OK:
Preflop: I expect villain to 4x 13% of his range since he is MP1:
22+, ATs+, KJs+, QTs+, JTs, AJo+, KJo+
Flop: he cbets 85%, which is very high, so we only lose 66- and some overcards.
Turn: his cbet is very high again... Contrary to PP on this solution, I am not including 22 and some of the other marginal hands because he would not have played them preflop or on the flop. He is continuing with sets, overpairs and gutshots. Yes, gutshots. They represent a lot of what he flops and it is a great semi-bluff for him on such a scary board. Obviously our image counts and since we seem to be pretty tight, it can work.
Here is his continuation range:
77+, AKs, AJs, KJs, QJs, JTs, AJo , KJo
He does not hit 47% of the time, semibluff included.
We are 55/45 against his range.
Revenue = .47*48.5 + .53*(.55*139-.45*90.5)
Revenue = 22.8 + 40.5 - 21.6
Revenue = 41.7BB
What's interesting is that all the percentages in my calculation are very close to coin-flips (47/53, 55/45) while PP's were very further from that, especially the equity against villain's range (56/44, 23/77).
So I modelled all this in an Excel file (100 BB stacks).
With 80% cbet, 65% turn cbet:
- if villain never ever folds, you need to be 40/60 versus his range to be profitable
- if villain folds half the time, you need to be 20/80 versus his range to be profitable
With 60% cbet and 40% turn cbet:
- if villain never ever folds, you need to be 45/65 versus his range to be profitable
- if villain folds half the time, you need to be 30/70 versus his range to be profitable
Does this make any sense at all?