98 is the worst hand vs his range. Can't believe someone even thinks that.

This thread shows how many people have leaks who are "solid" at poker.

Its a fold AINEC

Check the percentages on flopping trips,2pair,straight, flush and FH. If that's not enough clarity, use pot odds.

I would definitely fold QJo always here. A5s is probably slightly better than T9s against a 70 year old OMC because Villain is probably not 3-betting AK. By using the fact that Villain probably does not have AK in his range, we can go for 2+ streets of thin value with A5s on Axx boards.

If this particular OMC is capable of 3-betting AK, then T9s is slightly better than A5s.

FWIW, the odds are about 5.6% to flop 2pair+. Add the odds are about 6.9% to flop a 12+out draw that can be played profitably post-flop.

Basically, we are only going to be in an extremely profitable situation about 5% of the time (made hand versus a tight range. About 7% of the time, we will have a somewhat profitable situation where we have a 12+out draw. The other 88% of the time, we probably need to check/fold a lot on the flop.

Thanks you just clarified my point.

Awesome.

No, he just clarified the potential value of suited connectors, he didn't clarify anything about 98s vs t9 suited. You're taking his post further than he did.

Clearly drawing in 3bet pots should be a crime

What did you miss?

Huh? Yes he did prove his point. Mathematically your just not going to flop well enough to win. Thus making you a loser over 85% of that time. And illustrating how its a leak. This villain type is never making this re raise with 98 suited so its a moot point against that unlikely hand.

Grunching ...

I'd fold. Vs. this type of opponent, I set a minimum of 30x along with a > 50/50 shot of doubling based on reads and/or some history. OOP is a huge obstacle in creating a solid plan based on picking up equity, and potentially making a play on the turn. Really need position.

Also, 109s is in my UTG range. I will 4bet my entire UTG range if game flow allows me to.

4bet/fold calling is a leak.

In position I am calling, OOP I am folding

98 is one of the best possible hands against AA, is what my post was. If we are getting technical it is actually 56, but that is besides the point.

What everyone is failing to see, is the pot odds, and the extreme description of the situation. Yes, I am folding 109 suited 70% of the time to a 3bet ) (it is in my 4 bet range depending on table dynamics), but against said villain where it is clear he has >KK, and getting 2.5:1 odds with 30x behind, I'm calling. IF I know he will stack off with an overpair, which 80% of the OMC villains I play with will 100% of the time.

We mash the flop 10% of the time. 1 in 9 times we commit $30 and are done, that is -$270. We have to know to be done, no following weak draws, etc. The 10th time we stack villain 80% of the time, that'd be +$720. In or out of position it doesn't matter against extreme example as I took it.

To reiterate, I'm folding 109 suited to a 3bet most of the time out of postion, in postition I'd probably see a flop but again table dynamic dependent. Against said villain described in example, I'm calling almost 100% of the time.

This is incorrect analysis on risk versus reward.

First off, you are only going to flop 2pair+ 5.6% of the time, not 10% of the time. So your gin hand would only come 1 out of 20 hands instead of your mistaken 1 out of 10 hands. That means your downside is -$570 of -$30 over 19 hands, not -$270 over 9 hands as you suggest.

Most importantly, flopping 2 pair+ doesn't guarantee that we will win. An overpair has 25% equity when we flop two pair on a ragged board. An overpair with a FD redraw has 32% equity against a flopped flush. This is the reason why pocket pairs are better for cracking tight ranges because Villain can only draw to 2 outs when we flop a set on him.

Even if Villain stacks off 80% of the time post-flop, we are not going to win an average of +$720. Because of Villain's suck out equity, WE will occasionally get stacked INSTEAD OF Villain. Realistically, our upside is probably more like +$500.

Of course, I didn't account for times when we can continue profitably with a draw post flop. But, as I mentioned before, it is hard to play a draw OOP profitably without having fold equity on our side.

grunch:

I like calling with PP better than a SC here for a few reasons

-often these guys are going to be impossible to semi bluff and alot of the value from playing these types of hands comes in FE when we flop a strong draw.

-some of these nitty old guys shut down when flush is obvious cutting down on potential value postflop

-when we make one pair hands they are prob never going to be good

I think OOP I am just mucking here unless we are deeper or IP
small PP I might call.

Never folding a PP to a 'min 3bet'

Ironically, having a maniacal image means we can call here profitably because we always have great implied odds.

So, if we want to be able to call here, we should play hyper-LAG in deep games. It ends being correct to call a lot of 3-bets from tight 3-bettors if they always stack off against our maniac image.

By the same token, we should accept that playing tight and solid prevents us from making these speculative calls against tight 3-bet ranges profitably because we aren't getting paid off often enough when we make a gin hand.

Just a regular minraise? What about 2.5 or 3x?

Very interesting, I just hate playing oop in 3bet pots. If the guy can fold to donks and maybe doubles I'm will never call unless in position.

Ok, I probably shouldn't say never...

...against this type of villain, never!

They are just so easy to play. Now 3x or bigger, I'm folding most of the time.