We don’t bet turn because we don’t want to get raised. This is potentially a bigger deal at 5/10 than lower stakes; turn raises are going to be bluffs more often but still not enough that we ought to be snap-calling with second pair when JT got there and there are plenty of 2 pairs as well.

Thx for the response JM. I thought COvsBB K97 would be higher EV with bigger sizing but maybe that is only on FD boards?

Yeah we should definitely use the bet small strategy if it is much easier to play, I think that makes a lot of sense.

I was mostly trying to draw from people's experiences instead of mass DB analysis but that might be too skewed towards people's biases. I do think the proper response vs a 1/3 cbet is more intuitive than a response to a 3/4 bet though.

I also think people don't study turn probe/sizing very much at all. So I'd love to get OOP to the turn as much as possible.

I'll have to run this hand later and check on some things, but I appreciate the response. Also I enjoy your YT videos as well.

Thx again.

ok ive been thinking about this for a while now.

I think u might be wrong.

I wrote out a little argument here:

OTR with a bluff catcher.
Your opponent bets pot with a balanced range.

He has 20 value combos and 10 bluff combos.

Which is the best bluff catcher, 2nd best, 3rd, and worst?

A - you block value and you unblock bluffs
B - you block value and you block bluffs
C - you unblock value and you unblock bluffs
D - you unblock value and you block bluffs.

A - 19, 10 = 65.5 BEST
B - 19, 9 = 67.9 3RD
C - 20, 10 = 66.6 2ND
D - 20, 9 = 69.0 WORST

^the goal here it to make our opponents range contain a LOWER PERCENTAGE OF VALUE.
This is achieved best in case A. and worst in case D. these seem pretty obvious.
It gets more interesting tho for cases C and B. and answering this will answer our question, "when picking a bluff catcher, is it better to block value or to unblock bluffs?"
Here we see that case C is a better bluff catcher than case B. so we can say, "it is better to unblock bluffs than it is to block value"

does this make sense?

Nice response.

I think you are right. I never really thought about it like the way you presented it but it does make sense.

If we block 1 bluff that is like blocking .5 value. Or if we unblock 1 bluff that is like blocking 2 value combos.

So it is better to unblock bluffs than to block value seems correct.

Thx

The thing is that in practice most people don't bluff enough. You can unblock bluffs but you aren't certain they are using them, whereas if you are unblocking value, they are far more likely to do so.

Still, good post, thanks.

I think it’s going to be tough for villain to have enough bluffs here for us to call. We also can retain a lot of Kx and strong hands when we check this turn card, 9x is hardly the top of our range.

We block A7 and 99. Nobody has the balls to raise that river? Wait, do we even know the suit of that river? How can we play this hand without all the necessary information. **head explodes**

I agree we prob can overfold here, but I'm not going to be able to let this combo go and will call, especially as most 5-10 regs are going to realize that the river is a better card for them than us...also the second 7 blocks some 2 pair combos...agree that it's prob value heavy from most 5-10 nit regs.