Title. Also curious about river call *as played* but I don't think I get to fold there with the spade I have (or with any spade?) needing only 21% or so. Less curious about river.

For flop, I think I'm clearly just supposed to be getting stacks in no? Would I do the same with a set, or would I prefer to flat my sets? Do I get in stacks with the nut flush or does that seek to trap?

$100 PokerStars PSKO
BTN: angel zera (54bb, $757.30 bounty)
SB: Schwibbs (79bb, $805.36 bounty)
BB: LCC102515 (80.4bb, $443.92 bounty)
Pot: 1.875bb
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to angel zera [6s 7s]
angel zera: raises 1bb to 2bb
Schwibbs: folds
LCC102515: calls 1bb
Pot: 5.375bb
*** FLOP *** [9s 8s 2s]
LCC102515: checks
angel zera: bets 2.71bb
LCC102515: raises 5.34bb to 8.05bb
angel zera: calls 5.34bb
Pot: 21.48bb
*** TURN *** [9s 8s 2s] [As]
LCC102515: checks
angel zera: checks
Pot: 21.48bb
*** RIVER *** [9s 8s 2s As] [Ac]
LCC102515: bets 8bb
angel zera: calls 8bb
Pot: 37.5bb
*** SHOW DOWN ***
LCC102515: shows [Js 7h] (a flush, Ace high)
angel zera: mucks hand

Also, does his flop c/r make sense? It seems like he has enough equity to just flat my cbet and that it would be a shame for him to have to fold to a flop 3b from me after taking the c/r line.

Monotone boards are really weird and definitely throw me for a loop sometimes since I haven't done a ton of work with them. I generally don't worry a *ton* about them since they...just don't occur often

how often have you been open raising preflop up until this point? have they being calling you? have they been calling your c-bets if you have being on the flop? do they check-raise on flop?

consider folding this hand preflop.
I'm getting it in on flop.
i would play turn as played.
I would fold river.

thx for reply

folding BTN 3handed w/ 67s is a pretty objective error IMO

As you mentioned, this is a clear flop shove for equity denial purposes.

It is probably ok if our hand is face-up here, since villain most likely isn't calling it off on a draw as ICM implications should see him avoiding playing for stacks here w/o a nutted or top-of-his-range hand.

I agree with the equity denial consideration, but should we really be ripping in an 8x shove on flop over the x/r?

The sizing makes any other raise difficult. After villain's x/r the pot is 16bb with the big bet standing at 8bb. If we're going for equity denial then we should be sizing 3x+, which would be 24bb+ or essentially half our stack.

We're basically asking the villain to commit to the pot, so we might as well put on max pressure.

To your second question, I'm not sure that villain c/r his flushes here. If so, oh well...just a cooler. But most likely he is doing this with a straight draw, flush draw, pair + flush draw, two pair, or a set.

The jam allows max fold equity for the draws and max value for the made hands.

As the small stack at final table 3-handed, we're looking for a spot to double up rather than raking the 10BB and still being the short stack. How many flopped flushes do you get 3-handed? Pre-flop action leaves villain with a very wide range and we hope he has a straight draw or 2-pair type hand that he thinks is a monster against your range so that you can induce a bluff from him on the turn or river when no spade comes. If the non-space ace comes on the turn, villain may bluff or if we bet he may check-raise and if he has the ace of spades in his hand we'll get it all in, which is what we want here, so I agree with the call after his x/r on the flop.

After that it's just bad luck. Villain's range includes enough aces and bluffs that call on the river is fine after x/x turn.

Sup Angel, do you ever not run deep?

Pedantic, point, pretty sure we see a mono board (13/50)*(12/49)*(11/48)=1.5% if we don't hold any of that suit, if we block one suit it's (12/50)*(11/49)*(10/48)=1.1%, and we flop a flush with suited cards (11/50)*(10/49)*(9/48)=.8%.

So not often, but in your case you can prob expect ~4-5 mono boards per event

Flop sizing is about 271% too big.

Think as a general principle mono boards, at least in spots like BTNvBB where ranges are wide and one range is basically a capped subset of the other, are conducive to being cbet for 1bb. The idea being, most of V's range is handcuffed since most of his range contains no spade and hence will have trouble continuing even for minsizing.

You already have a range advantage, his range essentially being a capped subset of your range, so you wanna be cbetting often but most of your range also has no spade, it's just a combinatoric fact. Spades are only a quarter of the

Your hands with a spade wanna go small because they block the hands V will continue with (so bluffs wanna go smaller because they can and value, namely big spades and flopped flushes, also wanna go smaller because those really heavily block V's continue range).

So bluffs wanna go tiny, and value wants to go tiny, and that leaves basically nothing else in your range that also doesn't wanna go tiny.

AP his x/r seems OK as a low freq play since you should have some hands which'll fold, but it's not great by any means.

AP pure flatting the x/r because his x/r range should be mostly flushes and he has a ton of them; you're not guaranteed to get it in good by any means so you really need to let V blast off with what few bluffs his range can contain. Furthermore, you will have a hard time balancing your jammed flushes with bluffs if you do jam. This is likely fine exploitatively though, if you wanna go down that path and be wildly unbalanced because V is fishy and'll pay you off anyway.

Jamming with this hand for equity denial is extremely mubsy and a huge deviation from the very poorly-represented equilibrium strategy (your range at this point should have like 28 combos because 1bb is so heavily preferred at equilibrium)

It's actually 4x greater than that. You calculated the probability of seeing a mono board if it has to be only one suit. Actual calc should remove the first factor since no matter what the first card is, we just need two more of that suit to make a mono flop.

OK Let me clarify:

CONDITIONAL on GII OTF, V has tons of flushes

D'oh!

Yes hat's right

So Angel you personally should see like 15-20 mono flops per event you play

agree with equity denial comments.

I think I pile the flop here or make a big 3b, with the added bounty factor and him covering I think gii ranges from v otf should be wider in general

A frush is a pretty strong hand to use to deny equity...it's also ok to get value too.

Obv there are better flush combos to tarp but you can have some slowplays too.

For all you zomg BB has a ton of frushes people...we have 2 spades (and there's 3 on the board.) Besides...redraw to str8frush etc.

V interesting, thanks. Some questions:

1.) Do we really have that big of a range advantage? In absolute numbers, Villain has more flushes than we do and is never capped

2.) You address strong value and pure bluffs, but don't we also have a ton of vulnerable 1-p-hands that won't be too happy setting such a good price? (I get that it's not that big of a deal if we actually have a clear range advantage)

1. It's not as huge as other spots, but it's clear, and V doesn't have nearly the advantage in flushes as you're implying. Hero opened BTN, he's got relatively speaking ton of flushes too and many of the flushes we may expect V to have that we don't (the super-weak ones 82s, 92s, 93s, etc) are blocked by virtue of hero's holdings and the board.

2. They're perfectly fine betting so small because either: V is in the handcuffed part of his range (i.e. no spade, air) and he either folds out of necessity (a very efficient outcome for us because we only bet 1bb) OR he makes a mistake by continuing against our well-balanced 1bb range (if he continues with no spade he loses on every spade turn or river, if he isn't already losing against extactly the type of hand you describe--V can't just float willy-nilly because hero has the range advantage--or a set, or a flush, or 2pr, or...) OR V is in the non-handcuffed part of his range (has a spade or a made hand) and we don't effectively deny equity against that part of his range anyway, plus if hero has the RA and is vigorously cbetting his air then that air certainly doesn't wanna overcharge itself against V's made hands and high-equity hands that are never folding to a cbet, so going more than 1bb is excessive--it's no bargain to bet half-pot with 9x, or even say JJ, or AhKd and go to the turn with half the deck or more sucking for our hand.

The push-pull dynamic that sets an equilibrium is gonna push essentially all frequency into the b1bb node.

Yeah he certainly doesn't as we have more nutflushes, but still: playing around w some ranges doesn't really reveal a clear-cut advantage for BU. Maybe I'm missing sth though.

And yes, we're obv blocking some of his flushes in this spot, but that doesn't really affect our overall strategy, does it?

I'm sure it's highly sensitive.

I picked some really wide ranges

Wonderful replies in this thread.

@Eggs--the 1bb thing is quite interesting. Are you saying 1bb because it's some sensible % of the 5.375bb pot that I faced on flop? Or would you say 1bb still if it were a 10bb pot? A 100 bb pot?

What if, with this 5.375bb pot, the rules of the game allowed us to bet any real number multiple of a bb? Would we reduce our sizing down from 1bb to 0.8bb? To 0.01bb?

My question here is that a 1bb bet as a standard just seems (almost) the same as checking to me as the pot size gets bigger (or, rather, the pot size relative to 1bb)--so I'm curious if the "1" sizing is some specific function of the size of the pot in this instance, or if you're speaking more generally.