Villain is tighter reg. Idea is really simple, I dont care what he have, becouse he is capped and not allowed to donk here, can this fact alone justify spew?

PokerStars, Hold'em No Limit - $0.10/$0.25 - 5 players
Hand delivered by Upswing Poker

UTG (Hero): $30.76 (123 bb)
CO: $14.78 (59 bb)
BU: $59.50 (238 bb)
SB: $19.09 (76 bb)
BB: $27.27 (109 bb)

Pre-Flop: ($0.35) Hero is UTG with K♦ J♣
Hero raises to $0.55, 3 players fold, BB calls $0.30

Flop: ($1.20) 8♥ 3♠ A♠ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks

Turn: ($1.20) 3♥ (2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks

River: ($1.20) Q♥ (2 players)
BB bets $0.86, [b][color=#C51F1F]Hero raises to $7.50

Why is he capped? BB is supposed to almost range check turn. Also he isn't donking he is probing.

no aces, also checked paired turn with 2 FD's that I unblock.
I wonder if i can raise smaller for same effect?

Yeah but just because he doesn't have AA doesn't mean he is capped. He can still have quads/boats/flushes, a bunch of hands that can either call or 3bet your raise.

You want to block value when you do stuff like this so a hand like KQ/QJ with a heart would be a good combo.

Would you check any FD on turn in BB shoes?

I m really curious opinions about this hand, as i usually dont do those things, just trying to enhance my game with a bit of the main track plays against pool of nits

It depends on the player type, but yes. These spots are rarely pure bets with a FD in the solver, and a lot of the reason why is so that we can remain uncapped OTR when it goes x/x and a flush card comes This is a fundamental difference with playing OOP vs IP. OOP we are rarely range betting, so we have to protect our check range a lot more. That's less important IP when we can guarantee seeing a new card if we want when IP.

Against either tough opponents, or against certain types of passive stations, I am fine checking a FD here. Even a hand like 88 is supposed to check here some times. We can debate whether our opponents are actually doing this or not, and possibly derive some exploits like this against capped range. But just because we may have identified a capped range, it doesn't mean that our opponent will fold whatever it is they have. If they are a station, they are going to find a call with any pair they might have gotten here with far too often for this to be profitable.

Yeah definitely. A good heuristic is not to probe very often on Ace high boards. And if you do probe you overbet.

You are saying you have AQ+ when you bet.

so you think bb's bet frequency is supposed to be 0 in a x down pot to the river?

Also as BB when you check turn with draws you get a great opportunity to wreck IP with big x-raises when he delay cbets. IP is the one who's capped here, not BB. BB can and should be x-raising every street with traps some significant portion of the time, while IP has much less incentive to x-back the top of his range. When IP delay cbets on turns that don't improve him, OOP should go nuts with x-raises and use massive sizes.

In practice this is massively profitable at low stakes beyond what it should be in theory, because people delay cbet too often on bricks (the GTO frequencies are extremely low) and don't even try to defend against big x-raises, nor should they against a population that probes too often with draws, underbluffs turn x-raises, and has blatant sizing tells. You should be looking for these spots as OOP and constructing your ranges in a way that allows you to x-raise aggressively. Hands like draws have a huge incentive to go for the x-raise rather than probe, because when IP doesn't delay cbet you realize your equity for free and when he does you have a wildly profitable x-raise. When IP checks back turn you can also bluff rivers very profitably because most players under-protect their double xb ranges.

my theory is people are terrified of undefined future actions / parts of the game tree. its why theyd rather take a neutral / slightly profitable stab ott as opposed to check and figure it out. i think its the reason people really suck without iniaitive and end up betting too much w made hands / non sdv draws. am explaining that poorly but most seem terrified of those nodes

Yeah Wumpy is dropping knowledge. Those turn XR's are like 2e (10x sizing) so even GTO Wizard sim's don't go big enough.

I've realized in poker you basically have to lose money initially to get better. I force myself to take weird lines all the time and usually punt but I end up learning stuff along the way.

You might be interested to see how far away even 500nl zoom regs are compared to a GTO Bot.

This is BUvsBB population stats. Notice the probe % of 41%



Now compare this to GTO Bot's in BUvsBB. They are probing 9% less at 32%



Also notice how well people play flop nodes. Most people just study flop nodes in depth and then take a cursory look through turn/river nodes. We can see how far away people are in the turn/river nodes compared to flop.

This is gold, just confirm that as an exploit my idea is good
Charlie Carrell FTW
As for people studying flops, it's weird becouse EV diffrence otf is lowest and responses are intuitive, most non ituitive floats we should be doing are often near 0 EV, that in practice make our play good or bad dependant on player we are facing