If her only 3bet so far is with QQ, and the only time she's piled in massive money postflop is with the ~nuts, then I'm giving her credit for a monster (both preflop and postflop) until proven otherwise.

Gnotsurewhywe'dassumeotherwise?G

GG you are analyzing 30 minutes of reads or 10 hands for an incredibly small sample size. A sample where she already was seen making unconventional loose plays like limp calling Q5o. Neither of us have any idea how a player like that plays...we just know she's bad because of the Q5 limp/call and we can say she's probably in the bottom 10% of the pool.

So you're just giving her AA/JJ only even though we block both and they amount to only 2 total combos anyway, and are totally ignoring that she might have 12 combos of AK?

12 is a much bigger number than 2 so even if she only takes this line with AK like 10% of the time you're supposed to call.

I'm often so surprised that people on the forum are like 90% confident that they can remove entire segments of Vs range. I'm rarely that confident in life or at the poker table.

What percentage of the time would she need to take this line with AK where shoving would become more profitable? Assuming she never folds with the Kd and folds at a percentage you think is reasonable for this player without the Kd.

oh yeah definitely dont backraise then. the op was worded kind of oddly with the ,

Ok I didn't see it but it makes it a faster fold. She's not min raising pre with AK if she's the type of player she's described to be, a beginning player thinking they should min raise big premium pocket pairs to keep everyone in. With that thinking, she's not doing it with AK.

But that's just me. Jamming is over playing it imo when the hands in her range that does this crushes us. I narrow people's range street by street, so what hands do this that we beat if discounting AK? She knew enough to gii when she had a FH so she's competent enough to know where she stands here too so queens through kings are out the window rn pretty much.

I'm of course not very confident in my 30 minute / 15 hand read. But until I have a better handle on what she's doing, I'll gladly default her to what 99% of players do. And 99% of players don't minraise non-monsters preflop, cbet boards very multiway with a whiffed AK, and then attempt to get stacks in play with KK/QQ on the nut low turn card. So far her limp/calling crap hands preflop for lol measly $15 while attempting to play for stacks with monsters is pretty standard fare, so no reason to put her in some unicorn 1% box yet.

Gassumingthat'saduckquackinguntilprovenotherwiseG

Betting 35 into 150 is rather consistent with a novice player who wants to set their price to hit a drawing hand which they may view AK to be on this board. I have seen that plenty. Also, most novice players would size up with AA on this draw heavy flop, so I would discount that. We already know that she BOMBS with monsters so would have to think she bets large on flop with top set here. That would be consistent with her play with top boat earlier. Just as much as you want to discount AK, there are reasonable arguments to discount AA/JJ based on flop play and observed tendencies.

It's funny that other people are saying she wouldn't min-raise pre with AK. Y'all have so much absolute certainty about a game that is defined by uncertainty.

There's always the possibility that she shows up with AK or even A2o, and other junk but the read her is she has a big PP probably 90% of the time or more, but that's just me. Be careful giving a new/bad player that much credit thinking "she would cbet this amount with that or she would do this if she had that"; she was referred to as someone not having a clue to begin with so giving her that much credit might come back to bite you in the ***.

you are literally doing this

you went from her limp minrring and showing down QQ to "She's not min raising pre with AK if she's the type of player she's described to be, a beginning player thinking they should min raise big premium pocket pairs to keep everyone in. With that thinking, she's not doing it with AK." and "There's always the possibility that she shows up with AK or even A2o, and other junk but the read her is she has a big PP probably 90% of the time or more, but that's just me."

I assigned her a range based on prior solid info that we've already seen. I'm not assuming she would bet more otf if she had aces or kings, or bet less with AK (like she did). Without knowing anything further about her or have any bet sizing tells is just assuming, and everyone know what happens when you assume.

I was not giving her credit or saying she WOULD do anything. I was saying she COULD do something like cbet AK.

There are reasons to discount AA/JJ based on flop play, just like GG has reasons to discount AK based on flop play, and you discount AK based on preflop play. I don't find any of the arguments entirely convincing and I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm 90% certain she does this or that with any parts of the range we've been discussing.

You cannot say she would flat AK based on prior solid info until you've seen evidence of a showdown where she flatted AK. Seeing her 3bet QQ doesn't say anything about what she would do with AK.

you did but there isn't really enough evidence to suggest what you're saying is right. its no different than what youre saying Chaos is doing.

we've seen her limp once in some context and min rr and show down qq. so we know she has an open limping range in some positions, and some amount of the time facing an iso she reraises. we dont know if she has different sizes, what else is in the range, why she does it, all we know is some percentage of the time QQ is included. we have no idea what she does with KK, AA, AK, KQdd, or 72o. deciding based on one non descriptive retelling of a showdown that you understand her strategy entirely and hero folding a very strong hand because of it is too big of an adjustment imo.

do you see the difference between she limp min reraised once with QQ and this is a beginning player who reraises only and all of her big pocket pairs small to keep opponents in?
what about the difference between she overbet in that hand with a full house (note not enough detail is given in the history hand but whatever) and every time she bets big she has an absolute monster so im going to fold top 2 pair on the turn in a 3bet pot like you're in a scene from rounders?

the history hand is some amount of evidence but you need more than one showdown (especially one we have extremely hazy details of) to conclude she does this ALL of the time with this exact segment of her range and no others. it makes what you're saying more likely than had we not had the history hand but i think you're jumping to large conclusions prematurely.

This is true, I'm not disputing that at all. I'm just putting big pocket pairs as the majority of her range until I have better reads but from what I saw so far, it isn't really enough to assume she's doing this with AK or KK and call away almost 300 bb's, but that's just me.

Agree with all this. What is the math on how many combos of AK she needs to be doing this with to be more profitable to jam than to call?

As close to how I can recall, her QQ hand in mp.

Utg limps, V limps, 2 more limps ip. Aggro sb makes it 15, utg calls, V makes it 30, folds to sb who calls, utg folds.

Flop (84) : QJ3cc
Sb checks, V bets 100, sb calls

Turn (284) : Jccc
Sb checks, V shoves a little over 300

So this tells us she had a monster and she bet it like a monster, but when she potentially had aces in a 5 way pot, she only has one pair which is probably why she bet small otf. When she potentially hit her set, she switched it up into high gear while planning to get stacks in by the river. I could be wrong of course but that's just me.

I am not really sure if there is a way to answer this. I think the answer depends on a lot of factors as to how she will respond vs call or jam. If we jam is she always calling off on turn with every AK? Or only the AK with a diamond? If we call turn would she jam AK on the river if there is no diamond? Would she check/fold if she has AK no diamond and a diamond hits river? Once you know answers to those questions I guess it's a simple math problem as long as you assume her range is just AA/JJ/AK.

Result:
We jammed, she snapped with KKd and we held. But I wasn’t sure if call call was better. We will make better decisions than her on river. We can fold Kx and diamonds and stack off the rest either by bluff catching or jamming ourselves.

The main drawback to this is we don’t stack KK or AK with nfd.

Fun hand. Maybe KK with the Kd is the only combos she plays that way, checking all her AxKd on the flop and maybe calling preflop.

Seems like you played it perfect vs this villain, and won the max with the best line. I doubt shes ever balanced or close to it. Think she bets flop larger wit AA seeing results. And maybe does not minclick pre with JJ.

NH. My intuition was calling because I thought she could have that hand or AK, possibly with Kd. You block AA and JJ, only one combo of each. And it is more of a stretch for her to 3betting some combo that gives her a flush on the turn.

You have very little hand history with her, but you know she is a huge fish, fish do silly things, and there aren't a ton of combos of hands she can have that have you beat.

I mean, nice result. But we're playing a 1% player cuz 99% of the poker population doesn't play KK like this, at least IME. Obviously always sit at her table every opportunity you get because she's not going to last long.

GimoG

About the bold, if she's betting 35 into 150 with KK I guess she's betting 35 into 150 also with AA -- those are the same hand category.

She might bet flop larger with JJ because it is top set after all. In the other hand history she bet 100 into 84 with QQ on a similar flop texture of QJ3ccx

Looking at how we saw her play QQ allows us to eliminate JJ in this hand with pretty high accuracy just because of flop play without making any assumptions about preflop play (assuming she's not mixing up her play, or deviating with flop sizing because of multiway),

So we really only lose to one combos of AA. If you impose arbitrary assumptions about discounting AK based on preflop or flop play, or KK based on turn play then you need like 95% certainty to justify a fold. The requirement of 95% certainty comes from basic combo math because there is 1 combo of AA and 19 combos of AK/KdKx and 1/20=5%. Anybody who wants to claim 95% certainty about these types of arbitrary assumptions is destined to be falsified by results in the long run IMO.

There is a very simple adage that Bart Hanson has advocated for the longest time: when doing range analysis, it is worthwhile to include a 10% chance that the player does something out of the ordinary with a portion of their range. He would call it a spaz factor (not PC, sorry). Cbetting whiffed AK on the flop could be in that category (10% of 12 is 1.2 combos). Betting turn with KdKx could be in that category as well (10% of 3 is .3 combos). These small percentages have a pronounced effect when we only lose to a small number of combos like in this example. If we count the unexpected events here for 1.5 combos and we realistically only lose to 1 combo of AA, it's an easy call. Or jam if you like.

I got the action wrong. I thought the jack came on the turn. Which leads back more to I think she can play a whole lot of AK like this also unless she does not minclick it preflop. I believe calling or jamming was best here, I think trying to figure out which is the hard part.