No, sorry I was just making a joke about how the hero luckboxed his way to a buyin when they were both doing something out of the ordinary against each other. I'm guessing the CO had assumed the BTN would bet JJ+ on the turn, and he would shove over the top.

I agree that the 3-bet is fine, since if the SB+BB fold a certain percentage and the CO folds a certain %, then pre-flop can be demonstrated to be +EV.

You haven't even given us stats on opponent so we discuss a range.

All I'm saying is that hands like AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 99, T9s, JTs, 55, are in villians range.

i like dis line against a REG.

if we 3bet with trash, we def cbet more often, and we DEF cbet HERE.

i like cb turn and the overshove on river

This changes so much. I don't know why you didn't put it in your original post. That c-bet is very bad now IMO, I think you'll see players c/c with AQ in his spot.

I dunno if a reg is flatting a 3-bet w/middle suited connectors OOP. Maybe we could cross out T9s and JTs?

The flop is likely to miss him, but does he need to hit it?

Think about it for a second. I'm cool with the 3bet, but I am not cbetting the flop once a 19/9 guy calls our 3bet. The 3bet vs. this type of villain is +EV in a vacuum, but once this guy calls you, you should shut down and hope to flop a miracle. He's got something in this spot more often than not, so just c/f once he calls imo.

I was looking over a few video summaries at DC, and it seemed like some of that stuff was a little bit more relevant to mid-stakes than microstakes no?

if we 3bet with trash we have to cbet here.

since we already decided to make the 3bet, we're not going 2 have many favorable flops. If we take the line of checking and folding to his turn bet (as we can't really improve here) our 3bet is now spew. if we cbet dis flop, we get enuf folds on dis flop to be +ev.

I think they'll call AQ OOP very rarely. Remember this is a reg, so they'll think this out.

1.) They put in $6 and now have to call $10 more with a hand that did not improve.
2.) They play 19/9 with a 1.7 post flop aggression. Thats weak, so they don't have a lot of intestinal fortitude.
3.) They're OOP, so they're not real comfortable.
4.) What do they think they are beating? They are behind all PP's, AK, AT, and any hand that paired the board. They beat KQ, KJ, AJ, and a pure bluff. KQ, KJ and AJ are all debateable parts of someones 3bet range, so that weakens their position even more.

Additionally AJ acts the same way IMO, and AK will usually re-raise pre. I actually think that villain will re-raise AK more than AA/KK (if they choose to slowplay at all), because its a weaker hand and also thats what they've been programmed to do.

So why are you so sure that they'll call with AQ and that a cbet is so bad?
If you aren't willing to cbet a bluff on a dry board, then why even 3bet to begin with?

Maybe you're right here, I'm not sure, but this is why I chose to cbet that flop. That video was basically a math theory video and since most players at this level only play their own hand, I thought it was applicable.

But in light of your comment, it could be a mistake to apply here, I'm not sure.

It's more based on the following points:

This is the fifth time you've 3-bet him, and he's already tight - so obviously sick of folding.

He's allot more liable to think your FOS and end up calling you down light. He doesn't think 'what do I beat?' when he c/c with AQ/AJ, he thinks 'I have 2 overs which I can hit, and this ****** isn't getting the best of me this time'.

"If you aren't willing to cbet a bluff on a dry board, then why even 3bet to begin with?"

Because he folds so often, c/f every single flop that doesn't hit you in the face is still +EV. Saying 'well I have to c-bet', against such a strong range is starting to make the 3-bet pre-flop look worse.

It comes down to the following - if you're 3-betting a tight opener because he folds so often, then he is going to have a much stronger range post-flop. If you're 3-betting a tight opener because he's liable to c/f every time he misses then you can more freely say a c-bet is going to be +EV.

EDIT: I'll just add one more thing. I think there's often a fear that if we don't c-bet we'll look weak and won't be able to go back to 3-betting light. If you end up folding without putting anymore money in, just give it a while then go back to pwning him with your 3-bets. My guess is he'll never adjust.

and finally...

I'm not saying he's definitely c/c with AQ on this flop, he'll probably fold a missed flop quite allot. I'm just making the point that given the history I wouldn't find it unusual for him to do this. I'd therefore woudn't put AQo entirely in his c/f range on the flop.

Yeah, I'm just saying a guy who has a super tight calling range can't be expected to fold T95r flops.

Gotta clarify that I've only 3bet once before this hand. The 5 cbets come from the total number of hands that I have datamined on him, and not all of those were me. Does that change your thinking?

Got it. You just have no equity when you're called (or about 2-4% is about right). Since we aren't shoving the turn I kind of prefer just to give up one street early.

You can mess around with Poker stove, against QQ-88,AQs-AJs,AQo for instance, you'd struggle to find him folding 50% there.

I don't understand all the hate this thread is getting, this hand was played perfectly against this particular player, and these are the spots you need to start understanding when you attempt to move out of the micro stakes. Sure you don't need to be able to play like this to beat nl50, but the ability to exploit the weaker regulars would surely yield an increased winrate.

this.

its getting hate because he got lucky. the OP might even be a maniac at micro stakes because the play he just did would make me label him as a maniac in my book...

you guys are just nits, i guess you won't ever be able to 5 bet AJo like me.

yeah.. you do that on me and ill be sure to have aces ready for you

This post sums up the regs PERFECTLY and is exactly why this strategy is SOOO plus EV. You think that anyone who would even try this is a maniac, even though I purposely wrote out my thought process on each street.

Yes, the straight was lucky, but thats not where the EV comes from in this spot. That was just gravy. Its the lite calls and poor play that result from the regs thinking you're a maniac.

I pull this **** at 10NL all the time and it's insanely profitable if you pick your spots right. There are so many people who call 3bets with speculative, pretty-looking hands like JTs or QTs and then have to fold 2/3 of the flops. (I do that too but it's not exactly profitable)

edit: one thing to remember is that someone's VPIP/PFR stats aren't related at all to their 3bet calling frequency. Nits like this sometimes get too attached to their hands and make dumb calls with 55/67s/whatever in spots like this, especially if you've been 3betting them a lot imo.

I'm saying that an average player, you can 3bet this .. and you don't need much of a read, I just disagreed with the whole oh ho ho you better have a read statement.

That being said, I like to keep my ranges reasonable and as a default wouldn't 3bet this .. also I tend to lean towards thinking that this hand is butchered postflop.

Finally I tend to believe hat op overvalue how often hands makes straight or flushes .. especially based on the comment that he doesn't like to 3bet co raises from btn with SCs, as he feels he is losing value

I think there's a reasonably good chance that villain in this hand played it wayyyy better than OP, and that he flatted your 3bet with kings might mean he's onto your 3-betting jack****, because that's exactly what I would do, although I'd play postflop slightly different.

And Gelford, people don't really like to fold, I don't think it's profitable to 3bet most regulars in this situation.

i think i would prefer this if the opener was on the button and i am in the blinds as his opening range is slightly wider. if your going to c-bet then give up ir raised i dont think it matters if your in position or not.

also, i think this play is mostly about building an image to get paid off on later. Although i can understand this thought process behind this i dont really like it that much, as i think you can still exploit reg's or smart players by just playing to the image you already have which doesnt necessarily have to be aggressive/maniac

another thing i think the villian played this fine preflop given youd been 3b him previously

I think its hard to rep a hand on this board

Same