What do you think about my line? Should I bet or it's ok to check? I didn't bet cauz cannot imagine his range of calling 4b OOP, it's ridiculous to call 4b OOP, I don't know may be on NL100 it's reasonable, but not on NL10.
So anyway I need your thoughts about this?

Flop check is not great, just bet $2 on the flop and jam non A turn.

As played jam over his turn bet

Why is it that unreasonable to call a 4b oop. In his spot I'm doing this with QQ+ and maybe AKs type hands as well. You should just gii ASAP once he flats and board isn't bad though, who know what a random player has and probably not just AA.

Why 4 bet if you think the only hand you can get called by is AA? If that is true are you 4 betting 100% of your range in this spot?

Because he didn't shove after your reraise PF, you have to assume AA is out of the question. On the flop you should have bet $1.5 to try and milk a little more or get the fold. Having seen the post results I think he might have come along for that much but on the turn you jam it hard.

That was a lousy suck out on his part. I can't imagine he wins much placing those kind of bets OOP with suited connectors.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

You make a small bet on the flop and the jam the turn? What's the point of that?

Because your trying to milk the V for a little more since they are vested they will either fold not wanting to chase and you pick up your preflop gains or you get just a tad more out of them since they obviously don't have you beat. If they just call you know they are chasing, if they reraise then you might be able to place them on a set or a bluff but a reraise of $3 will be a tough bluff to make.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Okay, I'm on board with that. So now why do you want to jam the turn?

To block possible hands that now have potential to draw out on you. A anything, pocket diamonds, straight. Basically, make it really hard to call for a low % draw. And since you've shown strength through the hand, they have to place you on an already made hand forcing the decision to fold.

If they rightly do fold then you just won $3.65 unless they fold on the flop bet then you only win the $2.15...Either way I like winning 1/4 or 1/3 my starting stack with KK.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

So, you mean, you want them to fold even though they have a low percentage chance of winning the hand?

In short yes.

Thought process:
If they are on the flush draw then they have a 19% chance of hitting. I've seen stupidity calls as high as 3/4 pot size bets. This hand is the hardest hand to force a fold so the jam is to discourage this possibility the most.

A anything hands have (and we will assume top pair + A) anywhere from 7%-11% chance and these hands are likely to call just about anything lower than a 3/4 pot size bet depending on the player. Again the jam forces the idea that you had an over pocket pair.

The gut shot straight has a 9% chance to hit and is the most likely hand to fold on a turn jam.

Anything else, like a set on the flop, would have reraised you on the flop...if they smooth call, then I tip my hat to the extra money they will pick me off for on the turn. However, if I got an instant smooth call on the flop, and the V was a tight player I might consider checking the turn (but I feel this is a weakness in my game).

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

It doesn't make any sense to me at all. I can get on board with jamming if you think villain is going to call a lot but jamming to fold out hands that you have crushed is pretty ridiculous. Do you understand why?

Also, what possible gut shots and flush draws do you think villain is calling a 4 bet with? It really seems like you have no idea what you're talking about.

I'll take a guess, because he stands to win more often than not so bet to get out the most equity for the hand? The problem I have with this is that on the hands where he does lose, he's bound to get it all in and the overall losses will out way or break even with the small value bets you make the other times. So I still stand by jamming and I'll add leaving the table.

To your second point, for such low stakes, i say you never know. Players at this level are bound to call just about anything just to see themselves bust AA or KK.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Non of this sounds the least bit right.

I gotta agree with dogarse and BreakingYourNuts here, but what you're saying is fundamentally incorrect.

To over-simplify things, when we bet with the best hand, we want calls (when the villain is not getting the correct price to call). If we are looking for folds, what you're essentially describing is a bluff.

To take an example from what you've posted:

Say we bet half pot, villain then requires 25% equity to call. If he has only 19% equity, we want him to call. While getting a fold may be +EV, getting a call is ++EV. This is a really important fundamental to understand.

@OP: I'd bet flop. Possibly small to try induce a bluff.

Let's look at this from the losing perspective. If you bet half pot and they call, I will be all in on the river due to being pot committed 100% of the time. Over 100 similar hands you would be out $215.40 (20x) while being up $364(80x). This is a net gain of $148.6 over those 100 similar hands.

My method. You lose nothing for fishing for $1.5 on the flop and forcing the fold on the turn, and gain $385 over 100 hands. This is winning poker.

*disclaimer* odds for hitting the flush or gut str8 are 38% and 18% respectivly on the flop. I'm making an assumption that the turn doesn't pop up with a favorable card for either. If it does, im not jamming the turn for the fold anymore.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Sorry but this is nonsense. There is no flush draw otf that can get there ott and flopped gutshots are such a small part of his range they that we shouldn't be factoring decisions for our stack on them.

Plus you can't do EV calcs that just assume favourable cards and ignore unfavourabe ones - that paints a misleading picture.

The first answer in the thread of 1/2 pot flop & jam non-A turns seems like the only way to play to the hand. No idea why we are checking flop.

No no, you miss understood the disclaimer. I meant after the flop, not on the flop.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Your math makes no sense at all to me.

Assuming that if we bet $1.50 on flop and then $2.50 on turn, V calls 100% of the time with his FDs, Gutters and Axs and we never fold the river. Then we are winning an extra $2.50 91 times and losing $6.30 9 times vs his gutters, for a +EV of $1.70. Similarly we are about +0.80 EV vs his FDs and Ax + GSSDs. If we can bet more on the turn and get called this increases dramatically, if we can ever fold the river then this EV increase even more. If we can ever value bet the river and get called by worse then the EV goes through the roof.

Anyway, to the OPs original question it's a 4 bet pot, on a dry board with an SPR of less than 2 and we have an over pair. Of course we want to get our whole stack in the middle, the only question is do we want to do it over 2 streets or 3 street and bet accordingly. So either bet something like $3.10 on flop and jam turn, or $1.70 on flop, $2.80 on turn and jam river. Generally, I like to go small on flop and turn in 4 bet pots so I can have a turn bluff/fold, bluff/give up range.

Villain probably plays tt+ and ak this way preflop with some frequency. Also some random strong broadways and random stuff occasionally.

We can forget balance and maximize vs his him exploitably. Aside from when he holds QQ, it will be hard to get big value on this flop.

We bet flop small as a default for value and to deny AK from realizing its equity.

If you somehow knew villain was a spaz, you could consider checking here so villain might bet turn with his air. Consequently, that's exactly what happened here, but I'm not confident this happens regularly.

I think when you told AA, you can make a much better case for checking, since you don't need to force villain to sacrifice his equity, since he has very little. There's very little downside to trying to get villain to bluff when you hold AA here. I think KK needs a read to make checking better than betting.

Looking at results, hero actually happens to take a maximally exploitive flop and turn line vs villain. We get him to bet with only a gutshot when he probably would have folded to a flop bet.

We basically get the best possible result, with the exception of the river suckout.

Honestly, I don't know where you are pulling these figures from...?