A few questions about this hand as I feel like I misplayed it on various levels. Villain is a reg at these stakes, doesn't go out of line usually.



Should I include this hand in my SB 4betting range ever?
Is 1/2 pot a bad sizing on the turn? Do we ever fold the river?


PokerStars Zoom, Omaha Pot Limit - €0.10/€0.25 - 6 players

UTG: €52.75 (211 bb)
MP: €52.90 (212 bb)
CO: €45.15 (181 bb)
BU: €24.30 (97 bb)
SB (Hero): €29.01 (116 bb)
BB: €64.24 (257 bb)

Pre-Flop: (€0.35) Hero is SB with 4 K 7 A
4 players fold, Hero raises to €0.75, BB 3-bets to €2.25, Hero calls €1.50

Flop: (€4.50) 7 7 5 (2 players)
Hero checks, BB checks

Turn: (€4.50) K (2 players)
Hero bets €2.75, BB calls €2.75

River: (€10) T (2 players)
Hero bets €7.75, BB raises to €32.75, SB (Hero) ?

I'd say around maybe 30% he has you beat basically it'd be a pretty good idea if you should fold if you were playing live and previous tell etc but online it's tougher to fold. Just based on hand without knowledge of opponent I'd say fold this maybe around 20% of time or a little less

Against a reg probably folding to 3-bet. Sizing on turn is fine, could go a little bigger. Would mix between checking and betting turn depending on villain. As played don't think you can fold river. I don't play zoom so maybe we can fold if BB isn't finding enough bluffs?

I think this is well played, but the fact that you are asking about folding the river to this raise makes me concerned. Obviously, you lost this hand to TT, but I think you need to consider that villain should be playing a naked 7, or more specifically a 75, K5, T5 exactly as he did in this hand.

I had some intuition about this hand so I ran it through Flophero and it agreed with my intuition, which I feel good about.

• Turn size: 1/3 or check are preferred over 1/2 with your exact hand (a K7). It likes to mix 1/3 and 1/2 with hands like AK64, where you get some of your bluffs from
• river should be check or pot (mostly pot) - you are polarized here so just jam it

So basically this is great, but once he raises you what should you do? Flophero wants you to rejam over the top and I think that sort of makes sense. It's hard for him to get to the river with TT, so you are mostly worried about KK, but he should be raising you with 75, 7K and T5 and you chop or crush all of those. He will have to call your rejam.

Combinatorically I started villain with a 15-40% range and on the river he has 2455 hands that are 75, K7, T7, TT, KK.
KK!(TT, 75, K7, T7) - 43 (1.8%)
TT!(KK, 75, T7, K7) - 929 (38.1%)
75!(TT, KK,T7,K7)- 621 (20.0%)
K7!(TT,KK,75,T7) - 517 (14.5%)
T7!(TT,KK,75,K7) - 803 (25.7%)

so, a whopping 38% of the time in this rough sim your opponent will show up with TT (I didn't properly discount for him folding a lot of TT combos to your turn bet, so it's probably less than this), but that doesn't mean you should fold (EVER). Even though, because of how you wrote your post, I am sure he had TT.

Anyways, solver wants you to rejam his jam here, because solver probably has some bluffs in it's range. I think this work shows you could safely rejam here if you wanted to because he isn't folding any of these and you are best 45%, chopping 15%, and losing 40% so it's still a great re-jam spot.

edit: sim range 15%-40%:(75!(TT, KK,T7,K7), T7!(TT,KK,75,K7),K7!(TT,KK,75,T7),KK!(TT,75,k7,T7) , TT!(KK,t7,75,k7)) if anyone wants it

Ludicrous

Did I miss where you discounted these hands because he will c-bet flop with a good amount of these?

Is this a fold on the river ever?

I think this is a fair question. No I would not fold this hand, but you should be folding some fullhouses which I would imagine solver would never do. Players at these steaks are not coming close to solver aggression so overfolding is how you exploit that.

No, you are not missing it and no I did not do it. I do have a job so I did make a simplification. All the work is done and the combos are there, it's easy to discount any combo you'd like to. I said it was rough and it's not meant to be gospel, but it provides a fair bit of value I think. Maybe not? It's easier for me to just not post the work - it took a bit of time to write up.

I think if you were going to fold fullhouses you can fold 55 or 57, but this is way too strong. Solver wants you to rejam it. I agree with your exploit though, and I think you can do that by just calling here with the third nuts.

I think it's absolute madness to refer to the solver at $25 zoom. Such a high proportion of the player pool operates on the basis of only even seeing that they have a raise button on the river when they have nut boat or better. The number of people that have a light value raising range, let alone a bluff raising range, is tiny. I don't think I can fault a fold here. Though I would fold to the 3b pre.

/shrug - ok. I don't agree, and I think that's fine.

The fact that the players aren't doing that when they should means you can learn two exploits at once.

If they aren't raising as much as theory would say they should we can fold exploitatively and just need to decide where that line is. I provided analysis above that I would have done 15 years ago with limit holdem without any solvers, and I would have concluded that folding here is probably wrong, but around the threshold depending on how tight you think the population raises.

If people are folding this boat in this spot commonly at these limits then in the other players shoes we can exploit that and raise wider and I doubt ANYONE here would have recommended that if the hand had been posted from Villian's perspective with this exact action. Imagine I'm BB and I have 9875 what are you going to tell me to do? It's a very reasonable line for villain to take on every street (flop is questionable, but whatever). Another hand is AK86, what do you do as villain with this hand on the river facing the 3/4PSB? I know what I do.

I dislike the turn bet, especially in fast fold tight environment.

I enjoyed the theorems players use to make years ago. Good old Beluga had at least one and Zeebo had a theorem back in the day that stated, "no one every folds a full house." I miss those guys. I am going to pour some of my 40 ounce Olde English "800" out for any of them that have passed away.

I feel we need a theorem about under full houses particularly in fast fold poker where player ranges are tighter. This is a work in progress but, I'm thinking "the under full house theorem", especially in tight game environments, should state...

"If preflop was 3bet+ and your opponent was the last preflop raiser, then never bet into them with your under full house if there is an Ace or King on board."

Stop overvaluing under full houses when there is an Ace or King on board on hands that were 3bet+ by someone else!!!

In fast fold poker particularly, players don't 3 bet preflop lightly when they can just fold and quickly move on to the next hand. And I would weight their 3 betting range to AAxx (duh) and KKxx.

The flop has hero out of position in a preflop 3 bet pot as the 3 bet caller and Hero can check 100% of the time. That is fine.

The turn gives Hero an under full house, but put a King on board. You have the King thereby reducing the chances that Villain has KKxx, but is is still often wish casting on the part of Hero in a preflop 3bet pot to think, "oh the Villain doesn't have the over full house." These hands can be played to showdown passively just fine on boards that have an Ace or King.

If adding King boards to the theorem is a bridge too far for some of you, then it can be reduced to include only A boards.