2/5. Effective stacks 850. Vs in order: gambler, calling station, recreational, pro. Today is hero’s first at 2/5, and he got good cards. In the past two orbits, he three-bet in the blinds, once too much with AKs, the other about right with KK. Both times everyone folded.

OTTH

Gambler UTG opens to 15. Calling station, recreational, and pro on the button call. Hero with AA in the SB raises to 75, three green chips. Everyone folds. Should hero show?

No. Why would you?

I was hoping posters would say why or why not.

The default is to never show, so I consider the burden of proof to be on people who think we should show.

Personally I would never show both cards unless my opponents paid to see them.

at live poker its kidna rare for people to fold to a 3!, and the real reason you 3! Light is because you can profit off their fit or fold postflop mentality, and you set yourself up nicely for when you do get AA KK type hands.

You dont want to show, because its actuallt a benefit for people to think youre getting out of line with your 3 bets, you hit AA agan and stack someone who overadjusted. If you coulf magically only bet TT+ AQ+ and have people think youre 3 betting a 30% range, you would.

If i HAD to show a 3 bet, id show the bottom of my range, but the best option is for them to simply not know your range.

The other day my first 3 bet which was with K2s got to showdown, suffice it to say i tightened my 3 betting range after showing that

show when you 3b with A3s

Absolutely not. You want them to wonder if you 3bet light not show them the nuts so they know they made a correct fold.

No reason to show. Best to give as little info as possible.

If I was hypothetically forced to show anything however, it would be bluffs and not nuts. I would rather increase the likelihood of my value getting paid off than fold equity on future bluffs. Probably the opposite is true for tournaments.

Depends on how I think my opponents are playing, how I think they perceive me, and what I want to accomplish.

If I think my opponents are over-folding when I 3B from the blinds, I might show AA to reinforce that tendency, so that I can widen my 3B'ing range without hurting my TAG table image.

If I think my opponents are likely to call my 3B's too wide, but they all just happened to fold this time, most likely with total garbage, I might show AA to let them know I'm not always getting out of line, and that my 3B'ing range from the blinds may be stronger than they realize.

Generally, my feeling is that we don't want to play too many 3B pots from OOP, so my preference is for opponents to over-fold when I'm playing my entire range as a 3B or fold from the SB. Showing down a strong hand reinforces our TAG image. It's the only way to get any value from a big hand when our opponents all fold.

I also don't think it gives away too much info if we show AA. Of course we're going to raise when we have AA. I think it's worse to show we 3B with a weaker hand, because that lets our opponents know we're capable of 3B'ing light from OOP.

Seems to be a silly question.

I would focus on your 3bet squeeze sizing. Based off $850 effective stacks at 2/5 NL, my standard 3bet squeeze sizing here OOP from the blinds with AA would be $100.

$75 is too small unless you had some really good reasons for going so small.

They know anyways so what are you getting from showing?

Results: Hero showed. Everyone oohed and ahed.

Would you believe me nonetheless that my AA here was the first time I showed in two years? It was a spew, I just couldn’t help myself, “it just happened.”

At the time I justified it telling myself I raised too much with KK and a little too much with AKs in the previous orbits in the blind. I wanted to show that when I bet the lesser amount — 3bet 3x plus calls hand—AA is in my range.

Thanks for humiliating me once again on 2+2.