V was 35/15/5 from 46 hands
this guy was loose but the preflop 3bet is so small and then he barrels all the way,looks so strong


[converted_hand][hand_history]Poker Stars, $10 Buy-in (60/120 blinds, 15 ante) No Limit Hold'em Tournament, 9 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite. View Hand #37353302

MP3: 8,211 (68.4 bb)
Hero (CO): 9,331 (77.8 bb)
BTN: 4,918 (41 bb)
SB: 6,661 (55.5 bb)
BB: 5,978 (49.8 bb)
UTG+1: 3,350 (27.9 bb)
UTG+2: 8,098 (67.5 bb)
MP1: 5,021 (41.8 bb)
MP2: 8,639 (72 bb)

Preflop: Hero is CO with T A
5 folds, Hero raises to 240, BTN folds, SB raises to 360, BB folds, Hero calls 120

Flop: (975) T 8 3 (2 players)
SB bets 487, Hero calls 487

Turn: (1,949) 7 (2 players)
SB bets 974, Hero calls 974

River: (3,897) 2 (2 players)
SB bets 4,825 and is all-in, [color="grey"]Hero ???

$10 tourni? Was this a single table SNG? Exactly how loose was this guy? That's not a huge sample. I'd say this mostly comes down to the player and the positions. What kind of loose is he? Does he ever have Tx here?

Something noteworthy is the villain's sizings. The flop/turn bets are probably him clicking the 1/2 pot button and then he overbet shoves river? Fishy.

Not a big sample but looks loose passive . Min 3 bet oop is likely very strong range. Unless we have evidence of spazzing out before then the turn is the point to fold

You have got to raise that flop in position, not utilising your position here is a massive leak. If villain 4bets your done if he folds great. It's a small holding so winning a small pot her is fine.

^^this. Another reason you want to do this is because you will find out MUCH earlier in the hand if villain is honest or just overplaying his AK or AQ. It will give you a pretty solid read most of the time.

Not surprised to see this play at the $10 level. Have been seeing a lot more players running at about 28/9 at my tables lately. I'm not complaining!

and what if he just calls?Do i check back the turn?or continue betting?
If i raise flop arent worst hands just going to fold and better will call anyway?

This is where it gets a little more complex now as there are many different lines the hand could take. If villain calls then checks the turn you'll need to decide based on previous info what the better option would be. Is villain tricky? Then check behind. Have you witnessed villain call down with two over cards? Then bet. Does he chase draws a lot? Then charge him for the privilege. If I had to generalise though I'd say keep the pot small and use your position to control the pot.

With regards to worse hands folding then yes that is true but you dont want villain to get to see a turn card on his own terms as any jack, queen or king is bad for you plus a 9 could complete a straight (if he had QJ)

Is calling in position with TpTk not utilizing your position?

I disagree with raising the flop, also see as raising the flop as more of a leak. Min-raising you aren't letting a new player bluff. This sizing is only used by new players with no clue and I'm not taking away their chance to barrel it off with air.

he 3bet pre,what hands can he have that any J,Q,K on the turn improve?Aj,Aq,AK,i dont want to make these fold on the flop,well ahead of them

Yes and no. You're def using your position by pot controlling, but is it the best line? I don't think so, because we still have no idea where we are throughout the hand. When we take this line of pot controlling, we do not define villain's range at all. Do we want villian to be bluffing against us when we have a weak tptk? This works better when we have a good tp, like A, K, or Q. Our ten is outdrawn against around 20% of the time, which is great for us. But with all of his range in there (bluff combos and value combos), his equity in the hand mor than doubles, hence why I think raising the flop is good: if cuts his equity in half with his overcard hands, and it saves us money because it makes him show us if he has a monster instead of leaving us to guess by calling behind. Most of the time the flop raise will immediately define villain's range here.

Yeah, against AJ, AQ, and AK, we're in good shape, but that's not his entire range. He could easily have us crushed here, which is why pot controlling by calling behind seems bad to me.

If we give villain a pf range of 77 or 88+, AJs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo, we're not in great shape. So yeah, calling behind for pot-control is ok, but do we have have a strong enough hand to be calling his bluffs with? Not when nearly 40% of his range includes value combos, and he 3b in a really fishy way pf.

His bets make it look fishy.

Esp the over pot river shove.

This villain needs to read more about bet sizes, it just looks so bluffy and i don't believe the story.

If he has an over pair/set he is betting bigger on the turn to make a flush draw pay extra to see a river and to set up a shove on a non draw card.

Wouldn't he check/call all sets and overpairs on river as he has showdown but doesn't want to risk betting and getting shoved on.

If he has a flush draw he checks the turn for pot control surely?

The river shove just screams 'Don't call!!'

What are others opinions on the bet sizes?

I think that you are playing not to lose as opposed to maximize value. Raising to "see where you're at" seems counterproductive. Whose to say this villain wont 4b jam AK? Are you always getting away if he aggresses against your 3b? You're advising turning AT into a bluff and we are much too strong to do that. Keeping AJ, AQ, AK in the pot is a much better way to go.

In game I'm probably clicking call on all three streets and expecting to be good.

Yes, I'm advising turning it into a bluff because of 1) the preflop action, and 2) it will yield more profit than calling down with no idea where we are. When you call down, as you advocate doing, you're letting him value bet all of his overpairs and sets, which comprise more of his range than his bluffs. This just doesn't seem worth it to me.

It's fine to keep AJ, AQ, AK in the hand when they're drawing so thin, but that is such a small part of his preflop 3betting range. I also wrote that we are demolished by all overpairs and sets, which he has way more of than AQ AJ and AK. It makes sense, then, to make him tell us if he has a monster or not. I'm not going to risk my stack on a passive play when I could have learned a lot more about his hand earlier on. If he jams with AK on us, so what? You're going to get bluffed sometimes.

AT as a TPTK on lots of boards isn't a fantastic hand. Plug the numbers into pokercruncher or flopzilla, we're ahead of his entire range, but def. not by enough to warrant no protection (hence, my advocacy of the flop raise). I will never call off my stack here because "I have top pair, so what else can I do?"

Am I always getting away if he aggresses my 3b? (I think you mean flop raise, right?) It depends on the board texture. If I have more equity in the hand with a flush draw or a straight draw, then I'd take a more aggressive line. This is completely villain dependent. So it depends if villain is capable of a postflop bluff. If I think he is not capable of bluffing in this spot, I'll give up on the pot. If I think he is capable of bluffing, I might call a jam on the flop. But at 55BB, that'd be a sick bluff.

Like I said, when most of his range is value combos, I will raise for protection to keep him from bluffing me off my tptk when I'm ahead. This will win me smaller, but more frequent pots up front as opposed to the occasional big pot when he bluffs off his stack. But it will also save me my entire stack, which I avoid putting in and giving him most of the time when he 3-barrels into my tptk. (even though in this case, wer'e left with 22BB, we're risking 55BB on a mediocre tptk)

Don't forget that all of his AK AQ and AJ of spades gets there with a flush on the river, weighting more equity to his value combos.