It's overbluffing with no equity after the turn and no blockers to the hands represented. You may get away with it a a few times, but when people get a whiff of what you are doing, you are going to get called a lot.

I also think people have a tendency to overcall in some spots. Like, if if let's say the flush draw bricked, people might call with pairs like Tens because they think you are jamming the busted draw.

Well, if he's raise-calling T8s from MP, then he probably has all the low pairs as well.

he probably does, but you cant just add the extra nutted hands when you expand your range. if you want to look at 200 bb btn call vs sb 3b range, IP has 2p+ 6.2% of the time otf. (ip is pure calling pocket pairs and t8ss pre fwiw so its probably reasonably close to reality).

BTw, when OP is talking about MP, is he referring to the Lojack or HJ?

FWIW, a consistent problem I have with live poker is that thanks to the huge preflop raise sizes and the resulting lower SPRs, I am not sure whether to look at this as a 200BB spot or a 100BB spot.

try to look at it by spr of whatever sim you're looking at i guess. here is sort of non factor because just trying to illustrate how often we (dont) actually have a good hand here otf, but the 200bb spr is 7.2 and the spr in this hand is 8.2 bc of the small 3b size. i do think theres a large practical difference in how people play when they get deeper in absolute bb / $ terms live. like in the sim oop is supposed to be xr / getting it in with overpairs at some frequency and i while i think that happens for 100 bb, i don't think anyone except the very best and very worst do that as you get deeper.

so maybe nodelocked version of whatever spr ur looking at

probably co in terms of actual hand ranges lol

side note but sim doesn't have 100% as an option ott, it uses 125% instead and im inclined to think there's a significant difference in fold equity between potting and overbetting here and overbetting vs equilibrium response. (am not necessarily saying 125% is the size where this happens)

You say “even at equilibrium” as if equilibrium is weaker than V. Villians 3 bets WAY WAY too tight, and his sizing is WAY too small, and his hand is basically face up, resulting in a situation where your range is behind on every single flop because you can profitably call $40 into a $80 pot with a more disguised range.

With a JJ+ AK flop, V should be range betting, but he checked, which is a huge error, and it oughta let you check back your air and 1 pairs and draws to see if you hit, not let you cbet with ****ing air.

Like, if you wanna ask gto, fine. Range lock SB’s 3 betting range and see what gto would do. (I really oughta just buy piosolver myself….)

I think that since we do have the nut advantage here, we can go nuts with overbetting and such, but since we don't have the range advantage, we need to do it at a small frequency.

i don't have pio on this computer and i'm not going to upgrade gtow for one hand that the op doesn't seem particularly interested in learning from, but can you actually show any of this? usually the difference between betting and checking otf is a rounding error for hands as opposed to a huge error, and generally on boards where we're going to struggle with runouts and our unpaired air misses / arent paired we don't really range bet often.

even in a 4b pot (where the spr would be much lower) which should have relatively close ranges in terms of stregnth for oop to what you're talking about, this isn't anywhere close to a range bet. utg btn 4b pot 200bb deep for reference, but also 100bb as well. fwiw overpairs are mixing and the ev difference between small bet and x in the 100bb sim is .05 of a bb in a 41bb pot w aa so somewhere around .1% of the pot.

This is the type of fundamental misapplication of GTO that i keep seeing in this sub. The reason GTO is seeing very small or zero difference in the EV of different lines is not because the lines are actually irrelevant in real poker, its because GTO is facing a balanced range.

Facing an unbalanced range, GTO makes massive errors in certain spots against unbalanced humans, which it perceives as a small winner, or indifferent spots. its unexploitable strategy just means that it makes up for those errors in other spots along the line (in the case of this V, it would make so much money blind stealing and in non 3 bet pots because V is making a big error calling instead of 3 betting with a lot of hands and not pushing hero off his equity with his blind steals and would likely lose money in the rare 3 bet pots due to the strength of the range). It also means that as a hero, you cant simply blindly accept GTO’s answer to a question, because YOUR strategy is unlikely to be unexploitable, meaning thst if you make the same massive errors as GTO against an unbalanced range, and dont make up for it in different lines, youll end up as a big loser, and there are certain lines GTO takes that are very hard for a human to find, because they are unintuitive.

Like, forget GTO and just think about the range of V and hero with your brain. Its not anywhere in the same universe as GTO’s expected range of V, so GTOs recommendation is sort of irrelevant to the question. I think the easiest example of this phenomenon would be if V flopped quad aces here and then turned his AA face up and showed you that your equity was 0%, and then checked to you. Would you still look to GTO and see that the difference in flop lines is a rounding error? Because we arent particularly far off of that OTF.

i'm not really sure what you're saying here. i told you why i think what you said is incorrect re ev differences. i'm open to being wrong but i think outside of a very specific nodelock for ip's postflop tendencies (which you probably aren't going to know vs most people you play with regularly let alone unknowns) that isn't going to be the case. you're not really saying anything or showing any kind of proof for it though which makes it difficult to really respond.

you want to ignore gto because you think no one is balanced but unless you have a very accurate (bordering on clairvoyant) idea of how unknowns approach spots how does that actually help you? i also think you may not understand what unexploitable means

He has AK here a lot, so ??? Also, if he's willing to call a pot sized bet already, the ace doesn't help you. Was he smart enough to hang on?

Somewhat surprised this hand is still being argued over.

Why can't we just call it what it is? OP is a LAG doing what LAGs do, opening wide from MP, and calling a 3B from the SB with a marginal hand, just intending to out-play his opponent post flop and IP, but the board didn't really cooperate, and he ran into the absolute top of V's range, so he went down in flames triple-barreling.

Hero pulled a Mike McDermott - "I had nothing, but he raised and I decided I don't care about the money, I'm just going to out play the guy, I'm going to out play this guy, this hand."

Most of us have done this at least once. I respect the cojones to follow through with the bluff. The reasoning, not so much. But the cojones, yeah, gotta show respect to the man who takes this line, expecting KK/QQ to fold, because eff those hands.

Arguing over whether or not V would be an idiot for calling with KK/QQ when the A hits the river seems like it misses the larger and more simpler lesson to be learned - sometimes it's okay to give up on our bluffs when our opponents don't appear to be in a folding mood.

I laughed so hard with every single line I read here I'm stuck 2.5k right now on a live game but thanks for giving me a smile.

There is a quote that I always say to the table when I make a crazy play: "The objective of poker is to maximize your winnings or maximize your losses".

In this hand I decided to maximize my losses, so we didn't succeeded on the hand, but we fullfilled the fundamental poker objective.

If you live by the sword then you die by the sword.

Please don't let these nits here change you.

Stay gold, Ponyboy.

I like the effort but IMO this was applied in the wrong scenario.

Preflop = perfect.

Flop = whatever but a fork in the road. A small flop bet represents less than we want here. Hands like 6x, 78, and broadway cards with a spade are now in our range, whereas if we check, we are still uncapped and can realize equity AND can still bluff on later streets. If we did have 2 pair+ here or a good combo draw, we'd want to bet more to build a pot vs V's overpairs who are capped on this texture. If we did have the A hi flush draw, we'd either want to bet big with plans on checking turn on blanks or checking and receiving at least one free card to spike the nuts.

One caveat though, I don't often see many V's in live poker check this flop with overpairs at 2/5. Lot of people here seem to think V is strong with a check here, but without history telling otherwise, this is often AKo. Therefore a bigger bet here often knocks out this hand but a smaller bet does not.

So all in all, if we want to bluff this hand and outplay our opponent, a larger bet or a check otf is preferable to a range bet that actually hinders what were trying to do and limits the runouts we'd like to bluff on in future streets.

AP Turn: With a big bet size we're essentially telling V we're polar with a 4 or air. If we had checked flop or bet larger otf, this story would be more credible. AP with range flop bet, I don't think we're ever getting an overpair to fold here.

AP River: As is good for some stories and not good for others. Had we played the hand differently, it would be a ton better. AP the story with a flush draw and hands like A4 now are unlikely vs astute opponents. So what exactly are we trying to represent with a jam?

We can range V all we want in this spot, but if we can't logically come up with a hand that makes sense AP, you're going to get looked up more often than not.

Overall I love the aggressiveness, the heart and the awareness that sometimes you're going to get looked up when bluffing which is ok. I also like the fact that V isn't that good with his preflop sizing and his tank call on the river. This leads me to believe that HERO in theory was correct exploitatively attacking V in position, but just failed at the application.

Well i appreciate you giving me the push for buying piosolver cuz ive been planning to do it for a month and never feel in the mood to put a bunch of brain power into learning how to use it. Look at me blowing $250 for an internet argument :P.

Trying to put villain on a range isnt clairvoyancy, its what we do here. Im not saying my ranges are perfectly correct, im just saying i know for a fact GTO's 3 betting range here is going to be way off (too wide). OP said he put V on a 3 betting range like "big aces and big overpairs", which i took to mean the typical TT+ AQ+ 3 betting range at 1/3 and 2/5. I mean look at the range GTO wizard is giving villain and think about how unreasonable it is that V is 3 betting with like J9s here.

I gave piosolver the typical CO defending range against a 3 bet (honestly this is also probably wider than hero is calling), and V AQ+ TT+. Piosolver bets flop 100%. I actually widened V's 3 betting range to 15% (A3s+ 44+ ATo+ all suited broadway, K9s, KQo. Not saying it would be linear, im just doing quick and dirty) and it still cbets this flop 100% vs a GTO calling range.

If we force V to check his whole range OTF, hero bets only 28% of his range, (again, as i originally said, to me this was the big error. The check was about as obvious of a trap as V couldve laid), including 0% with T8hh.

After V check (whole range) and hero betting flop, hero bets 70% OTT and 93% OTR after betting the turn, and GTO makes it to showdown with all aces, about 20% of AK/AQ, and all of KK-TT that has a spade (folds KK-TT no spade), so sure, blasting off OTT and OTR with your cbetting range (which should be way narrower) is fine.

so yeah, I think the lesson here is youve GOTTA just give up with your complete air when youre this wide against a range this narrow. Im not saying you gotta do the GTO 28% range, sure, cbet 40% or something, im not asking for much here, I wouldnt come so hard down on this line if there was even a gutshot or a bdfd OTF, or if hero had an A for an over to some of the PPs.

Yeah im all in agreement on the first few paragraphs but I mean i dont think thats the takeaway big picture here. Its not about giving up after the flop, its about giving up ON the flop.

interesting. post pics of parameters of solve pls. feels unintuitive to me given lack of runouts / polarity disadvantage but it appears i am / maybe wrong. im not saying you necessarily mis solved but the gtow solves have sb 3bing 8-10% and checking quite a bit so im a bit confused why it would range bet a 15% 3b, that would be wider than co's range - for reference 200bb sb 3b vs co open 500zoom its checking 85%

they prob going to get me to upgrade to the higher tier gtow for the sake of this if it makes u feel any better

my best guess here is either the spr is off or (much) more likely ip doesn't have an option to raise if you're really seeing it range bet 15% of hands

as per ruse / gtow ai solve. if i keep the range at jj+,ak itll bet 40% ~95% of the time as oop. as soon as i widen to TT+, AQss+, KQss, AKo betting freq drops to ~55%. the 15% range u listed checks pure otf fwiw (which makes sense, its somewhat similar to an EP open hand facing loose btn). am willing to continue discussing this either here or in dm or let it go, idc really.

I said in my first post here that just because V checked flop doesn't mean he just completely whiffed with something like AK, and that I would have checked back, and maybe started a bluff if he picked up some equity on the turn.

I understand hero being tempted to stab at the flop to try and steal the pot on a low connected board that shouldn't connect with V's range. I just think that the line of small stab on flop, pot-sized bet on turn, jam river is repping too thin on this run-out.

None of which is really trying to argue with you. Hero didn't need to pick this particular fight with this particular V, and this particular hand. I'm just trying to be fair. I think we've all tried to fold out better hands with pure aggression. My hope for OP is that he just picks better spots and weaker V's.

Its my first ever solve so i probably screwed up. I put in the stack sizes and pot size. I spent a few hours on it last night, pio definitely isnt intuitive, it doenst have pf pre solved and i was concerned the default 3 b calling range i used for hero was wrong/too wide. Tried to use the pf solver and then got sleepy lol.

The range was like 30% or something for hero. Hero basically said he was calling with his whole range IP deepstacked though.

Ill probably look into it again just cuz im curious but i dont know that ill have time at my computer for a few days so prolly fine to just move on.

Since I’m seeing a lot of people say that their solver says to bet sometimes and check sometimes…you know that anytime the solver does that it means betting and checking are both “admissible,” meaning they are equal EV against solver-approved strategy, right?

So whether we bet or check flop is actually not a “GTO” question once we see this—instead it’s a question of exploitation. You know, like everything.

Villain was like mariano vs yoh viral in this hand. Yoh viral tries to represent a thin range with an aggro line and mariano keeps instant calling him and pushing yoh's chips into the pot like saying: " I know what you are doing but I won't let you run over me". Then Mariano freezes when Yoh make a 2x overbet on the river.

Sometimes opponents are not in folding mood