$200 effective stacks.

Hero raises to $7 with AKo UTG.

Unknown villain in MP flats.

Everybody else including fish on button folds.

Flop ($17) AK3 rainbow.

Hero bets $12, villain raises to $30, hero calls.

Turn ($77) is an 8 (board still rainbow).

Hero checks, villain bets $48.

Does an unknown villain have A3, JTs or a spazzy AQ enough for me to continue calling down here?

Close Spot





srsly?

Yeah im folding here like.... oh I dunno... maybe 0% of the time? You're folding AK on and AK3r board scared of exactly what? 33? Come on. My only thought when im raised is how do I get him to put more money into the pot.

I dont mind a flat OTF because we have the board so crippled. OTT id flip flop between going for a c/r and like a small donk (think $10 into $77) to induce a raise from both his air, his worse two pairs and his AQ, AJ that arent going to want to just flat call a 1/8 PSB. If we do get raised im flatting then donk shoving all rivers. We lose value from a possible third barrel but I think most villians aren't firing the third barrel and this helps us stack his weaker Ax's that will have a WTF im confused click call.

iz da best "flydonkfly"

Whoever he is, he's really bad.

Unless this is some kind of trick post, which I don't think it is, then the fact that you are posting it shows you have some serious flaws in your game.

For example, it shows that you aren't really thinking through hands correctly, much less designing appropriate strategies to implement your decisions.

First, in this hand, what hands actually beat you? AA, KK, 88, and 33 right? Well, there are only two aces and two kings left in the deck. So there is only one possible combinations of AA, and one possible combination of KK. There are three 3's left in the deck so there are 3 possible combinations of 33 right? and 3 combinations of 88.

At this point, you've already seen that, of all possible hands he could have been dealt, there are only 6 combinations that beat you. Now, you proceed to try and see, given the way he has played the hand, what possible other hands could be in his range. Also, somewhere in this analysis you then try and identify the probability, based on how he has played, that he actually has these hands.

For example, at low stakes, especially live, it is really odd that AA or KK would just flat your preflop raise instead of reraising. Thus, he probably does not have AA or KK. Is it possible? Absolutely. Just unlikely. With respect to 88, he probably does not have 88 here because it is unlikely he would have raised you on the flop with 88. Regarding 33, he calls pre to hit a set. Hits it, raises the flop, and continues turn. This makes complete sense. Thus, 33 is definitely in his range here. If we can't widen his range anymore then this (there aren't other hands he could have that play like this), then we should fold.

However, there are a ton of hands that he could have that play this way. For example, two pair probably plays this way. You are playing low stakes (live I presume?) so people tend to play way too many hands (one of the big leaks most players have at this level). Thus, he could have any combo of two pair (some being more likely than others). He could have just an ace thinking its good (I think this might be unlikely since, unless he is an aggressive player, most low stakes live players will just call you down and play passively with an ace). Thus, I think his range is more semi-bluff hands, two pairs, big aces, and a set of 3's with a small possibility of having 88, AA, KK, or AK.

Thus, as you can see, even without doing combinations of the hands in his range I listed, his range is much much wider than just AA, KK, and 33.

Now that you've identified his range (let's say, semi-bluffs, big aces, two pair, sets, and maybe just something weird like KQ or 99.) then you try to identify the best strategy to play against him. Since there are a lot of hands in has range that will call your check-raise on the turn, you should go ahead and check-raise. This builds the pot, gets your hand value, and avoids a big problem with just check calling the whole way down, which is you still pay off the hands that beat you but never extract full value from the hands you beat.

Thus, check-raise the turn, and call his shove or (he just flats which is much more likely) you then shove the river.

As you can see from the above analysis, your spot here is really good. Thus, the way you've posted the hand indicates that you don't think about the hand in this way at least, and your wording suggests that you just want to check call all the way down which makes me think you tend to be more of a tight-passive player which is not a very good strategy. Thus, try to think through hands more in this kind of format and you will start getting more value on your hands and generally being more aggressive (which does not equate to bluffing, but merely playing the turn like I am suggesting).

@ J_Bell, the hand was played online.

I think he has 0.5 combos of AA or KK at the most, maybe 3 of the remaining AK combos, all of the 3 combos of 3s and MAYBE 1 combos of A3s. I think he almost never has something like AQ and a multi-street no equity bluff makes little sense given positions. I also NEVER see people show up with JTs here, maybe you do.

Sure he could have K3s or something, but the question is HOW OFTEN we can hope for something like that. He needs to be an absolute donk for there to be value here. I think there is VERY little value in raising at any point in this hand, and even calling down will be marginally +EV at best.

P.S.you're talking to a guy who is barrelly and stationy and tries everything he can think of to win pots. Not weak tight over here by any means but this spot is closer than u make out

Also no need to be so condescending with your tone. I don't need you to explain how to count outs and put people on ranges. This spot boils down to population frequencies, so what I'm asking is: am I good here enough?

I'm not folding against a complete unknown at 200NL. Just call it down and take a note. AA and KK are almost 100% a 3b and lots of people fold 33 MP v UTG. He hardly ever needs to be spazzing out to make this profitable.

Okay, the fact that it was online does change things because it changes the quality of your opponents. Thus, take out some of what I said and I apologize for the misunderstanding. However, I still don't think your analysis is sound. First of all, it is kind of a mistake to try and think of things in terms of half combos of this and so forth. You miss steps in the analysis. What you are essentially doing is a calculation that is as follows (total combinations of hand times probability of having that hand=stated combos of that hand). While not inherently flawed chain of reasoning, it does miss some important parts of the analysis and can lead to some bad results in some spots.

The point is that we can agree that those hands are not very likely. I think 33 is the only hand here that I would not be surprised to see him turn over. Nevertheless, his range here is wider than that because your hand is underreppred. I agree with you that some kind of super bluff, or even semi-bluff is pretty heavily unlikely as well. I think he is probably going for value. I don't understand why you think aq isn't in his range though. Also, I'm not sure why you wouldn't at least agree A3s would be in his range here? I don't necessarily agree that A3o isn't in his range, but even assuming you are right, why would AJ or A8 not be in his range either? You are assuming he wouldn't raise those hands or just that he wouldn't play them in the first place or bet the turn after you call the flop raise?

Also, if you truly think you are beat then you should fold. The only reason you would call down here is if you think you have the best hand here enough to be +ev and the range of hands that you beat would not call a raise. I don't think that is true in this spot.

If we aren't disagreeing about the analysis I am using, then we are really just disagreeing about the Villian's hand ranges I suppose? You don't seem to think he shows up with A8, AQ, AJ, A3, K3, J10, Q10, random bluffs, enough to justify calling when the only hand that really makes sense that beats you is 33? You may very well be correct, but against the range that I suggest he has, you should raise turn. Against the range you suggest, you should just fold. There is no range he has that check/calling is correct against.

Also, I absolutely am not trying to be condescending and apologize if you think I was. I wasn't sure where our disagreement on the hand was rising and assumed it was just because you didn't necessarily go through the hand in the right way. I'm inclined to think now we just disagree about his hand ranges, but there is still the point that check/calling is never correct against either the range you suggest or that I suggest. and the weak/tight comment was over the assumption you were playing live. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

No worries, J_Bell.

I don't agree that 33 is the only "unsurprising" hand here. I also think AK would be very unsurprising. This makes it a tough spot to be in because against the most likely hands, we are crushed vs one and flipping vs the other, with little money in the pot and full stacks to go.

Regarding the rest of his potential range, it is unreasonable for a decent opponent to raise flop with Ax for obvious reasons. He could indeed be doing this sometimes if he were a weaker player, but as you say, weaker players usually just flat bets with top pair no kicker or mid kicker. So Ax is in his range since he is an unknown, but it takes a special kind of spazz to raise Ax on this dry board here vs an UTG open, and I just don't see such spazzes often at all.

I agree he could have A3s, but I only put one combo in my estimation of his range because I rarely see people flat suited aces in MP. In the cutoff it is more likely, and it happens frequently on the button and in the blinds - again, just my experience, which could differ from yours.

A very possible hand is A3o; he can have it if he is a very poor player and he would certainly play it this way if he was.

I also don't think my hand is under-repped. Most people would play there monsters exactly how I have, in bet calling flop and checking turn. This is the dryest board imaginable, so there's no air to rep when we raise, which itself can be a good reason to raise but not with no dynamic.

I don't understand why I should raise turn. If he is doing this for value with A3s and is DECENT then he will fold when I raise turn. If he is terrible than he is betting that hand and A3o on the river anyway. A once in a million bluff gets folded out when I raise turn, too.

If he is absolutely awful and is raising AQ on the flop then I suppose he would call my turn x-r, but he would likely just stick it in on the river himself in that case.

Anyway I called down because I had top 2 and thought he could be a fish with A3o but thought the spot deserved a 2nd look.

I actually agree with a lot of what you are saying. I agree with your A3 analysis and AQ and Ax.

The only problem is that he is an unknown player, so you don't really know if he is fishy or not and given that I raise turn because I think his range is wider than that.

Actually, your check call could be pretty good instead. I've changed my mind. If you think he is good enough to fold A3 there then just check call because you can get more value by just check calling turn and getting him to try to go for more value on river.

However, I just disagree with your range probability and description of what he would likely do in response to your raise. I'm assuming he had 33 and you are thinking now you should have gotten away?

If you are thinking about folding turn why would you not fold flop?

Well, while villain is unlikely to be bluffing on the flop he is almost never bluffing on the turn after I call the flop raise with no draws on board.

You make a reasonable point, though, as villain is rarely bluffing here anyway.

In truth, I made my decision to call down on the flop, based on the reasoning that he can have A3 sometimes.

If I knew he was a disciplined but uncreative nit or even tag (who had no A3) I would actually fold flop.

This morning when I worked out the math I think calling down was $9 +EV when giving him a range of 3 AK, 0.5 AA, three 33, 2A3s and 1 random bluff. Having that 1 random bluff as well as some A3o in his range makes it a close but clear call down.

Nah, he had 33 and I still think I played it fine by calling him down.

It's good to revisit "standard" spots every now and then as I improve my thought process. Turns out I was being a bit nitty in being concerned about the spot but not by much.

You're boned. This is a cooler like always.

Vs reg random it's possible that they'll flat their range vs a UTG open, or decide to make a vacuum play with AA vs a random w/no history. Going further, don't see any type of reg raising flop with top two or top set like ever, so that really leaves 1 KK and (3) 33 if they flat that pre. While it's a parlay to get to 4 combos that beat you, it's more likely than a reg raise+barreling with worse IP.

Vs true random you potted pre from UTG, that might induce a few more flats of AK; but (unless truly special) these don't seem like the days that AQ or any bluffs will gets raised and barreled given the positions/history/stakes.

Verdict: games still play such that we can chalk the turn read as a pure cooler instead of omg how do I over complicate things! It is what it is, not the way it should be. imo