This is a vastly different spot. It's three way and we're not last to act. We can't flat pre because it invites the button in and makes hand much more difficult to play. It's also a little deeper where a 5 bet is less than 25% of effective stacks. There's simply no way to click back to $400 and fold for $800 more.

I disagree about not being able to fold to a 6! jam.

5! fold saves you money in these spots by not forcing you to stack off post-flop when you don’t flop a set.

I thought we were last to act.
we raised MP"s 25.
Admittedly MP seems to have vaporized in the hand description.
I don't like just smooth calling pre.
now our dream flop has become so much more difficult to play.

I dont agree with this, on several levels.

Livepoker gives us incredible and rare opportunites to play extremely unbalanced,making extremely exploitative plays due to the nature of livepoker. Due to how absurdly unbalanced the vast majority of our opponents is playing,we can range them more accurate than we should have been able to if they was playing more balanced (but fact is they are not). It would be stupid from an EV point of view to not take advantage of these possibilities to the max.

Wich in the next step makes applying GTO based theory far from optimal. If we can avoid losing our 240 BB stack here to a very very likely AA, that is insane regarding the impact it will have on our winrate and edge in the game. Preflop tendencies regarding 3 and 4 betting is an area that most live villains is _extremely_ predictable( same as when check-raising the turn is usually very nutted),as such we should be taking advantage of this knowledge.

Like just start to ask yourself some basic questions to start off a train of thought, couple that comes to mind:

1) Lets say you go and play 100 hours of 2/5, how often will you likely even see a described tight player cold 4 bet from the blinds during that timespan? Regarding how few times that will happen, what does that says about his likely range?

2) How often during that timespan will it occur that a tight villain is cold 4 betting from the blinds 240 BB deep AND fire out 400 into 500 pot C bet after getting called pre without having the stones?

2) How often during that timespan will it occur that a tight villain is cold 4 betting from the blinds 240 BB deep AND fire out 400 into 500 pot C bet after getting called pre without having the stones?[/QUOTE]

for balance maybe like 99.9% of the time.

for me this hand all boils down to pre.
either raise again pre or muck this hand and mutter I just folded KK.

I’m going to revisit this hand.

1) Is V a thinking player that pays attention to players at the table?

2) What’s your range for 3betting in that spot?

3) Is it possible (read something about a K9 hand) that V recently either
a)Feeling lucky today?
b)Recently got dumped?
c) Sick of your ****?

At this point in the hand I just raise it all in. He could have AA (6 combos) > you still have 8%. He could have QQ (6 combos) > you have 92%, OR he could have a combo of KK (1 combo), if you have the diamond you’ll have a slight advantage.

The above is math based thinking assuming the opponent is robotic and doesn’t do random **** like raise K9o over limpers. I call and hope V is wide or spazzy due to emotional/illogical reasons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't think we can completely rule out AQ of diamonds from villain's range (given the K9 move) - His 4-bet could have been to try to win pot uncontested (and figures he blocks AA and AK) - On the flop, besides having a good draw, he could put hero on KK given hero didn't re-raise (and V blocks AA and QQ) and figure he can represent AA too.

Yeah, re AllTheCheese's post, I feel like we have quite different interpretations of OP's phrase "tight regular". I basically interpret this as "ABC nitty guy", so re ATC's last sentence "It's just burning money if the reg is balancing at all", the idea that a guy described as a "tight regular" is capable of "balancing" is absurd to me.

From a tight player, cold 4bets (of not even 3x, he's going 150 more over 90) this deep OOP against a 3better without image problems are just AA/KK, that's the reality. I feel like everyone ITT actually knows that but most people don't want to act on it. Like Petrucci said, really brutally exploitative play is where the money is at LLSNL. And the thing is, when you exploit in a spot like this, you don't have to be right all the time. People have this attitude where if there's any chance whatsoever that he can have a hand other than AA/KK, then oh well, what can you do, gotta toss 240BB in. But let's say I'm only right about that 50% of the time and the other 50% this guy can have { QQ+, AK }. Then stacking off on this flop is still only breakeven overall. And I don't think I'm wrong about his range here anything like 50% of the time.

This guy is not your standard tight dbag that limp calls and never 3 bets and only stacks off with the nuts. Everyone seems to be ignoring the K9 iso hand and post flop result. Granted it doesn't mean he'll just go ham with 99 and cold 4 the sb. But it will be an argument for him being able to be just wide enough to not fold here.

Exactly. The little information we have would lead us to believe that he is playing a solid game, not a nitrock style.

And as I have pointed out many times here, when a player is making aggressive plays at you, it becomes more likely that the player is aggressive generally.

Like if 20% of regs who play K9s the way Villain did will make this play with AK, then the likelihood you're up against a player who can have AK given the action so far is not 20%, but way more.

Yeah this is what I was saying on the 1st page, the K9 hand is the only real info we have to go on, and my opinion is the way that hand was played makes him seem more "competent TAG" than "tight" and therefore capable of squeezing JJ, AQs+ potentially.

Do we have any idea about how villain perceives our image? You mention our image is 'clean tight' so could he perceive us as weak/nitty and is maybe trying to push us off the flop? (since our pf range looks fairly capped after flatting his cold4)

Do we have even a vague idea of what his 3b/4b tendencies are pre? (I'm guessing we must not, otherwise that info would have been included)

I don't think we can fold all of our KK combos here, if we can even fold any of them. If we are going to pick combos to fold, then we should pick the ones that contain Kd. We don't want to block AdKd. I know that is only one combo, but we have to pick our calling range somehow.

As for the rest of the hand, I like the 4bet flat. I think a 5bet is going to fold out too many of the hands that you have crushed. On the flop, i really don't think we have any choice but to call. I don't like raising or folding.

If you aren't going to call, can you tell me what you calling range is on this flop?

Hands that can beat AA: because i think that hand is making up the vast majority of villains range at this point.

Against that narrow of a range, i dont need a "callingrange". I pretty much know my opponents cards (sure he can show up with QQ or spazz like 10 percent of the time but you get the point), wich allows me to play close to perfect.

Yeah dude, we get it. No one ever 4bets with worse than KK+ in 2018. Cool story. Checks out. The fact that the vast majority of the players itf would 4bet AK in Villain's spot and cbet the flop is just an anomaly. IRL, even though those 2p2ers play IRL, no one does that.

This is an interesting situation. Yes if we have the K we block AK, but also, if we have the K we have a bit of extra equity vs AA without a diamond (and freerolling the other KK). I'm not sure which side is more important in considering which KKs to fold if we decide we should fold some.

You sound like a guy who have ran out of arguments, and have to derail the discussion with ridicilous statements,strawmen arguments, and trying to make fun of me instead. Pretty low standard to be honest.

I've already made the argument why Hero shouldn't fold. It is you who has no argument. Your posting in this thread boils down to "I know he has AA, so I fold." There is no logic to refute there.

Yeah, i noticed that you thought about the Kd from the other direction. Very interesting. I don't know if i am right, but in this situation, i would prefer not to have the Kd. In my opinion, folding any KK combo in this spot is bad, so what the hell do i know.

Fair enough, but if that is your line of thinking, then that means you should fold preflop. You don't have odds to set mine with KK here.

No it doesent, because i dont know what is happenning on the flop when i make the choice preflop. I am not able to be confident enough to fold KK preflop in position (even though alarmbells is going off in my head already when facing the cold 4 bet from a tight non out of line player), but i am however confident enough to do it when i get additional info postflop dicatating its the correct play- and getting to see the flop, if villain checks or bets, if he bets how much and so forth.

For example his huge flop C-bet i this hand (400 into 500), is giving me the chance to eliminate pretty much all AK combos from his range. Huge information of course.

Again, there is no logic to this statement. Just your feeling that it must be the case.

A wild notion: he may be betting big as a bluff to REPRESENT a big hand.

If someone posted this hand as the villain and AA then not one person would say bomb it for 400 here. It's a terrible size for value but an amazing size for bluffs (AK) if so many people are just mucking klangs so easily.

No, experience and observation over thousands of hours at various LLSNL games.

You can choose to ignore it if you want, but in LLSNL i believe we can range people that accurately in spots like this, and simply avoid going broke 240 BB deep with KK.

Yes sure, in theory a random villain can cold 4 bet here with anything and blasts 90 percent pot C bet to "represent a big hand", but in reality that is happenning so damn infrequently that we are burning money going broke here. What you see is what you usually get.

Same thing as people in theory can easily exploit me for folding too much to 3 and 4 bets because i know their ranges is nutted, but are they doing so in reality? No. Thats the beauty of livepoker, predictable patterns that repeats itself over and over again. And if they do starts to exploit me, i will be aware of it pretty quickly cause i pay attention and readjust properly.

^I can see this side of the argument, and agree to an certain extent that he is pretty highly weighted towards AA but it seems like putting him on exactly one hand seems a bit drastic based on only the k9 hand (that wasn't all that tight imo), and his 4b range should be a little bit wider unless we're positive he's a nit.

I agree that huge c bets are usually for max value, but not 100% of the time. Some percentage of the field will rip a larger sized cbet bluff to try to take it down on the flop, at least in my games. Especially since we flatted pre and we are underrepped, he could even potentially think he is value betting QQ against AK/JJ, or just be trying to make us fold out our pf flatting range. With AA wouldn't a more reasonable flop line be to check to induce bets from our overpairs?


I feel like this spot would be a ton easier with a bit more history. With the limited history its a gross one, but I think we have to go with it.

@Petrucci: Your experience is not representative of mine. There are of course players you can identify who only 4bet KK+ even against an LP 3bet, but that is not my general population read on TAG regs. Preflop, I would put QQ,AK at minimum 75% weight in his range.

When you say "in theory a random Villain can cold 4bet here with anything and blast cbet," that is a distortion of the argument. In PRACTICE, he could have anything. Surely someone in history has 4bet 27o in his exact spot. In THEORY, he should have some carefully selected bluffs. It is possible he is thinking in this theoretically sound way - for example if Villain was me - but his thought process doesn't need to be deeper than "I have AK, so he probably doesn't have KK+. Let me represent KK+."