I think I preferred the days I did only what was intuitive or deductive logic based without the solver demon on my right shoulder.

Can going bananas with bottom pair be justified against mid and small stakes populations? Is this even a spot? Do I need a backdoor wheel on top? And please at least confirm turn is a trivial jam or I really don't know anything.


PokerStars - 60/120 Ante 15 NL (8 max) - Holdem - 8 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (MP): 39.97 BB
MP+1: 27.51 BB (VPIP: 50.00, PFR: 25.00, 3Bet Preflop: 25.00, Hands: 8)
CO: 27.24 BB (VPIP: 22.65, PFR: 16.76, 3Bet Preflop: 10.67, Hands: 182)
BTN: 36.28 BB (VPIP: 19.12, PFR: 10.29, 3Bet Preflop: 3.70, Hands: 69)
SB: 53.91 BB (VPIP: 14.52, PFR: 10.48, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 126)
BB: 24.9 BB (VPIP: 0.00, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: -, Hands: 1)
UTG: 64.34 BB (VPIP: 50.00, PFR: 42.86, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 15)
UTG+1: 21.84 BB (VPIP: 30.56, PFR: 16.90, 3Bet Preflop: 9.68, Hands: 72)

8 players post ante of 0 BB, SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 2.5 BB) Hero has A 2

fold, fold, Hero raises to 2.17 BB, fold, fold, BTN calls 2.17 BB, fold, BB calls 1.17 BB

Flop: (8 BB, 3 players) T 2 8
BB checks, Hero checks, BTN bets 4 BB, fold, Hero raises to 10 BB, BTN calls 6 BB

Turn: (28 BB, 2 players) 5
Hero bets 27.68 BB and is all-in

Is check raising flop really right? Feels pushy to me; what hands are you check calling with? I'd jam the turn as well, but I love pair plus flush draw.

My solver tainted mind says nh, but what does your x/r range look like in this spot? If I'm BTN, I'm like f*** this guy, Im not folding 98/78 (I'm a big station though). I think I would prefer a cbet here along with the other club wheels unless BTN is super aggro. I feel like it's too likely flop checks through and it would be a shame to let BB realise equity with a hand he's folding otf.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

My favorite part of this hand is when he flats your check-raise with his set. Then you shove the turn and he is like, "Boom goes the Dynamite."

Seriously though, as soon as the check-raise fails, you should be shutting it down. You took your best shot at winning the hand and it did not work. Trying to force him out of the hand by shoving the turn is little more than wishful thinking.

You are just hoping that he is drawing, and you are stacking off all of your chips on the hope that he bet-called his draw on the flop? The turn is hardly a scare card, since it fails to fill the straight or the flush. So you are committing all or nothing to the idea that his range includes the draw. Unfortunately, as is always true, he was playing an actual two card hand, and not some nebulous range. Your play seems like a spew to me, no matter what your solver said.

8x, weaker 10x, 99, 77 (etc). Check calling with A2 makes some sense in that we likely have his Ax reverse dominated, but if he doesn't have Ax which he maybe should do alot of checking back with (not sure), we don't have much in the way of implied odds after x/call. When an Ax turns we have the exact sort of hand he expects us to and he can barrel polar.

But even if he should check back plenty of Ax, he possibly over float bets because he expects pop to over check-fold. It's this type of back and forth which makes me sometimes go "f this, what do I think Pio would do?"

I'd generally be happy to play my whole range as a check on this texture (unless I can cbet-jam turn for less than 1.5x) but I'm conscious that if I check-raise my flush draws here, he can easily jam on me and make me cry.

One benefit of x/r A2 is that I don't mind folding to a jam. But because I don't wan't to recklessly x/r most of my flush draws, it makes sense to have a betting range and A2 seems a great hand to include in that range,

Absolutely magnificent v a spewtard just waiting for a mofo to cap themselves. Games are dead etc.

My main concern when I have a combo draw is always, how can I realise all my equity without being forced to make a marginal call, i.e how do engineer stacks so I put in the last bet?

Frankly I wasn't even worrying about what he had tbh, I was a peace knowing I'm realising all my equity and theres nothing he can do about it. I'd need years of retraining to lose that mindset.

If checking range...all sets, all overpairs (may x/call some AA), AT. Maybe go bigger and maybe should have sized bigger here too.

Shipping all blank turns.

Villain will play river better than me ip on these dynamic boards. We don't need to see one even if I'm strong.

Seems fine. The a2cc is a mix it’s important to use some kind of rng to keep your frequencies in line otherwise you can go nuts c/r every low to medium frequency spot cuz if you are doing this @ 100% then you are way ool
Anyway after this turn the money is going in sucks to run into top of range

If I'm going to x entire range and take this sort of line, I'd prefer to do so with deeper stacks as like you said, a x/r here allows villain to jam. With hands like NFDs we would rather he flatted, and we then gain the opportunity to reverse dominate when an A peels. Does a bet not look more attractive here with this exact hand? We put pressure/deny equity vs hands that may check back such as PPs, 8x, SDs, some Tx that has to fold to multiple barrels, and gain potential floats from some AdX and a few worse BDFDs.

This is the problem you are not using pio and have no idea how this spot really works.

Pre-sim thoughts were:

1. Really prefer a Cbet...it's too weak to c/c (too much equity to c/f) and it's a good result to fold-out stuff like some AJ; KJ; 65s etc. I think the pop probably doesn't float wide enuf here so you actually may fold out more combos. IMO with an SPR of 4.0-4.5 it's hard to size the c/r properly. OOP i like 3.5x minimum since if we're balanced or somewhat balanced, we want the additional FE. The only combo that i might wanna c/r to 2.5x is 22 and that's not even a 100% open from this position for me.

2. Don't hate c/r as a low-freq play but might be reserved to use against villains who we have a read will stab too wide vs a check (the pop at mid-small stakes may have this tendency?)

3. If we get to the turn like this (c/r flop) then we shove any club.

Here's the Pio strat otf:


A2s is a pure Cbet.

Here's the strat after we check:


So far w/p...

But this is what I found pretty interesting - Turn strat after flop c/r:


We're checking a lot of NFD combos on this turn card. I looked at different club turns and we need J;Q;K to shove. I guess the thinking here is we will have some c/r give-ups + IP will still have some stuff like QJ + all his diamond and some club FD combos.

These are the ranges i used ("std" MTT saved ranges that i use for sims.)

OOP:


IP:


Fwiw i think the open is ok with weaker players and no obv reshove stacks behind but i would take a look at it once u get a decent sample b/c i don't see it winning very much unless u play it pretty close to optimally both pre and post. Vs. aggro players behind you will have to use this combo as a 4bet bluff at a low freq.

I have also ran a sim, using slightly different ranges (from the RYE course). I also gave options for multiple bet sizings. Ac2c is a 60/40 mix between betting/checking, and after checking, will only x/r 35% of the time vs a 1/5 pot bet. Vs 1/2 pot it is a pure x/c.

IP has to be betting hands otf such as K7s, 65s, A6s without BDFDs, 33-77 without a diamond at some frequency, which I doubt in a 3way pot. I node locked IPs decision otf removing some of these betting combos. After that, the ratio between betting/checking doesn't change much for Ac2c, but it almost never opts to x/r.

its ok vs stabby guys but you have an ok c/c hand 3 way.
If BTN is fishy and peel too wide you can consider cbetting.

@erc thanks for sims
I think its too wide BTN peel range given stack depth.

Fantastic contributions from everybody. Great thread if I do say so myself.

@erc007
@Codfish60
@lolposting2016

At what stack depth would this become a 70%+ check board or is stack depth/SPR not the critical factor?

I automatically assume this tendency is in place on any dynamic board. That is a leak. At least 3way where LP has to worry about BB. The result is me turning low freq plays into high freq plays.

I'll start giving people more credit in reggy fields.

Check with the intention of calling a jam? Watching Pio v Pio would make a mockery of "GTO is boring" mantras. Would be a great play by IP to jam those but I don't have enough faith in my opponents to not always have it, but I have seen some funny calls.

The triple merge crossed my mind as I clicked all in. I stared at his 8s for a second, wondering if it were actually QJ

Makes sense. I didn't like the 1/2 pot bet, made picking raise sizing awkward.

I don't need to know how it happens in 1 million hypothetical situations. I only need to know how it works in the real world.

In the real world, the chips in your stack are worth far more than the chips you don't have. They are worth far more than the chips in the pot.

In the real world, you have bottom pair and a nut flush draw, which is a pretty poor hand to put all of your chips in the middle with. It is not as strong a hand as your solver says it is, for reasons others have gone into in great detail in other threads. (See Skalansky's comments about card removal, or Paul Phillips' comments about the practical application of odds in poker.)

While It's true that I don't use a solver, none the less I know that going all in with one card to come holding nothing more than bottom pair and a flush draw is a pretty speculative play, with the majority of it's potential success based on your villain folding. I've seen guys do this a thousand times.

The next thing they usually do is tell you what a bad play you made calling them down, because your winning hand was so far behind their "range." They tell you that you "have no idea how this spot really works." Also they usually call you a Fish or a Donkey or some other such slur, but to be fair, Donkey has fallen out of favor and is used much less often than in the past.

no

Weak. Very weak. Why not try refuting my points... I guess I'm too obtuse for it to matter so why bother.

If you think this shove was a good play and not a spew (which was the original question) then one of two things is true: 1) you are putting villain on an unrealistic range, considering that he has put a third of his stack in the pot so far, or 2) your pio solver is a fish.

Obviously jamming the turn requires fold equity. It is a semi bluff, always behind when called, but with (hopefully enough) equity to make it +ev when it is.

"I've seen guys do this 1000 times". Do you see it when the jam works? Or when they are balanced with nut hands?

So I gave villain this range for stationing flop:

JJ-99,22,8h8s,ATs,KTs,QTs+,JTs,T9s,98s,AdQd,KdQd,AdJd ,KdJd,Ad9d,Ad8d,8d7d,8h7h,7d6d,Ad5d,Ad4d

He is effectively flatting his entire continuance range bar 2 combos of 88. I wouldn't expect most villains to do this. 49 hands against which I have 38.5% equity once the turn peels.

If he calls a turn jam any time he has top pair or better, or a flush draw with a pair or straight draw, or a nut flush draw with 2 overs. We have 34% equity (34 hands).

Using RC fold equity calculator, we break even if villain folds -7%. He can do what he likes v the jam, we win.

Worst case, he flats all 88s, he lets his nut flush with 2 overs go, he holds on with 99.

Equity v turn calling range drops to 30.6%.

"We break even if villain folds 2% of the time"

Im with 2pairsof2s. The rest just doesn’t make any sense to me.

I’m curious as to how successful you have all been in mtt’s because maybe I’m missing a trick.

I’m folding pre-flop, or if somehow my MP range has widened then I’m folding the flop. If I’m somehow feeling extra-loose today then I’m calling flop, certainly not raising. If there is any sense in raising here then it’s certainly lost on me.

You’re literally just raising and shoving hoping your opponent has nothing or that you make your less likely flush, set or 2 pair. I thought this was the typical play of a fish?

It's part of an overall strategy though. As @Bearer said we can't use all of our flush draws as x/r candidates for fear of being jammed on. So we need weaker hands we don't mind folding. Pio opts to do this with other hands like Ac9c, 76s/AQs/77 without BDFD.

Assuming villain is betting at the right frequencies, they are supposed to continue flop with some A highs/ all 8x hands without BDFDs (which fold on a fair number of turn cards). We also assume villain is stabbing wider than optimal (and probably calling our x/r slightly wider), making our x/r better in theory.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I respect my opponents enough to provide them with an incentive to call.

I'd take exactly the same line with 88. Why should villain ever call with a bluff-catcher if I always have it?