I've been seeing a lot of the higher stakes online regs ripping hands like AK and AQ for 30+bb lately, so I decided to add it into my strategy this weekend. Not sure if this was just a little too thin:

Live $160 event, 66 entrants, 8 paid, 33 remaining. Turbo structure (20 min levels, gets very shallow at 2 tables left).

I have a very solid image. I'm pretty clearly the best player (arrogant, I know) and no one has been wanting to play any meaningful pots against me. I've shown down the best hand all but once, and have won many without showdown. I have not had any 4bet spots yet.

Blinds: 600/1200/1200, 35bb effective (42,000), 7-handed
Hero: opens to 2,500 UTG with AQo
HJ: 3bet to 7,500
Folds back to me. Pot is 13,000 and I have 39,500 behind and am covered
Hero: 4bet jam
Villain: tank calls with 88

I felt that I had lots of fold equity here and am pretty surprised he called with 88. I was thinking that with the turbo structure I needed to take this spot to try to win a nice little pot preflop, and in the instances where I get called by 88+ (apparently) I can have a good chance to get a big stack and pretty much gaurantee that I make the FT. I generally do not make this play, but the stack size OOP was weird and I think it's close between flatting to see a flop and jamming, but I tend to go with the more aggressive line in live settings when I'm not sure.

Given the dynamic you have described, I would fold to the 3-bet. You opened UTG and HJ 3 bet you -- after you just described that (1) you were the best player there, and (2) no one wanted to play meaningful pots with you. So when HJ 3-bets your UTG open, this should indicate a very strong hand as the players are avoiding you. And since you are the best player, you want to limit the high-variance spots. (I know this is tougher in a turbo, but I'd still fold here).

Also, best not to post results right away.

Based on what you say your image is and the fact that you raised pre-flop UTG I would likely have just called and folded on the flop if I missed. The range I would 3-bet raise pre-flop in that situation against you is about QQ+/AK with maybe some JJ.

However, if you raise a lot in EP pre-flop then your range would be perceived as wide and the 3-bet with 88 would be understandable. Still the call of the jam is whacky.

If the person who 3-bet was doing a lot of 3-betting pre-flop then I would have also jammed but you make no mention of it. Against extremely aggro players I am now jamming 100% of the time OOP with AQ in these situations.

Given your description of the tournament and how far from the money we are, I don't really have a problem with the jam. Our opportunities might be limited because levels are 20 minutes.

Lastly, its a $160 tournament. The field isn't going to be strong (unless its in Prague) and the player with 88 may have felt that they weren't going to get in the money unless they got lucky so that is why they 3-bet hoping you had AK/AQ. As played you got your money in good with some Fold Equity. In order to go deep in tournaments you do have to win some flips in huge pots and this just wasn't your day.

I second most of what Bubble and Rick said. While I don't like the villain's 3b gii against you, I think your 4b jam here is a mistake. Like Bubble said, if you're the best player at the table, I doubt a random in a $160 live tourney is 3b bluffing your UTG open that often, therefore he's going to be almost exclusively value in this spot (99+ AQ+ usually) I think if the dynamic shifted more towards LP, like you opened MP and he was cutoff/button or you opened hijack or cutoff and he's after you, then this becomes a trivial 4b jam. I don't think live players at this buy-in level are 3b bluffing against UTG/UTG1 opens as frequently as they should be

+1 to this and Bubble's post especially. If people are playing you super passively, just muck AQo when you open UTG and get 3b. Feels bad, but that's taking advantage of opponent tendencies.

I'm interested in this hand from villain's perspective too. Is 88 a fold in this spot (position of RFI-player, position of villain, stack depths)? If so, might a call be OK with the main goal of setmining if the table is passive and a squeeze therefore unlikely?

Should hero only shove for value here, or can he mix in some bluffs? Villain needs just shy of 40% equity to go BE which I believe he won't have against any reasonable shove range from a normal UTG-opener.

I feel I have a number of overplayed AQ-hands (like many others I guess), especially at these difficult-to-play-stack-depths. It feels like GII won't result in enough folds to compensate for the fact that villain will call with a range that either dominates us or flip against us. At least at the lower BI:s I play. Even if our chip-EV might be slightly positive I fear it wont compensate for the many times we will bust or get crippled. But playing AQ too careful at this stack depths might also be a mistake, right?

Given the described table and positions, I would have just called the 88 in villain's shoes rather than 3b, somewhat setmining, somewhat playing poker in position.

In GTO, hero can have some 4b bluffs and AQo seems to be a reasonably fine one. But I think given the table conditions, I'd rather play exploitatively, given the 3b range is also unlikely to be a GTO 3b range (it turns out to actually be wider than expected, but we don't know that in the moment.)

Villain 3-bet is probably whatever, I'd mostly call in position in a $160 tournament against players who are generally going to be straightforward but it's probably not bad.

As played our hand is probably borderline and wouldn't be surprised if it mixed call, fold and shove at some frequency.

In villain's shoes my worst pair to call off would probably be TT against most in a $160, but if you've given the impression you're somewhat aggressive I could see where villain might think you're Ax heavy and call off.

In short, this hand is fine, maybe a little aggressive for the stakes but probably at worst break even, not like a punt or anything.

Nice input. I kind of agree with everything, which to me, means it's a more interesting spot than the standard pre-flop gii. I posted the results because if I just left it as I 4bet jammed and got called, everyone would most likely assume "gg he has kings" and showing he has 88 is pretty notable for the discussion imo.

Villain had no 3bet (but honestly, no one does in these daily events) but had a vpip of 50%+ at that point and like I said, he was sun-running and couldn't lose a hand it seemed. I had been getting some good hands this level and was opening more often. Two hands earlier I opened AKs and he and the BB called. The flop was a very dry 2-3-7 rainbow and I c-bet and got check-raised by the BB and I folded. I may have leveled myself into thinking he was starting to believe I was getting too out of line and he decided to take a stand and 3bet me. This might actually be true, though, because he has 88 and I never see 88 3bet in these fields, let alone call off for a 32bb re-shove. I think he just put me on AK and wasn't considering any other hand, which to his credit, isn't the worst read.

AQo is the absolute bottom here and I'm doing it with QQ+ and AK much more often (at this stack depth probably 100% not going to lie), so I feel like my fold equity should be good enough to make this play here with the AQ blockers. Being OOP along with the stack depth also was a large factor in not flatting. The tournament is super high variance anyway, so if it wasn't in this spot, it would be another flip spot soon enough. At least that's what I keep telling myself

Also, for the record, we got showered

Getting called is the result; generally, the OP should stop at the decision point in question.

88 3-bet/call is very unusual but I tend to agree with the others given your description of the table. If nobody is 3-betting you and you're pretty much having your way with the table, then you should be able to keep picking up pots pretty easily and this 3-bet should be very strong. Really it would take some kind of read that villain is 3-betting light for me to go ahead and 4-bet jam at a table like this.

Usually yes. I just decided to do it a little different this time. The discussion has been pretty good regardless, so I would do it again.

I definitely agree with what you're saying about the table dynamics. In hindsight, I should just continue to chip up at my own pace and take advantage of better spots when I can get them to put chips in drawing dead/slim. As stated before, though, there were a few reasons I decided to take a shot at getting a big stack at this point of the tournament: Turbo structure and fold equity being the biggest factors, followed by stack depth and OOP.

I like it. If the player tanks, it means that they were considering folding in this spot. You have to have some shoves here and AQ is the perfect 4 bet shove if you are going to be 3 bet light.

All options are fine, V is reta*ed to call this. At these stakes probably exploit fold, at higher stakes we can mix all 3 options imo.

Exploit fold is probably fine, tbh, but I do think there's something to be said for building the muscle memory to find these 4-bets at lower stakes, even if it's possibly -EV vs. this population. Obviously we're not going to be 4-bet jamming obvious nits, but against randos (who have stuff like 88) this can't be bad.

Of course certain obvious nits will panic fold JJ and AK to this jam, haha.

It's not like I dislike it in theory or dislike finding this spot, it's just that the way you've described this table makes it sound like their 3-betting range is JJ+/AK and they're never bluffing.

Good players may shove, but that may be the play in a high stakes tournament with more light 3-betting. In a $160 tournament, and having opened UTG, the push is bad. AK is different from AQ and I would push with AK. Villain should probably have a more polarized 3-betting range this deep, with big hands and bluffs. He should not 3-bet 88 and should fold to the push as played. However, it is not surprising that a low stakes player couldn't fold a good hand.

Yeah I still go back and forth with it. The villian was adept enough at the game to be a little light here (results oriented proves that correct). You know how people who know enough about modern strategy are like "I have A4s so I should 3-bet"? Also a litle bit of game dynamics. I had gotten a nice little run of cards this level and had been opening more than I was the previous few orbits. A few hands earlier I opened AKs from the cutoff where him and the BB called. I c-bet a very dry flop with just a backdoor nut-flush draw and folded to the BB check-raise. I think he was starting to feel like I was getting out of line a little bit.

He was also high as a kite and was coming back from each break with his buddy at the table smelling like Cheech and Chong. Not sure what reads you guys have gotten from people that are really baked?

I disagree. I think AQ and AK are not that different in this spot except that we are dominated with AQ by AK. If the villain going to 3 bet lots of marginal hands, we need to be shoving more often. If you aren't shoving AQ in this spot, then what hands do you add to your 4 bet range here? You are still dominating the other light 3 bets that the player might make. We can't only shove/4bet AK/JJ+

I would shove AQ normally, but not in a $160 tournament, where people tend to 3! to tight. AK plays better than AQ against AK, AQ, QQ.