Played this one tonight and thought it was interesting.

40/80 3 handed

SB is loose and aggressive, but weird and bad. He makes big folds and misses a lot of value on the river. Very inducible with standard lines.

BB is a solid online TAG

I open OTB with J9ss. SB cc. BB calls.

Flop 567 one spade

I chk back.

Turn Ks

SB bets BB folds. I call.

river 3x

SB bets I raise

Notes: I can have a straight here, but realize my line doesn't make much sense.

What would you consider a "big fold" for him here?

Trying to reconcile someone who misses a lot of river value but also makes big folds and what his bet/folding range would be on this river...

The only problem I see is that the river is a scare card as far as he's concerned, and he might think it's perfect for you to bluff there, and he might call with a 5 or 6.

Other than a pair, the only parts of his range this will work on are his Q high hands. The player you describe would have 3bet pre with A high, and you already beat the rest of his non-paired hands.

I'm nowhere near your skill level, so this is more like thinking aloud rather than advice.

He might randomly b/f a small pair, depending on his mood and how he's running (he is losing). He also may chk small pairs. He is random. He will def be "bluffing" w ace and queen high on the river a fair amount and will usually fold those to a raise (but not always. He is random)

If he's prone to curiosity calls then I think you'll do better to bluff with the top of your folding range.

Can we talk about the flop? Sorry if you think it's a trivial check back but I'd bet this hand 100%.

I think it's a pretty trivial check at least some portion of the time. I want to be able to raise different runouts on turn/river and this hand will allow me to raise cards that I wouldn't normally get to.

This is pretty close to the top of my folding range (which is why I decided to raise) on the river. I'm showing down many Q highs that I call the turn with.

If this is bs who I assume he'll never fold a pair, of which he has way more combos than he should, but he can't help but bluff every single non lair hand he has also so I think it's good.

I wouldn't put you on a 4 because you probably would have cbet ypur OESD or pair of 3s on the flop.

I think turn is a must raise

I decided to check Cepheus for the optimal HU play, even though the 3-handedness here obviously makes things different.

My instinct was that OTR was right, and we'd see significant check backs, but in fact, the backdoor fd makes this a bet over 95%. Without the backdoor, he checks back 25% of the time with J9s.

And my guess it that the 3-handedness makes checking more desirable, so OTR is still probably right here.

It's interesting that across his whole range he checks back 34% of the time:



green = bet
blue = check
green with blue bar = mostly bet, sometimes check, closer to 50% check if the bar if full
blue with green bar = vice versa

I love bots as much as the next guy. Some critiques:

3 handed is MUCH MUCH different than heads up.
Bot assumes that villain(s) will have a substantial donk range. When villain doesn't donk, bot believes villain to be weaker than usual. IRL, many villains check to raiser very very high%.

Definitely agree with DD considering this player is a rando spazz. Our read is that villain could easily fold hands he shouldn't -- better to tell a better story with the turn raise.

yeah, he donks about 32% here. i'm curious to know what the equity difference is between the donk and check range -- i'll try to run the numbers tomorrow.

but if you are correct that a check looks weaker to the bot (i think you are), and that these live players are therefore stronger, shouldn't that argue even more strongly in favor of the check OTR made? And I think the 3-handedness does too.

the situations are different, but not, imo, repeated word all caps different i still think there's value in looking at the HU situation, and seeing if we can reason our way with adjustments to draw conclusions about this situation. but yeah, it puts us on shaky ground.

I feel like I would prefer to raise turn with this hand and reserve a river bluff for queen highs since this would probably be the top of my folding range on the river. On this exact river, it is true that you can't represent too much but this player is not a great hand reader and especially against you, most people just assume you have some kind of balanced range for any action you take.

Speaking of the specific player in this hand, I have a theory that a huge amount of the actions he takes are based on live tells, or at least his interpretation of them. I think he is actually one of the better regulars in the games at picking up live tells, but that he relies on them too much. I think this fails him against good players who are generally pretty good at keeping their physical behavior consistent. Against these players, he still attempts to pick up tells, and then reacts based on what he thinks he's learned, often resulting in seemingly random and bizarre lines.

I may be off base here, but it is a theory I have that I think explains a lot of the actions he takes.

Not sure if you know my rep around here. I love bots and discussing bot strategies. I agree we can learn a lot from looking at bots. I'd suggest you look at 3handed bots if you don't already, since HU is much different from 3way+.

(HU, BB is defending ~95%. 3way, SB range will be a lot tighter, and more defined because of the cold call. BB range given BTN raise + SB call will also be tighter. Cbetting into a 95% range is much different than cbetting 3way against tighter ranges.)

The lesson to be learnt from a bot is that SB/BB should be donking a lot more than the average live player on these type of flops. The corollary is that Hero should then adjust to live players by donk-checking more than what a 3handed bot would suggest in this spot.

I agree with your conclusion, just not how you got there or how applicable HU bots are to 3way pots.

(^^addition: forgot to mention difference in BTN ranges. HU, BTN opens 80%+. 3way, BTN opens 40-50%)


Thinking out loud: how would people here play a Kx? I don't think it's horrible to flat some Kx OTT, to raise safe rivers. SB is loose/aggro. Good chance he vbets any pair. Good chance he barrel bluffs many rivers. If a 4/8/9 comes, we can flat behind.

I would call/raise river with a king vs this villain fwiw. That being said, you're probably right

fair enough, and good post.

EDIT: btw, which 3-handed bot do you play? i've played neo before but no others. and didn't know of any whose strategy you can query in the same way you can query cepheus's.

Don't mind the flop check. But I think if you are going to take this line raising the turn and bet river will be more successful. FWIW I think he missed everything anyway.

Sent from my LG-D415 using 2+2 Forums

flop bet > turn raise > river raise IMO.

The problem with the river is that it does look like a perfect card to bluff with, given the 4 cards to a str8. Hard to put you on a 4 here too. Not even including the fact that you are most likely cbet any 4 or 8 on the flop, even if you are opening with 50% of your hands OTB, that only includes 7 total hands or so that have a 4 in them. You are not checking back any pair on the flop and are most likely raising any K on the turn, so this only works if he has total air. A somewhat competent villain likely to look you up with any pair, Ace high, and some Q high hands.

I think it's fine and can see him folding hands as strong as Kx here. Definitely his QTss type hands too.

Obviously raising turn is good, too. Essentially, just raise at any point against villain as described and I approve.