1/2 nl (300 max) 7 handed can't make a hand all night abt 5 hrs into session,things turn around but tough spot here, would like some others opinions average stack sizes range from abt 100-500 on the table.

Stack size (160ish) Pretty much all of this action is in the same orbit I pick up ak early postion either +1 or 2, and open to 12 and take it down uncontested.

2 hands later I am middle postion straddles on to 4 and whole table calls and it's on me w jj (160) after everyone calling the 4 I don't want to make it 45-50 and if I see a flop be left w 100 to an iffy flop and either c bet fold to a raise or check fold idk ... so tbh I just jam 160 lol and take it down (if we were deeper and was winning would play accordingly)

Very next hand I pick up pocket queens player opens to 12 3 callers I raise to 40 intiol bettor calls all else fold oop to the flop 43k rainbow ( could have bet here ..?) I check and he bets out 70 ... I end up letting it go and show him ... he asks me if I want to see I said yeah and he showed me a10

I'm feeling committed with 120 left and 116 in the pot on a not-terrible flop. Check is good to let him bluff, but easy shove for 50 more when he bets 70. Don't post results in the original thread.

Jam flop. Villain cannot possibly have enough Ks in his range to make this a check fold

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Should preflop raise be more? Maybe 50


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yeah pre is too small. I'd go 65.

overbet jam a K43r flop with QQ?

Yep, the 3-bet is way too small. Here's how I typically size 3-bets.

If the previous bet is size X and there is Y money in the pot (not counting X), then we bet 3X + Y and shade down IP and shade up OOP.

Here X = 12, Y = 27, so B = 36 + 27 = 63

I like this sizing in general because it gives the initial raiser exactly 2:1 odds. Since we're in middle position but behind the raiser we might make it 60.

Yes, though I'm not sure I'd call it an overbet. The SPR is 1--we'd be betting 120 into a 119 pot, basically a PSB.

We have 67% equity against a wide range like {QQ-55,ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,ATo+,KJo+}

We have 67% equity against a narrowish range like {QQ-88,AJs+,KQs,AQo+}

We have 50% against a worst case scenario range of {QQ-TT,AKs,AKo}

Given the SPR is 1 and we're good about 2/3 times here, we absolutely must jam. Check folding here is criminal. Villain cannot possibly have enough Ks in his range to warrant check folding. Even if he's on the worst case scenario range of {QQ-TT,AKs,AKo} and only calls with a K, he's calling 16 combos and folding 13. our EV is

EV(jam) = 13/29*119 + 16/29*(.0872*239 - .9128*120)
EV(jam) = 4.40

This is the worst case scenario.

Against {QQ-55,ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,ATo+,KJo+} again assuming he calls with any K and folds the rest, he's folding 95 combos and calling 33 combos.

EV(jam) = 95/128*119 + 33/128*(.0789*239 - .9211*120)
EV(jam) = 64.68

It's an easy shove. Our hand doesn't even really matter here. Villain simply cannot have Ks often enough to call, and what else is he calling with on this board? OTOH if he does call light with pocket pairs we win even more.

I don't like jamming JJ. Could you make it like $26-$32 pf? I agree with the rest of your analysis though.

Anyway, I agree with making the pf raise bigger with QQs. $40 is fine without the 3 callers. With them, I'd make it $56. OTF I'm cbetting here probably 75% of the time so a check sometimes seems ok. Folding seems too weak, especially if you think you have a bluffy image. Either cbet this flop or check/call.

I used to play super aggressive preflop and always had a spazzy image then would get tilted when I got bluffed off hands by making super tight folds.

check/jam > jam IMO. or possibly check/call flop depending on sizing.

There aren't really any bad turn cards other than an A. Might as well give him a little rope. Obviously never folding. Assuming we are going to lose our stack whenever he has a K here, we should try to mazimize the number of additional hands that we can get the money in the middle against. I think checking flop accomplishes that best.

Check/calling polarizes villain's range to Ks and a few bluffs.
Let's simplify things and suppose villain himself jams when checked to with Ks and a few air combos.

With this range {QQ-55,ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,ATo+,KJo+} villain has 33 K combos. Let's suppose he grabs some hands like AT AJ AQ for bluffs and bluffs with 16 of these 40 combos. So he has 33 value jams and 16 bluffs and checks behind with the remaining 79. When villain checks behind let's suppose villain bluffs us off our hand when an Ace comes (1 - 44/47*43/46) and otherwise it gets checked down. We're good 88.58% against his remaining range and lose 11.41%.

EV(x/c) = 33/128*(.0789*239 - .9211*120) + 16/128(.8388*239 - .1612*120) + 79/128((1-44/47*43/46)*-120 + 44/47*43/46*(.8858*239 - .1141*120))

EV(x/c) = 96.70

Under these assumptions this line is better. However to be fair we should assume villain calls our flop jam with worse hands sometimes as it looks like a C-bet. I think we get looked up reasonably often with big pairs. Let's suppose 88 - JJ call (QQ would too, but I'm removing it to avoid accounting for chops). This is 24 combos of 128. So our previous EV equation is now

EV(jam) = 71/128*119 + 24/128*(.9162*239 - .0839*120) + 33/128*(.0789*239 - .9211*120)

EV(jam) = 81.54

So these lines are close but the x/c line appears better under these assumptions.

Key criteria that might influence one line over another are

• how often does villain bluff when we check? (more => x/c)
• how often does villain call our C-bet PSB light? (more => jam)
• how often does villain fold better hands like KT to our PSB? (more => jam)
• how often does villain try to bluff us off our hand OTT or OTR? (more => x/c assuming we call, otherwise more => jam)
• how bluffy is our table image? (more => jam)
• how sticky is our table image? (more => jam)
• will villain call thin value bets OTR? (more => x/c)
• are we going to call any bet on non-Ace turns/rivers? (more => x/c)

I think after careful analysis I agree the x/c is usually better, but if we take this line we have to stay the course and call down on non-Ace turns/rivers. We cannot let villain bluff us off our hand. We might even call on Ace turns/rivers if villain likes to bluff.

If villain is overly sticky/passive/nitty I like jamming. The more aggressive he is the more I like check / calling. However, note OP says we have a bluffy image--we might get called down VERY light OTF particularly as we just jammed JJ previous hand. If villain is very likely to bluff catch this might influence us towards a flop jam.

Both of these lines should be substantially +EV. Check/folding is not an option.

This is an interesting hand OP.