I lost a hand where he flopped flush-over-flush vs me earlier. That + this KK hand, made me think he is likely to percieve me as tilted. The following hand might be ok anyway, but the perception of being tilted surely is an extra justification, am I right?

Do you expect him to be 4B bluffing you a lot in hand1? Or getting it otf in w 55-88?
Hand 2 seems okayish, id probably see a turn and get it in on nonspades/nonace turns

Unfortunately the latter. I'm a little curious what the game dynamic was like to make you think it was acceptable to result in some of these plays.

Hand 1:
~What was your logic for 3betting flop?
~The river call is bad.

Hand 2:
~What are you trying to accomplish by jamming KJo?

Hand 1 I think that he assumes I'm 3bet-bluffing a ton. Therefore I expected him to shove overcards a lot (was snapcalling that). His small 4bet surprized me, but I still thought it was convievable that he was bluffing, so I decide to bluffcatch. Obviously checking the turn, since I don't want to take away his opportunity to bluff. On the river he probably shoves any Q, and also a lot of his 4bet-bluffs on the flop. That was my thinking, anyway. I doubt he is 4bet-getting it in PP's unless he somehow slowplayed AA or something like that.

The game dynamic at before these hands were that I had just been coolered flush over flush in a 3bet pot, and had been playing aggro after that. He probably percieved me to be steaming, but I actually had just been picking up decent hands.

Like I said in previous post, I'm 3betting the KK to induce (I think he expects me to flat his x/r with made hands and 3bet bluffs+8's). When he 4bets, I think it's conceivable that he is still bluffing but doesn't want to risk his entire stack. When I call he is probably putting me on a float, PP or an 8. Checking turn to keep his bluffs in, and calling river to bluffcatch + I beat Qx.

KJo hand I think 3betting pre is ok, and cbetting flop is mandatory. When he raises I think its too good a hand to fold. He is very likely 4betting AK pre, so I lose to KQ, and flushes (maybee sets, but doubt he calls pre). He might be raise-calling As as well. I have 3 options: Folding...but that seams superweak. Calling...ok, but then i have to check/call any safe turn. Probably fine as well. Raising...Get it in vs AsXo, and fold out bluffraises. This was also the very next hand after KK, so maybe he thinks I will do something stupid here.

Bad play. Very, very, very bad play.

Thanks. I got a lot out of this post.

Check the flop in hand 1, don't 3-bet after being check-raised, and fold the river.

Don't 3-bet in hand 2, and fold to the flop raise.

I definitely don't think anything here is bad but one line of thinking that you had in hand 1 that I have to disagree with, is that he would perceive you to have some floats in your range after you call the 4bet on the flop. I really really doubt that but im not sure how that really changes anything other than it surprises me he would check the turn. Hand 2 I just slightly prefer calling on the flop and looking to check call the turn unless spade hits. If he were to check behind on a spade turn, then you could consider shoving river.

I find it hard to take this serious... I can see an argument for flatting his x/r in hand 1, but to check the flop is just beyond ridicolous. This is a flop that you want to cbet a ton, and then you obviously need to do it with your TT+ as well.

3betting KJo 100bb deep some % of the time is widely regarded as good/fine/standard. Why don't you like it? If you are folding KJ to the flop raise, then what are you continuing with? The difference between KJ and hands like AK or AA is very marginal. Even the difference between KJ and KK is not that huge. Do you continue with these, or are folding anything but a flush? Seems like you will get run over big time if you do this.

Not really. Lots of hands are >>> KJ no spade here against reasonably constructed raising ranges. Monotone flops are weird that way.

KK is significantly better than KJ. Even hands like 6x4 are slightly > KJ no spade.

(Yes, bet the flop as a default in both hands.)

Ok, sure, KK is a lot better. Because then you have redraws to a boat, and your opponent can't win with 2 pair. But the difference between KJ no spade and AK or AA no spade is very small. The only difference is pretty much that villain will have 3 less outs with his nut flushdraws. Also AK/AA beats KQ, but that's only 8(with AK) / 12(with AA) combos of anyway.

The difference between KJ and AA is actually quite big on that flop. You're forgetting the simple stuff (like not blocking villains TP hands etc), it's not just raw all-in equity that goes into the equation.

Actually, this is a flop that you want to c-bet less often than usual, and checking bigger overpairs that don't fear giving a free card should be very standard. If you bet too often here, then you create a situation where villains can exploit you either by profitably check-raise bluffing with any two cards or by getting paid off too light when they have an 8 or better, which they will >10% of the time. Here, for example, you put in >20x the pot when >10% of his initial range had you drawing to 2 outs. It should be trivial to see that this can't possibly be good. You should never call all-in after seeing this flop with these stacks without at least an 8, and this is deducible via very simple arithmetic.

Villain's check-raise creates a situation where either you have 2 or 4 outs or he has 2-4 outs. You are a healthy favorite against his c/r range, some of which will bluff the turn and/or river if you call, but instead you elected to 3-bet rather large, thereby creating a situation where the majority of his continuing range has you drawing to 2 or 4 outs. I'm not sure that there's a name for this kind of bet - you never fold out better, so it's not a bluff, and you're behind the range that continues, so it's not a value raise, and you have very little to protect against, so it's not a protection bet. I think the best word for the flop 3-bet here would be "terrible."

And then you compounded this error by calling the river.

The best answer I could give to this question would take too long and involve discussing more concepts than I'm willing to share. Suffice it to say that 3-betting KJo 100bb deep against a min-raise some % of the time is indeed fine, but the % should be much less than 50.

The fact that you're talking about "KJ," "AK," and "AA" without reference to suits strongly suggests that you're not thinking properly about how to play on this board. AJ is a much better hand to continue with than KJ despite being a dog to that hand heads-up. And although I suggested that you fold KJ, I would suggest that you shove KJ. So simply saying "KJ" is not sufficient here.

I disagree that the difference between KJ and KK is not huge.

Eyeball math makes AA without a seems like a pretty good place to draw the line (that is, continue with AA and fold AK), but if I spent more time working on the problem I could be convinced to shift it up or down a bit.

What range do you think villain should be raising here? Having extra equity against dry A hands and increasing the combinations of Kx that he can have are actually pretty big deals. That's why I decided AA would be where I drew the line.

Call me optimistic, but I'm expecting to create a stack out of thin air against overcards here quite a bit.

I'm talking about KJ AK and AA with no spade. Any >TP+FD I'm obviously fistpump-shipping, as I shipped KJ without spades.

Yes, I agre it's quite big too. Was a little quick there.

Well, I agree that it makes a noticable difference, but intuitively I wanted to draw the line further down on the hand ranking charts. Maybe I've heard too often on training videos that you should not fold top pair.

I'm not sure that this makes sense to me. How are we getting exploited if we cbet a ton, as long as we play good against villains ranges after that? Villain will not profit by checkraising any two if we call him down wide enough? And if villain is only checkraising for value, then we can comfortably muck. We obviously have the challenge of figuring out what his x/r-range really consists of, but the same problem applies to him: He needs to figure out what our cbetting range is. Is my thinking flawed here?

The reason I'm reluctant to check back KK here, is because what are you going to do when you open 80%+ preflop, and end up on this flop with T or J-high? If villain knows that we are checking back KK, how can he possibly not just go in calldown mode with like K-high and better? Because K-high is really a monster hand if we are cbetting our air and not our big pockets. So what do you suggest that we cbet? And if we are not cbetting our air, what do we do when we miss the turn?

You're optimistic.

Watch different/better training videos and fix your intuitions.

Suggestions? Been mainly using deucescracked. Quite new to heads up anyway. I'm contemplating runitonce.

If you c-bet too frequently, then even if you play perfectly afterwards you will wind up putting more money in the pot with weak hands than you would have if you'd checked more often.

But what if villain check-raises a balanced range of bluffs and value, as he should? In that case, you're forced to call down with more bluff-catchers and put much more money in the pot with weak hands than if you'd simply checked behind.

Ignore what his x/r-range really consists of. Try to figure out what it should consist of, and then figure out how to play against that.

All J-high and T-high hands are not created equal. Hands with two overcards to the 4 are much better to bet than hands with a 3 or 2 in them. Betting JT-J5 and T9-T5 while checking J3/J2 and T3/T2 would be perfectly fine.

Well, he might decide not to go into call-down mode with K-high if he doesn't like lighting money on fire. Of course, if he decides that donating to us would be fun, then we should be perfectly satisfied with having him call down with K-high.

You have a problem in that you think in terms of categories like "air" when in fact every individual hand has characteristics that make it good or bad to bet.

Even if ~2/3 of our bets on the flop here consist of "air" (as they should), where "air" refers to hands worse than king-high, villain cannot profitably continue with most K-high hands (obviously he should continue with K5+ if he has a backdoor flush draw) if we play the turn and river well.

Most of our 8s (only checking with our weakest kickers), pocket pairs not strong enough to give a free card but >= 44, about half of our 4s (usually betting with a good kicker and checking with a bad one), and a little less than half of our unpaired hands, preferring to bet hands that are either strong enough to be for value (basically just our best ace-high hands) or that lack showdown value (J-high or worse) but have two overs to the 4 (including gutshots).

This works out to a little less than half our hands. Understand that after being check-raised, we will need to continue with all of our value hands (4s+) and some of our "air" in order to prevent ATC from being profitable raises, and the best "air" hands to continue with will have 3-flushes and preferably 3-straights. So, for example, 95 with a 3-flush would be better to continue with than AQo. Remember, in order to call all-in we need an 8 or better, so improving to top pair with AQ is not our goal. It's the same reasoning behind why 76s is a better hand to call a 3-bet pre with than A7o.

What is "air"? Is A2 "air? What about KQ? QJ?

The obvious answer is that if he bets, you call sometimes, fold sometimes, and raise sometimes. If he checks, you check sometimes and bet sometimes.

In other words, just play poker.

Afraid I can't comment meaningfully on this subject, I've never watched a training video.

out of interest, what stakes do you play? your SN is outed?

Thanks for sharing Spladle.

If you CBet 3$ with KK on 885, with a preflop potsize of 5, and both players play a balanced strategy that includes making calling down KK breakeven, aren't you losing ~8$ which is the pot at the point where he check-raises and not 100$ as it is as much his responsibility to make you break-even with 'bluff-catchers' as it is yours ? (Ignoring improvement of either players hands)

As you otherwise could just call down when he bluffs too much and fold when he don't. (Play poker :P)

If you know BB's strategy(CR-Range, c-c ranges), would you still check KK?

Pre-BF, the highest I'd played was 100/200 8-game on PS and 25/50 HUNL. The highest HUNL game I actually have a winning record at is 10/20. After BF, I took a very long break from online poker. In the interim, I played some live 5/10-10/25 full-ring NL/PLO. I recently (about a month ago) put a little money back online and have been playing mostly 5/10 HUNL since then.

As I've been posting on 2p2 for over 9 years, it wouldn't surprise me if at some point I'd "outed" one or more of my SNs, but I don't think I've ever made a point of doing so. I've played on half a dozen or so over the years on various sites.

I think this is interesting. 100 deep, and my 3bet size is 8 over 2, I'm probably 3b'ing KJo just about 50% (vs a minraiser). Only 2 hands that flat really have you dominated (AJ/KQ) and you dominate many other hands. I think it makes sense to throw in the weaker broadway hands to fill out your 3b high card range. Am I doing it wrong?