[converted_hand][hand_history]IPoker, $0.50/$1 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 5 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

Hero (SB): $95.40 (95.4 bb)
BB: $107.76 (107.8 bb)
MP: $71.50 (71.5 bb)
CO: $110.02 (110 bb)
BTN: $107.06 (107.1 bb)

Preflop: Hero is SB with A T
2 folds, BTN raises to $2.50, Hero raises to $11, BB folds, BTN calls $8.50

Flop: ($23) A J 9 (2 players)
Hero bets $16.39, BTN calls $16.39

Turn: ($55.78) 6 (2 players)
Hero

I'd be going much smaller on this flop unless trying to exploit a fish. Maybe it's kind of unintuitive to bet small on such a wet board, but we have such a substantial equity advantage here because this board is just so good for our range. Villain has a lot less strong hands than we do, and has more hands at the lower part of their range that we don't have

Pretty close to pure check turn as played when the pot is so big imo. If you had bet small on the flop we could pry be betting the turn more often with this hand

Yes in this type of boards i never go small because i dont cbet often and my cbetting range is small , but is interesting to bet small because range advantage ...

As played , i checked the flop and he bets about 2/3 , i think we have a hero fold ?

I like your sizing here on a connected board like this - on the turn I think it's a check. If he bets the turn you essentially have a bluff catcher and I can't think of many hands that bluff here. I'd just fold

I don't care for the massive bet. What worse hands are going to call it?

In flop u say ? I dont understand it haha

Bet small flop
If for whatever reason you want to play a big bet or check strategy check this hand on flop

Bet small flop and bet 3/4 turn?

The flop bet is way too big. Not many worse hands are going to call it.

OP I wouldn't beat yourself up too much on the flop cbet sizing. 1/3 sizing targets a certain hand class and the 2/3 sizing targets another hand class.

The IP Defender in 3BP's over fold to bigger cbet sizing's by a good margin. Even 500zoom regs over fold to 50% sized cbets in 3BP's by 12%.

Which makes you actually incentivized to cbet this hand even with the 2/3 sizing. BTN is supposed to be calling QJs/JTs/T9s/98s at mixed frequencies and stuff like KQo some of the time.

But if you nodelock your opponent to folding those hands to a 2/3 sized cbet. This hand becomes a 100% cbet OTF. Although the EV is very close between checking and betting.

I think the interesting part of this hand is BTN though. He get's raising ranges here and even more so if we assume a 1/3 range cbet by SB.

Why go small? I would think on a board like this where most turns/rivers will benefit the callers range and not ours, if we do cbet it should be on the larger size given our range advantage. I think developing a polarized range here is ideal otherwise a small flop bet will get called more often leading to turns/rivers where a good villain can leverage their range advantage. Curious to hear the argument

Small or big are both fine. Range advantage as a concept isn't very useful, you need to think about what the purpose of your cbet is wrt to your opponent's range.

The 1/3 sizing targets pocket pairs under 9x and some gutshots
The 2/3 sizing targets Jx and more Gutshots

Either one is fine but remember if you only use 1 you are making the decision easier for your opponent.

Really not sure where you're getting an idea that most turns and rivers will benefit villain's range more than ours. If we cbet range for a small sizing, then we're still going to have a substantial equity advantage on a vast majority of turns. Like the only turn that sucks for us that I can think of is a ten (and it's not even really that bad tbh). We have a significant number of strong trips (more so than villain) on any board that pairs the A/J/9, and we have plenty of flushes when the heart comes

It might not be a significant mistake if you know how to play it properly, but I certainly wouldn't call a polarized flop range "ideal." Most of the time they're not going to have a range advantage to leverage in the first place, assuming they're even actually good

Nice answers, so is better to go small at flop to let the villain call with most of his range and Hero can bet turn again without Make the pot too big, right? If we bet big at flop then I have to play check fold in this turn for example because the pot is too big and I dont want to stack here with my hand

Well if we bet and they call their range in theory should contain more hearts, more broadway hands,QT/T8,etc. What I'm getting at is most turns we have to check, and they can go bet bet with a good chance by the river we have a tough decision. Furthermore I think on a connected flop like this our flop cbet % goes down vs say A62r, so it's going to be narrower.

We don't have to check on most turns though after we bet small otf, on any brick we want to be betting at a very high frequency, and even on a flush or straight completing turn we're still betting a fair amount of the time. We actually have to check a lot more often on turns if we opt for a bigger flop sizing compared to a smaller one, even on bricks (villain's range is stronger, and the pot is larger while we're OOP)

Our cbet% on this flop might be a bit lower than say A62r, but not substantially so. We still would want to bet often enough that it's a reasonable simplification to just bet range. And also, lower cbet% does not automatically mean larger cbet sizing

I would suggest taking a look at this spot in GTOWizard, it might be a bit eye-opening for you

There's some good advice for you in this thread. I'd add...

How about, whatever sizing you go w/ on the flop, have a plan ahead of time for the turn. You bet larger on the flop to deny the drawing part of your opponent's range. One set of those draws came in on the turn. What's your plan?