9max, 1/3

Eff stack 600

V (MP) openraise 24, H (BB) calls w/ JTs

First session with V, seems to be a fishy lag, bluffed a lot postflop, varies his openraise size, had one hh with showdown at that time: he openr 14 from utg w/ 62s, x/raise/broke on mono Axx w/ flush

Pot ~50

Flop (HU) J9xr

H x, V cbet 24, H x/c

Pot ~100

Turn J

H x, V cbet 50, H x/c (and probably should've raised for value against overpairs? Problem is that v is protected with all the better trips and i dont want to play for stacks at this stack depth. Against an aggressive player who likes to bluff, i think that it's better to let him blast off)

Pot ~200

River blank

H x, V cbet 100, H x/c (and probably should've raised for value again?)

I think you definitely want to play for stacks. You aren’t actually that deep given the large open. SPR of 10 on flop in a single raised pot is quite shallow. Should raise turn or river.

I don't mind this. The large open size is a statement of intent followed by three streets. Looks very much like an overpaid, but in a situation where either player can have the Jack (and when you both do, you have the worst of it) I'm not sure how much value you get by raising at any point. Maybe losing out on value but unless this player seems incapable of laying down an overpaid vs fairly face up trips then I might play the same way. Annoying if it goes check-check on river but if he does value bet the river here with an overpair then I'd definitely make a mental note

Do you think that he will stack off with an overpair on this board? Sure, we are ahead against up to 3x 6 = 18 (QQ+) overpair combos, however, behind against a lot of better trips 4x 3 = 12 (AJ-QJ) and 3 (99) combos, sums up to 15 total. So it's pretty much 50/50 with the uncertainty that he will stack off with an overpair. Give that he likes to bluff barrel, it's very reasonable to call/trap on the turn and let him bluff rivers, so the only raise I can see is a x/minr on the river to force a crying call by an overpair.

... Or is your reasoning that his bet sizes more speak for an overpair than any better trips, so you discount them?

I think we could discount QJo and maybe KJo based on the 8x preflop sizing. That leaves 6 combos of Jx plus 3 combos of 99. We beat 18 combos of QQ-AA.

The only question then is if V can stack off with overpairs (we aren’t THAT deep and you said he’s a fish, so I assume he is rather sticky and the answer is yes), and how likely he is to triple barrel bluff with a hand like KQ.

If he’s very capable to triple barrel obviously better to x/c turn and x river.

If he’s less capable to triple barrel and he checks back river with a lot of his air, then probably better to put the raise in on turn and shove river to get max value from his weaker value hands,

I still think vs a fish we can put a value raise on the river since he’s probably value betting wider than we would assume. Like, he shouldn’t be tripling with overpairs but if he’s a loose aggro fish he’s probably going for 3 streets with overpairs here.

id just fold preflop vs this huge sizing vs a lag. i dont want to be put into gross spots OOP with middle pair or weak TP when I cant control the pot size. vs LAGS OOP i only like to play premiums and pairs vs. big pf sizings.

Fold pre ainec. Or 3bet, just don't call, but really just fold. AP call down is fine, I think you're more likely to get value from worse jacks than you are from overpairs, and he prob doesn't have that many worse jacks in his range (though he might, if he's opening 26s UTG he's prob opening J6s from MP).

I did some sims and the solver agrees and wants to play 3bet only vs this huge openraise size. What's the reasoning behind this play? Why is it so bad to just call and keep villains range wide? I mean I would feel pretty unconfortable to 3bet w/ AQ oop vs a huge openraise size, but the solver prefers this play.

This is hyperbolic nonsense. Folding isn't terrible, but we're up against a guy who opens 62s and want to play pots. Would we rather be in position? Of course. Do we notice that he made a smaller raise with a trash hand and this is a larger one? Yes, but we can't read too much into it. The reality is that we are in the wrong seat vs this guy, and getting a rare opportunity to close the action heads up with a fine hand isn't one we want to let go. It's an 8x raise and we are 200BB deep... hardly outrageous. We can wait for perfect spots to come along or we can go with what we've got and play some poker. Have to be able to negotiate postflop while OOP.

FWIW I don't hate folding or raising but I would call most of the time given the information we have.

Putting "solver" and "62s" on the same page is like trying to force two positive ends of a magnet together.

Calling huge opens oop is ****ing fish ****, and it's also a big reason why shitty overaggro regs don't lose their ass every time they sit at a poker table.

You don't wanna fold? Then ****ing 3bet it and stop being a fish.

I fold preflop. I highly doubt playing HU OOP in a raked game with no dead money against all but the most horrible is going to be profitable, let alone to a massive 8x preflop raise. Not that I put any stock in solvers / "defending" whatsoever, but my guess is that the set of hands it says we should be defending to this size is *very* small.

I'm fine with our postflop line against an aggro player. I guess it depends on how nitty our image is, but if it is remotely nitty then a river check/raise isn't likely to be paid off enough to risk those times we're actually behind (ETA: Although could certainly argue for a minraise/fold).

GcluelessNLnoobG

Thanks for your kind reply :-D. Could you also provide reasoning to go with your action statements, e.g. what's your gameplan postflop after V called in a bloated pot oop?

That response wasn't for you.

The reasoning has to do with the only real incentive you have to call bets oop in the first place, as opposed to either raise or fold, and how his raise effectively removes that incentive for you as your solver work has shown you. Issue is how to apply that theoretical framework to a practical situation, and the answer is not to suddenly develop a calling range when we're aren't incentivized to do so, our pot odds don't magically improve just because he's opening too wide, it's to either widen or tighten our 3betting range (in this case widen) depending on which way we are incentivized to do so. In this particular case, think about how when we 3bet a strong linear range here to counter him opening too wide and too big, what options does that leave V? He either defends a bunch of garbage hands that are doing terrible vs our range or he has to massively overfold making the 3bet itself hugely +EV. Should JTs be part of that range? You know better than I do, but ordinarily it's not.

I fold pre for 24 at 1/3 against a LAG with JTs from SB. No reason to get involved here.

Meh I kind of disagree with this. Depends a lot on the game and the player. JTs can fall into a calling range if we're dropping out the bottom of our raising and calling ranges but for these pot odds - even at 200BBs its pretty meh.