V1 is opening and 3-betting a very wide range pre. After that, he plays surprisingly very straight forward almost to the point of being fit or fold. His stack is 3k.

V2 is 2-3 recreational player playing up today I'm told by a reg. He is honestly one of the worst poker players I have ever seen and has bought in and stacked off 300 (the minimum) three or four times. He just went to the cage and came back with 1k (the maximum) though. He is sticky pre, raise/folds bluffcatchers post, betsizes very erratically, and just does a lot of stuff that makes you think he has played nlhe less than 5 times in his life. His stack is 1040.

Hero is "the aggressive guy" at the table. He hasn't turned over a winner in the three hours the game has been going (despite playing a ton of hands) and has only showndown one hand: 42o when he got it in and lost for stacks against KQ on K42. He hasn't shown any signs of tilt or any bluffs, just a lot of small ball aggression, taking down a bunch of small pots uncontested. He has 2k.

Gameflow: it's a day game that is currently playing very soft, tranquil, small and passive. Hero has been raising and c-betting a lot as mentioned, but usually in hu pots and the c-bet is usually like 45 dollars or something.

P- V1 opens to 50 in the hijack, V2 flats in the SB, hero makes it 200 in the bb with AKo. V1 folds and V2 tanks for a while and actually gets ready to muck his hand a couple times before finally calling.

F- (450) JT3r. V2 checks, hero asks for a count (840) and calmly ships.

Thoughts?

I'm on my phone, so just a couple of quick thoughts:

It seems to me that shipping let's him off the hook in regards to decision making..sort of like letting a bad player play perfect in this spot...I could be totally off but it seems that if he's the player you describe he will call this shove with any piece of the flop or draws he may have...

As for best line id probably make a smallish cbet and depending on how he responds and the turn card may fire a 2nd time

PF is fine. I think shipping flop is bad.

I'm not exactly sure what this villain thinks in his head when he is facing this bet. But this bet looks like AK or QQ.

I would bet 300 here and see what he does. I think it's a lot better than shipping 840.

I would prefer a slightly larger 3-bet to like 225-250, to avoid these sort of awkward situations. As played, I think shipping is fine. I think he folds at least 60% of the time, and the other 40 we have between 4 and 10 outs, and a small possibility of actually having the best hand. So I believe shove is a profitable play.

Just because you show no signs of tilt doesn't mean it doesn't exist....at least in your opponents minds. And at the end of the day, isn't that what really matters when assessing a situation/executing a plan? If the seed is planted that you maayyy be tilting (here, you getting stacked and/or bleeding off c-bets repeatedly), then it can't be overlooked/discounted when dissecting what your opponent thinks of you, your bet, your bet sizing, your line, your timing, etc.., and how it relates to you accomplishing your goals.

Obviously the adjustment made in metagame spots is to exploit your opponents tendencies of overcompensation. The heart of finding out the threshold of this adjustment is properly gauging the amount of metagame (in this case, tilt) infused into the current (and past) dynamic and its impact on fundamental play. If its impact (the altering of calling/folding ranges), does not affect the +/-EV in any measurable way then it (tilt) can be discounted almost completely**.

**1) The removal/addition of just a small portion of our opponents range may not be enough to solicit wholesale change in our approach of maximization as it pertains to +/-EV. 2) I say 'almost' because even in the times the current hand is not affected does not mean that long term consideration should not be taken into account.

Now I only mention all of this because too often we focus on what we feel our perceived image is and disregard what our opponents thinks it should be....and how they subsequently act because of it. When making a 'theatrical' play (a play I'd consider out of the norm, like shoving for 2x the pot), the barometer of this dynamic can weigh heavily on its ability, or inability to go as planned (based on ones motives and our opponents calling/folding ranges as it relates to those motives).

Out of the box plays are just too reliant on variables that don't translate so well on paper and thus create answers like "it depends", or in my case long diatribes circling the wagon. You just aren't going to receive an answer with the amount of conviction you're searching for here. From a fundamental approach, figure out the most narrow range that your hand would be neutral EV against if called, then torque this range as it fluctuates with the variables at hand.

I smiled throughout reading this. Thanks for the post. What's your line in my spot?

Well, I think my action would be predicated on my opponents tendencies and based primarily how he reacts to big bets, overbets, all-ins, and how they come about. Does he have yet another buyin to play if he loses? Does he interpret an overshove as a bully mechanism? Is he tilted to the point of just not caring?

I have no issue with your line whatsoever if these questions meet your standards of adequate fulfillment. I am reminded of this thread when discussing the art of going all-in/putting somebody else all in, and what it represents/how it is perceived (I realize that the example shown is a much smaller game but the underlying concept can translate).

I will say that I can't see this shove being too far bad if it in fact even is. You have plenty of equity when behind, could very well be ahead, and the pressure of knocking him out of the game may be just the threat you need to actually make the 'bluff' in this 'semi-bluff' work. The fact that the pot and followup bet are not overwhelmingly deep also eases the pain of any miscalculations you may have made when deciphering your best route.

There is always the battle in deciding between finesse and brute force and figuring out which one works best where. The better players choose the right battles...

probably just crai here, unless you think he checks back mid pairs. But he sounds like the type to b/f them on this flop.

I guess I don't understand the need to push here. Yes we have decent equity against his 1 pair hands if he calls, but other than AJ or AT, he probably mucks most of those. So, it seems to me that a more standard flop bet (say $225 or so) might accomplish the same thing and we won't lose an additional $750 when he has us crushed (set, JT).

I am interested to hear more from you as to why you chose to ship here as I don't think it is necessary against "the worst player you have ever seen."

I imagine Mikes thinking here is that any bet will be viewed by his opponent as being put to a decision for his stack and thus go into fold/shove mode. The times he folds is inconsequential since we achieve our goal of bluffing (though probably with the best hand), yet the times he shoves we face a serious dilemma given our actual equity in this hand as it relates to the size of the pot/bet faced, our opponents tendencies/frame of mind, and his range in this spot on that board (plenty of weaker semi-bluffing hands).

Seems like the classic semi-bluff spot where a shove gives us two chances to win whereas a c/c gives us one. And given the fact that our opponent could easily be semi-bluffing himself on a board like this (again, given all info provided) makes a c/f feel gross. Had stacks been slightly deeper I would probably prefer a more "standard" sized bet or even a c/r shove.

The fact that this player is "the worst player you have ever seen" does not necessarily translate into not being bluffable. Remember, he is already stuck a ton and playing higher then he normally does. He may very well be approaching his threshold for allowable recklessness (though when people tilt that threshold can easily be forgotten/dismissed) and succumb to this bet which threatens the rest of his play for the day. Now I/we weren't there so we can't be sure this was the dynamic in place for this bet to be appropriate, but I have to assume this was the read for this flop shove to be executed here.

I think shipping is fine vs this player - I mean our goal OTF is just to get him to fold better and there's no plan to fold to a jam, so it comes down to if potting it or jamming has a higher fold %

Yeah I raise little more pre and shove flop for what it's worth.

Sorry for sleeping this thread... I shipped and he tanked forever and then called with KJo for the double up. I dont care about the results, but wanted confirmation that sending it in on the flop was the beat play. thx for the feedback gentlemen.

ya for sure...before reading the results, i was gonna say its difficult for him to call with kj/aj type hands in this spot. if hes a bad as you say he can reasonably flat u pre and then fold most hands to that bet(even when he does connect) and then just assume by your play hes making a hero fold with tp bc "u MUST have an overpair".

against a better player i make a smaller sized cbet or even c back the flop<i think more likely

I guess I don't see what a ship accomplishes that a normal 2/3-3/4 cbet doesn't. Does he ever bluff check-raise here? (Methinks no). Does he ever fold better to a ship that he wouldn't fold to a cbet? (maybe small and middle pairs). Does he fold worse to a ship that he would call a cbet? (maybe gutshots and ace-high). With bad players there are easier ways to have them make mistakes than shipping here imo.

Sweet screen name btw.

when someone is tilting or stuck tons of money in a live game....bluffing him or trying to make him a fold a pair is never a good option....

i just think it puts u in a gross spot when you put 300 in and then he ships and more than likely your calling anyway with overs/a gutshot/odds...i think you may get a few more folds shipping...even a few more in this kinda spot i think is worth it