Solver says bet, but villain never folds
5/5
~$1000 effective
MP - unknown
Hero(UTG) K♣Q♣ raises to $20, MP calls
Flop($50) 7♣ 4♥ 2♣
Hero - ?
More of a theoretical question: Solver suggests c-betting overcards like AK/KQ on boards where I have a range advantage. That makes sense, but here's my concern: these c-bets mostly print if I'm following through with a triple barrel on runouts that don't change much.
But what if the opponent isn't folding hands like 99 even to a river jam? Does that change the optimal flop approach? Should I still fire those overcards, or maybe start mixing in more flop check-calls if I expect villains to call down super wide?
14 Replies
What I mean is - in theory, triple barreling on these kinds of boards is profitable because we can apply max pressure on the river with an all-in shove.
But what if the opponent doesn’t fold the river? How does that change our flop strategy now?
Should we still fire hands like AK/KQ on the flop, knowing we lose that final fold equity later? Or does that mean we need to be more selective with our flop c-bets?
5/5~$1000 effectiveMP - unknownHero(UTG) K♣Q♣ raises to $20, MP callsFlop($50) 7♣ 4♥ 2♣Hero - ?More of a theoretical question: Solver suggests c-betting overcards like AK/KQ on boards where I have a range advantage. That makes sense, but here's my concern: these c-bets mostly print if I'm following through with a triple barrel on runouts that don't change much.But what if the oppone
You have 2 overs + FD. You're not folding. But you are deep enough to sweat various combodraw BS/sets/lower OPs that V might have. My ? is: Are you going to see the turn cheaper by x-call or by cbetting smaller? Do whichever does that.
Me, X-call. I don't want to face a x-r. If your typical V won't, then cbet w/e. Might X anyway as a UTG opener.
What I mean is - in theory, triple barreling on these kinds of boards is profitable because we can apply max pressure on the river with an all-in shove.But what if the opponent doesn’t fold the river? How does that change our flop strategy now?Should we still fire hands like AK/KQ on the flop, knowing we lose that final fold equity later? Or does that mean we need to be more se
You can barrel less on turn and river, but you should still bet flop. Hero isn't betting because of fold equity, he's betting because he has both range advantage and equity advantage with his actual 2 cards. You may also make adjustments with how you play other overpairs, since you can expect to extract more value.
There are so many barrel cards, most of which are good for your hand but others are good for your range.
Unless you range check it (which seems to be trendy nowadays btw), flop is a clear cbet imo.
I mean, this is about the best (semi-) bluff hand which you can possibly have in this spot.
You may decide to slow down on turn or river depending on runouts.
If Villain does have 99, you have . . . let's see, carry the one . . . a metric asston of outs against it. Get money in with an equity advantage now, and worry about triple-barrelling if you miss.
UTG vs. rando MP call, who you think is a station ... I'm range checking 7 high flops (sorry to steal Niemand's point).
Depending on size reads/etc, would happily x/r.
If you have a betting range though, this hand seems more than fine to put in it.
Guys guys - talking about the 99 - OP is just giving an example node. Yes we understand V has other hands than 99...
I think the point of the question is: given Vs are playing so exploitable (calling down here with all 1-pair hands, even multiple streets, yea okay maybe they fold K7s for three barrels on an over-over runout), does the solver bet-bet-bet line make sense?
My answer is no. You can be very "counter-exploitable" in game because 1. no one really notices it or has a big enough sample size on you to notice it and 2. because Vs are so far out of equilibrium we also can be/have to be.
KQo no ♣ I'm pure checking here. I check AA sometimes to "balance".
these c-bets mostly print if I'm following through with a triple barrel on runouts that don't change much
What? These cbets print the most when face cards and clubs come to keep barreling, you get the most bluff catcher calls on boards that don’t change anything.
You obv don’t have to bet river on a brick runout.
Grunch:
My default line in a HU pot as the PFR is to range check when OOP. I need a reason to deviate by c-betting.
If your read is that V under-folds to post-flop aggression, even when you go bet-bet-bet, then I like checking even more than c-betting. If V is prone to stabbing when action checks to him, and has the low-stakes tendency to telegraph his hand strength with his bet sizing, especially on wet and dynamic boards, all the more reason to check here, not bet.
If we check and he bets a normal size, we can call and check again on turn. If he checks back on turn, we can over-bet the river if we brick. If he bets huge on the flop, we can just LOL-fold.
Aside from all that general stuff, this board specifically doesn't seem all that likely to smash our PFR range when we're UTG. Maybe we have over-pairs, and some 77 or 44, or a combo-draw with 56cc, but that's about it for hands that aren't afraid to put a lot of money in. The MP opponent who makes loose calls pre is going to have all the sets, some 2P, and some 1P hands that are going to be sticky on a lot of run-outs.
All that said, I could see a case for c-betting if V is sticky enough to continue calling when our draw comes in, or if we just spike a good top pair. It somewhat comes down to our reads.
Personally, I think checking from OOP is under-rated, and c-betting from OOP is over-rated.
can you show me where solver says to bet these hands ep vs mp at this depth? i mostly see range check for comparable situations. i also don't think your hand would be a good 3 barrel candidate even at equilibrium. if you really think he never folds an overpair for 200bb vs any action (kind of doubt) then id bet like 33-50% pot until i hit and then jam (i dont think this mimics reality)
id guess ev of betting and checking are very similar while you're significantly less likely to make a mistake in the aggro node and its much easier to control the flow of money if you bet the flop vs c/c (am assuming x/r isnt a great option based on reads).
Don't use a solver for live 5/5 - you should spend your time on playing highly exploitable against ABC Bob who calls down with any pair, or Tight Bill who only 3bs QQ+,AK. This is the 5/5 reality - I think for most playing low stakes live cash they hurt their winrates referencing solvers in live games.
