4 3 9 Q

Villian bets
$300
Hero?

I just sigh call. He might have a smaller fd. His line is too weak for a strong hand. I doubt he has a big had after betting the turn so small. You don't have to be good here that often.

Also if I see Villians cbetting this board half pot sometimes and more others I would see straight through that and be raising the half pot bets relentlessly. In theory you should have multiple bet sizes and be balanced with them but if you are picking one size fits all that is betting then bigger with a strong hand an smaller with a weak hand.

I think i said i need at least 40% to make the shove +ev if he calls 100% of the time. We know his calling frequency is some % below 100%, whether its 99.9999% or lets say 50%. The lower it gets the better for us.

Also if his calling range includes any pair+draws, it gets even better for us.

That's such a strange line and the whole hand itself is so strange that I would probably just toss in a call as well.

How about if he bet $500 otr? At what point do you say, ok its too much to call with tptpk?

Also agree i see alot of regs who use bad sizing on certain textures and its pretty obvious they are cbet bluffing.

Agreed i sigh called $300 otr but im curious now would you guys have called say $500 otr?

The line seems like an overplayed overpair. I would call up to 400.

On the subject of balance, I think it is like playing TAG or LAG. None of the are the "right" way to play, but they all have their place.

You don't need to balance against most 2/5 villains. It is like open limping from middle position, which is pretty bad at higher levels, but can be a valuable tool at LLSNL depending on table conditions.

This is terrible reasoning. Why get it in for stacks as a 2% favorite when you are likely to find much much better spots. Also consider that if you lose the flip this V might just rack up and bail.