Winning Poker Network (Yatahay) - $0.05 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

MP: 371 BB (VPIP: 18.78, PFR: 13.47, 3Bet Preflop: 8.79, Hands: 253)
CO: 165.2 BB (VPIP: 16.67, PFR: 14.29, 3Bet Preflop: 3.57, Hands: 86)
BTN: 129.4 BB (VPIP: 20.25, PFR: 13.61, 3Bet Preflop: 4.27, Hands: 326)
Hero (SB): 100 BB
BB: 101.4 BB (VPIP: 38.89, PFR: 22.22, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 18)
UTG: 131.8 BB (VPIP: 39.13, PFR: 30.43, 3Bet Preflop: 11.11, Hands: 24)

Hero posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has 8 8

fold, fold, fold, fold, Hero raises to 3 BB, BB raises to 11 BB, Hero calls 8 BB

Flop: (22 BB, 2 players) 7 J 4
Hero checks, BB bets 17 BB, Hero calls 17 BB

Turn: (56 BB, 2 players) 4
Hero checks, BB checks

River: (56 BB, 2 players) 5
Hero checks, BB bets 53.2 BB, Hero calls 53.2 BB

I felt ****ty about this hand starting with preflop so any advice on how I could have played ANY and ALL of these streets better is appreciated.

Preflop is standard. Ranges are at their widest blind vs blind, so you should be opening wider, and defending vs 3bets wider than you normally would in other positions.

Flop is also fairly standard. A majority of regs at this level do a lot of "one and done" cbetting with a significant % of their range.

River is a clear fold when an unknown villain pots it. >95% of the time it's a higher flush.

^ agreed.
Might look up a maniac on the river

would say, fold pre (you can call but probably -ev)
Then call flop, check turn sure np, and probably fold turn but can be close with bluffs/actually better flushes.

+1

I think it is just a little too weak to call a pot sized bet on the river.
Sure, if you see him going wild, then call a little wider, but don't make huge adjustments beacuse you are going to be wrong in more situations than you think and it's going to get expensive.

All good until you called river.

Guessing you got showed JJ.

River is certianly a x/c in theory, but unfortunately therse spots are not bluffed frequently enough for these sizings.

This is an odd prediction.

I feel like this is correct. I immediately want to click call but people aren't bluffing here often ime.

I immediately want to click fold

Lets say we call pre with
JJ-77, AQs-ATs, A5s-A2s, K9s+, Q8s+, J8s+, T8s+, 98s, 87s, 76s, AQo, KQo

then flop
raise sets all flushes except AQs ATs then raise as a bluff KsQ AsQ 9Ts 8TS 89s
c/c-88-TT with spade 2 combos of flush all Jx and 7x which is about 32 combos

River-Bet two flushes for value and 67s as a bluff,so we check 27 combos so everything with spade is snap call and even that its hard to defend vs this bet.Imo V pick pretty bad sizing for this spot we have problem maybe even a little bigger one when he bets small.So hand is well played.

This is pretty arbitrary in terms of range determination, especially since you have no idea of how wide hero is opening or how often villain is 3betting.

River can be a pretty easy call at higher stakes and/or vs particular villains, but this is another example of how your attempts to apply game theory to 5nl are costing you EV.

After his 3 bet putting more high card hands in his range for sure. Wouldn't be surprised to see him semi-bluffing flop with a good spade here.

If math is good then everything is good.
V is unk so we should some standard defending range vs 3bet and imo most ppl have something close to this one maybe hero have more hands but probably ends up with same range otr.

Im not sure if nl5 players never bluff vs check check check line,pretty sure that is not ture.How you even know that they do or they dont when you c/f 100 % of the time in this spot...

just fold otr...

i remember my notes from NL5 times... each note is like: fold river you f*** ***, they always have it...:-) so i´m always sure, that fold is good option here... random player does not have more then 33% of bluffs here...

It's a time honoured tradition to check the nuts at least once.

lol yeh

Poker is primarily a game of math (some forms more than others), but sometimes you need to go against what the math says because of player tendencies. If you can't develop good reads (on individual players and populations as a whole), then all the math in the world isn't going to help your winrate.

I agree with this, your ranges are just kind of skewed. The fact that you fold AJo but defend Q8s in particular is pretty shocking.

First of all, in general 5nl regs don't bluff often enough. I've played enough hands at this level to see this. I'm not saying it never happens, but it's super infrequent, especially with this sizing. Second of all, I've seen enough showdowns at this level because of how many hands I've played, I didn't always x/f in this spot, obviously...

I would use AJo as a 4bet bluff in this spot.Im not saying that call is best play vs this or whatever V.I m saying from theory point of view it looks ok so we cant say hero make any mistake in the hand.

Oh okay. Usually too strong of a hand to bluff.

I'm glad that you recognize this, but...

This is where you're mistaken, theory and practice are two very different things.

From my exp usually ppl that dont know or dont understand theory say this kind of things.

If we talk specifically about poker.I dont think you can have much bigger WR if you play super expolitible vs kind of balanced because you reads sometimes will be right so you make better but sometimes you are wrong and in those cases you lose a lot more.

I'll admit, my understanding of theoretically correct poker plays could use some work. However, like I've said so many times before, what is correct from a "theory" perspective isn't going to get you the most EV in these games. It's been explained to death by me and several other posters.

No offense, but my winrate is clearly better than yours (granted I'm playing on slightly softer sites) at this level. That's why I'm playing 50nl and you've been at 5nl for ~6 months now. I'm not trying to be an *******, I just think that this illustrates my point fairly well.

This is why they're called population reads. If they're correct, you're going to be right far more often than you're wrong.

Your excellent understanding of theory will aid you greatly once you reach 100nl, but if you can't develop strong reads and apply them correctly, then that's probably not going to happen.

I seriously doubt that theoretically this is correct with that hand vs the range of hands that shove river. You need a LOT of bluffs for that to be correct and even then calling on a paired board with only the 8 high flush I think it would still be very thin.

If something isn't good in practice, then it's not good in theory. A correct theory has to work in reality or else it's not a "good theory".

That's impossible. If people could use GT correctly it wouldn't cost EV in most cases. The game isn't solved yet. That's a job for the new quantum computers as they become more available.