His? We are 3 way. Your reasoning makes sense in a headsup situation.
Sorry, I mean their. While being 3way definitely reduces our SDV, the same thing applies. We are ahead of their air, behind their made hands and want fds in our X range. I haven't decides myself how to play in those spots. I'm concerned that checking here sacrifices EV for the sake of balance. But I will definitely X here if I know my opponents are competent.
What would solver do in a similar heads up situation (co vs btn)? Check or bet
Although the turn is hu you need to remember the prior action with villain raising the flop into 2 players. It's also not c/o vs btn , we raised in mp and got called by btn and bb.
Although the turn is hu you need to remember the prior action with villain raising the flop into 2 players. It's also not c/o vs btn , we raised in mp and got called by btn and bb.
That's why I'm saying 'In a similar hu situation', cause solver doesn't solve mw pots afaik
That's why I'm saying 'In a similar hu situation', cause solver doesn't solve mw pots afaik
It's not going to be much good in this spot then. If it's not solving mw spots even the cbet advise it gives in mw pots will be flawed. I don't use any solvers though so not exactly sure how they work. But making up a different scenario that discounts all the important info in the hand doesn't seem like logical way to come to any conclusions.
Seems reasonable. I don't think I defend my checking range enough in multiway pots in practice. We probably want to check somewhat often on a Jxx board anyway, so putting most of our Axcc's in our flop check range makes sense. Maybe some stuff like J9cc or JTcc as well?
I'd bet the worse no-SDV flush draws because they have no SDV and I want some flush draws that I can double barrel.
Thanks, decent post. That is what I am thinking too.
