this hand was against an unknown older asian guy. he's seems capable of bluffing and playing somewhat aggro he's pretty decent from the 30 min or so I've played w/ him but could def be a huge spot.

5-10 i raise 35 w/ 35ss in co btn calls asian guy calls in bb. 1500 eff.

flop: Q45dd
he leads 70. i call btn folds

turn: 3o
he bets 240. i call

river: 6o
he bets 760

Needs to be a pretty big spot for this to not be a snapfold (or a wizard).

Fold flop. As played I think you gotta call this. Maybe he shows up with 5-7 ddish hand here but I think you're good here most of time

he'd 3 barrel 67 & if the Q isnt a diamond he'd probably 3 barrel maybe 1 or 2 Qdxd hands.

I think even a set he's probably checking to you on river save for QQ.

I dont see folks bluffing here enough though with only 150BBs. you have all the made straights in your range and he didnt slow down at all & the river bet is a little over pot.

did he just quick fire all streets? any deliberation before river PSB?

i dont know, im on the fence. i wanna say as played its a crying call but i just dont think you get shown AQ that often except for AdQd unless he completely drooler.

I also wanna say raising flop > folding flop > calling and maybe you could switch the first 2. i just think semi-bluffing that flop is better than flatting and it merges with when you smash that board IP.

fold pre as played fold flop as played fold river

pre is real bad

flop I'm folding w/o a bdfd

river is interesting but I think readless this hand is far enough down in your range to fold

as played i would call river but i would either fold or raise flop. weighted more toward a fold.

Has he donked at all previously? Donking ranges are just so categorical usually. What I mean is there are players that always donk top pair but x/r draws or always donk draws but x/c top pair etc. I know you've only got 30 minutes but yea if you've seen him donk Kxx / Qxx / Jxx boards it's usually the top pair category.

Not folding flop that often, raising if the Q is a sometimes though I'd prefer a rainbow board, raise/folding turn sometimes (unless we are sure he's capable of 3 barreling (value and bluffs) in which case I like flatting more), river is gross.

His sizing is also pretty confusing/polarizing. I kind of feel like this can be a spazzing Qx a lot but maybe I've just been playing too many good 2/5s recently. I suppose the sane range is busted diamonds, diamonds with a 7, and 67.

Even though theoretically we should be folding more to this sizing, Id really, really want to call this compared to something like $500-$650. Especially if it was quick.

flop I think call is worst option because 1) your hand rarely improves on the turn, 2) your perceived range after calling flop isn't something that'll stop him barreling most turns, and 3) given it's a drawy flop there's more of his range that he can barrel turn with anyway and you can't call then.

4 & 5 were diamonds so he could have Qx w/ diamonds but does he really fire river so huge when there is a 4 liner? i think most guys would ck river here w/ that hand unless its spec Q7dd.

also don't really think he plays AQ this way he might bet flop/turn but usually guys like this bet smallish to "block" the river or just ck/call.

he thought for about 15-20 seconds on each street it wasn't fast betting but didn't take too much time either.

i think a flop call is best against his leading range here. i believe he rarely folds a Q here to a raise and i block a few made hands so i think his flop leading range is heavily weighted towards Q's and draws so i don't think a raise here accomplishes much if there isn't much fold equity against this leading range.

only played w/ him 30 min so haven't seen him donk out before. ya the Q was a spade so i did have a backdoor fd.

those of you advocating a fold on river, what hands does he play this way for value that he would take this line (donk, donk big, donk really big) when the board pretty much runs out the way it did?

1. ya it rarely improves but i can find out a ton more abt his hand on turn. his flop leading range is heavily weighted towards Q's and draws and i beat a lot of draws.

2. not sure about this. i think just cause he leads out flop doesn't mean he's going to auto barrel turn since he knows i'm the pre flop raiser. i think what he does on turn drastically depends on who calls flop (i.e. if i fold to his flop lead and btn calls i think he would barrel a lot more turns whereas he might not against the pre flop raiser)

3. ya i agree there are more draws in his flop leading range and i beat a lot of them so what does a flop raise accomplish? i don't think on this board there is much FE if i raise a flop lead.

pre is obv super dependent on the btn+blinds, but i would default to folding this esp since you havent indicated that any of these players are particularly bad

agree with calling being the worst option on the flop, mostly bc of what 663366 has said. just being ahead of his draws at the moment isnt really tremendously important because we are going to reach showdown and win so rarely, so we dont get to realize our full equity advantage vs that part of his range. another thing that i dont think has been mentioned is that there is still a player left to act behind us, which only exacerbates the above problem/decreases our calling ev. another minor point is that with 53 specifically, when we spike 2p ott (like what happened), 67/A2dd improve to straights, and some of his other draws may pick up some equity as well, so even our "good" turn cards are mitigated a bit.

as played id probably fold river, but it seems reasonably close vs an unknown possible aggro/spot (most of the decision is based on how likely/true this is). its kind of weird that his bet size as % of pot increased on the turn, and if we think this means that his river value range is limited to those hands that improved on the turn specifically, then his value:bluff ratio is much more favorable to us, but if you havent seen him do anything noteworthy/outrageous in the 30 mins youve played with him then im not sure its the best assumption that hes just blasting off with a bunch of random xxdd hands (i know 30 mins lolsample, but if he was some huge whale its likely we would have gotten some hint of that in the first 30 mins, so this at least provides us with some evidence which makes it less likely he falls into this category).

i would only open this hand pre against a specific lineup behind me. and that type of player i'm hoping for is not also the type i'm probably floating this flop with.

i think river is pretty close and you're just gonna have to go with ur read at the table - that is, with the info given here, i dont think it matters much in terms of ev - so i guess if you don't mind the variance prolly say call and be sure to show your hand to the table to get future action?

I really like this response and actually couldn't agree more.

I'd typically agree to be hyper cognizant of players to act behind you regarding their tendencies when deciding on a given course of action. However when it's folded to me in the CO and I have what I consider a playable hand*, I'm really only concerned with the BTN, as he's the only player that can alter absolute position moving forward. Otherwise, I'd just make additional adjustments as needed in response to the blinds reaction to my aggression.

Don't underestimate the power of the CO.

*I consider a playable hand one that I can confidently play in position for a 3bet with proper stacks (150bb will do), and at least a slight understanding of my opponents tendencies (TAG/LAG, c-bet frequencies, double barrel abilities, etc..). If I don't hold a 'playable hand', it doesn't necessarily dissuade me from opening, it just means I become more weak-tight in response to aggression is all, and use the opportunity to raise /fold as an image adjuster.

As for the flop, keeping initiative is important here (if not vital), since your prospects of improving are marginal (this isn't to say you need to improve), yet your ability to win a hand may stay intact with minimal effort/improvement. You need to hold the option of checking or betting and controlling your river destiny (this is the power of position after all, so use it). Otherwise, you find yourself calling flop to fold to turn action, or just calling off and hoping your 'read' is right. Both prospect don't feel like sound poker to me.

Raising the flop also disguises your hand so you maintain the ability to keep your range as wide as can be, and allows yourself to represent a multitude of hands you'd otherwise be unable to, had you given up control. And given your absolute strength, you'd really appreciate that latitude as the hand progresses (even if you don't necessarily need to capitalize on it) for numerous reasons that even transcend this hand.

Lastly, the cards that benefit you also make for scare cards on either end which commonly will freeze/kill action. Had the flop had more money dumped into it, these same cards hold the opposite effect with stacks given and action taken, yielding a much more desirable result at your juncture.

I don't mind pre if you have a sizable post-flop advantage over the people left to act. I like the flop call. Turn might be a raise/fold depending on your image and game flow and if you have the nuts in your perceived range; calling seems like the default play though against an unknown who might ship light. River seems like a call based on him not repping anything lol, though I don't expect live villains to make much sense with their lines or sizing, and I don't see a lot of bluffing big on the river in general.

What was the outcome if you don't mind?

this advice is awesome for 2008, but I think we should strive to do better in 2015. you don't choose hands to vipip based on some qualitative measure of "playability", you choose them based on an understanding of game theory decision trees. I think this forum can do a lot better

^ yup

Idk, maybe the person who built it deserves a tad more respect than that...

And fwiw to say "pre is real bad" is pretty 2011 imo. Based on what is it real bad? Do we know hero isn't good/creative post flop? Do we know button isn't a nit? If we don't know these things then we cannot accurately say that. And if hero happens to be good and button happens to be a nit, then not opening this hand from the co is just lazy, like not picking up a quarter in the street when you walk by it.

I choose to play this hand because I am in the CO, first and foremost. And this reason is based off an understanding of "game theory decision trees" and how to best exploit my opponents using position and aggression.

Seeing as how your first post said to 'fold pre', and 'pre is real bad', do you assume this hand can not profitably be played from the CO when all fold to you? Is there a measure in which you believe opening from this position? Are you implying game theory begins and ends at a singular decision point?

I obviously disagree (under certain circumstances). And given that I believe it to be profitable by opening from this position is relevant yet other variables make it cloudy, I use playability* as a sort of barometer for when I feel I can navigate the waters safely.

I specifically mentioned knowing the motives of the BTN as an integral decision point since he is the only one who can alter our absolute position. If I didn't have a handle on the blinds tendencies, it wouldn't be the end of the world as I have plenty of advantages on my side to profitably continue.

If you take issue my use of asterisk and term 'playability' it was only my attempt to clarify further action if faced with immediate aggression. And specifying stacks as a reason for said action, I'd argue again, this falls under the umbrella of game theory decision making in regards to how profitable or catastrophic continuing under said circumstances may be.

Please clarify where I (and the forum?) can do better, so I can. Especially under the guise of 'fold pre'...'pre is real bad'

I think it's a fold not only because he has a lot of 7s in his range (especially if he is Aggressive) but mainly because that is a massive river bet and it is always a near nut hand in this game.

sure. lets say we decide to open 53s and choose to open a contiguous range (meaning we don't do things like open 53s and fold much better hands like K5s or A3o). this implies at bare minimum an opening range of something like this.

22+ A2+ K5s+ K9o+ Q9o+ Q8s J9o+ T9o 98o J7s+ 97s+ 86s+ 75s+ 64s+ 53s+ 43s. which is about ~39%.

if we are opening this frequency, it allows the btn, sb, and bb to exploit us by 3b-ing a lot. when we get called, we have a hand with terrible equity vs almost all hands. furthermore, one gappers are a ton worse than connectors, using flopzilla can help with this.

(aside- one of the biggest leaks in the average winning live players pf game I have noticed is treating 1 gappers the same as connectors)

this is intuitively obvious to me, especially considering we are choosing a large open size of 35, laying ourselves a price of 35 to win 15. if instead we choose a smaller open of say 25, then its a bit better, but still too wide.

I don't really want to write an essay here in the comments explaining preflop strategy, but the way that I think about poker these days comes mostly from Matt Janda's Applications of NLHE and doing work away from the table with CREV. (and watching sauce vids)

-------

here's what I mean by the forum can do better. in the modern age, we have a lot of tools that we can use to mathematically analyze poker hands. literal nobody on the forum does this. I understand winrates in live poker are so massive and as such almost no pros do sims away from the table, but I think that when we are analyzing hands vs people who we perceive to be competent we should actually try to look for a balanced/GTO approach to hands.

regarding this pre spot specifically, we have no reason to believe that the villains behind us are making massive errors pre, which is the only reason I would open a hand as truly awful as 53s. moreover, if I was going to open it, it would be to 25 or 20 and only because I expect villains behind to overfold an absurd amount

I think this thread would basically be my rebuttal to your issues with my position.

As for people not utilizing the math tools around them to become better players, I agree. I do not however, agree with how to properly employ our new found knowledge on bettering ourselves in a live poker setting.

Your point on bet sizing when we do open is very valid and holds plenty of merit.

read the posts you made in your thread, but it doesn't really change the fact that 53s is complete garbage.

sure we can make large deviations from whatever a GTO opening range is for a certain betsize for a certain position, but 53s is just so far outside the realm of playable.

In your post you talk about factors like skill edge, exploiting certain boards, etc etc, all that really means is that we play better poker than our opponents postflop.

I don't think that being a much better player than our opponents postflop is sufficient to compensate us for spotting them a huge pf equity advantage and the fact that we have to fold to 3bets a ton using a 40%+ opening strat