I'd avoid 3b an UTG open 4x sizing a lot unless I had a big ace - perhaps something like this.



Flop looks fine, perhaps $40 bet is better

Turn i'm not betting that turn with any of my hands. I'm looking to check call or check raise it. I can't see an overbet ever be good here as we will never have the nuts

Why is 65s in there as opposed to 54s 76s and so on?! Is it blocking a5s?

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk

Preflop depends on the player especially in a live game where players are very bad/unbalanced. If he opens wide and calls most 3bs then you should 3b, if he opens wide and folds to most 3bs then you should call, if he's very tight calling is better. I don't think this is a solver spot at all.

It is unlikely you have the nuts, but you could have a set of aces. You would have to be 3!ing light to have a straight, set, or two pair. So the only hand that is a value 3! preflop and a value overbet is AA. I am not sure whether to bet or check the turn, but the overbet is bad.

You come out the gate swinging and then get mad when he wont engage lmao. NONSENSE! BLINDLY FOLLOWING THE BOOK!!! Relax man

Its this simple, from a theoretical standpoint the advantage of a calling range is due to calling when behind because of pot odds/protecting against blind steals, (every hand in your range wont necessarily be behind, because of balance, but your range is going to be behind theirs). The advantage of a calling range basically goes away when raises are 7x, because the pot odds are almost not a factor anymore, so its a more effectively strategy to 3 bet a linear range that has a range advantage against Vs range.

3b or fold strategy is not an effective strategy facing a 2-3x raise (maybe not even a 4x raise), or (especially) in games with antes. Dumbo didnt post the stakes but i assume this is $2/5 or $5/10 so as someone who basically plays 3b or fold myself at 1/3, i wouldnt personally recommend a 3b or fold strat vs a 2x-4x raise.

3b or fold is recommended for SB even facing a 2x raise from a gto perspective but this is because of wide squeezing factors that arent realistic to how live plays.

Any time you see stuff like this its mostly irrelevant stuff about board coverage, and really niche things like that it can stack A5 on 234 board or whatever. It could be an important distinction, but its probably well beyond anything we need to worry ourselves with haha.

Middling SC's from 65s to 87s have the best equity against the biggest PP's.

65s in particular has good properties in that it plays well against A5s, another hand solvers like to play aggressively, because it can make higher straights.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

it's unlikely ever dominated so the outs are clean and you are supposed to have 1 bluff for every value hand so 65s is the best bluff. The 65s is rarely rolled so I would just not even use it especially in a high rake environment. I wouldn't start 3b 65s unless you really know what you're doing on all boards because you can get yourself into trouble. Playing GTO against fish will win you money, but you probably won't maximize your win rate and have bigger swings. I'd just stick to very good hands until you start playing against people who understand this stuff more. You can play pretty straight forward and win 10bb an hour at low stakes. 3b 65s will just add more variance which is fine if you like bigger swings.

Just so you know - 54s is in there as well, but about 3% of the time.



You're going to need strong hands to check bad turns, so AA would be the best candidate. Otherwise we never have a strong hand when we check since we will check so many on this turn.


You can always adjust a players range to find the optimal 3b/call/fold strategy. Unfortunately that takes a lot of work, and most people won't put the time in to do it. Vs most players I just use the basic solver and it works for me. It's generally best to keep the pot smaller out of position when really deep especially if you are going to make mistakes post flop.

Whatever the 3! range, the overbet makes no sense, as you are representing a narrow range that it is unlikely you 3! an UTG raiser with. Not sure if he has many weak aces after the preflop action, so mostly targeting pps that you don't need to overbet to get to fold. Seems like an 80% pot bet accomplishes about the same thing and more plausibly represents AA/AK/AQ. Maybe misusing solver plays of overbetting that only work in specific situations.

When he shoves, it seems likely he has AA/AK. You can't call, partly because your flush outs that pair the board may not be good.

Yeah makes sense was just surprised how prominent exactly this hand was and must be related to A5 and A6 as you guys say and perhaps unblocking some hands like 77 88 that we hope to fold out. Interesting to see often what the solver says and try to decode the logic behind it.

You actually only want 1 bluff per value hand if your raise size is infinitely larger than the pot. For a pot size raise you need one bluff per 2 value hands to make an opponent who can only beat a bluff indifferent to calling and folding ( minimax theorem). Obviously this can only be appropriate pre flop

Sent from my Mi 9T using Tapatalk