no no no...IIII have the queen

Result:

So I'm just calling down with all my QX for a 2.5X xr? seems whatever 😒

If we get to the flop with a lot of QX, I'd consider folding the worst of those combos when the SB x/r's.

I'm guessing this is the part of the thread where Submersible would say we really need to do some work with a solver, and see how few combos of QX we should have as an over-call in the BB when the UTG opens and SB calls.

My hunch is AQ, KQs and maybe even QJs should be 3B's. Q7/Q8 should probably just get folded. Maybe Q9s/QTs, and QJo get folded too, when the open is from UTG. We probably only have a handful of KQo combos that over-call, or maybe also QJs. I'm guessing there's some mixing going on.

If we shouldn't have that many weak QX combos to fold, the combos we do have are mostly strong combos. I'm not sure how many of those would want to raise, or call a check-raise, much less 3B over a check-raise. I'd think it would be more solver-approved if we just donked out on the flop.

Think about it - if we're 3B'ing AQs/KQs pre, and the SB is likewise mostly raising pre with those same combos, would we have any 3B's here? What the hell does the SB have that can x/r the flop, and also call our 3B?

It would seem like she just has 77, and the same QX combos we have. If that's her range, there's no point in raising, if there's a chance she folds her worse QX, which is mostly just QJ, and she just continues with KQo/77.

We need to have very specific and very reliable reads to take this line. If we know SB is capable of x/r'ing the range Yami is giving her, yeah, okay, let's make that range fold. But nothing in your read would seem to suggest she's playing a super-high-variance style.

lol. Results are predictable. A female at 1/3 x/rs a high paired board. Likelihood she had trips. Low stakes players tend to be somewhat face up showing strength or weakness. Bluff them when they show weakness.

As to the comment that you win if she has a flush draw. If so, if the flush hits, you get stacked. She could theoretically have played a flush draw this way and bluffed with the best hand on the river. Kind of doubt she was semibluffing though.

raise later streets or just call depending on bet size.

The flop 3! really represents 77 or AQ only.

H reasoning feels like "I have a hand with equity that can't call, so I guess I raise" ... like I can see this being okay with some flush draws some of the time, but not all of them all the time. Would start with the best flush draws, just in case it gets all in FD vs. FD ... and/or you get to check it down and win after everyone misses.

I guess the broader question is, if we are going to have a bluffing range, are we going just to fire one bullet and give up hoping to realize whatever equity we have, or are we going to fire a second and possibly go for the river jam?

If we're only going to fire one bullet, then I think our 3! needs to be a good bit larger. Because V shouldn't be folding much vs our 3x 3! with all the dead money out there. If I'm V and I'm holding JJ, I think its a fairly easy flat vs Banana. Of course I have the benefit of having read many of his hand histories, in game maybe it isn't so obvious.

Why would we have a 3B-bluffing range in the BB when there's been a bet from the PFR and a check-raise from the SB?

As the BB defender, we checked in flow. We're not entirely capped. If we flat call, that could actually be scarier than a raise. It could look like we're sand-bagging with a monster.

The SB shouldn't have many if any bluffs here. As the BB, we barely have any calls, much less raises for value. 3B'ing as a bluff is...there's no better way to say this...Bananas.

I was curious, so I spent my morning running a solve with PIO. I used starting charts from GTO Wiz 6 handed 150bb.

Post-flop, I treated the UTG $10 as dead money and forced the $25 size or check for OOP. V is supposed to be raising Qx, pps and FDs with reasonable regularity. IP should 3! 6.78% of the time, so it shouldn't be a common play with anything.

The combos that really want to bet for value are 77 and AQo. No surprise there. All the Qx is betting with some frequency, AQo is over 50%. 77 is close to 75%.

For bluffs, the solver like Ax9h the most at 51% frequency. If also likes to pull from the Ah-rag offsuit hands. A2hh is the biggest flush draw it pushes at 45% frequency with JThh and A3h following up. (It actually slightly prefers bluffing JTcc). Other big FDs like KJhh is pure checking. And the Kxhh hands weren't really in the bluffing mix.

When you get down the list you have pps with 22 followed by 99 and 33 all in that 20%+- range and 54hh is in that mix at 25%. 65hh is at 0.001% so never. But I think what it did was pull the lowest SC in the range. So if 65hh is the lowest that calls pre...

Anyway, I found it interesting how much the solver loved Ax9h and Ah-rag as the essentially minimal equity bluffs. The higher equity bluffs are really the very low Axhh with A2hh the favorite FD and JT without the heart presumably because it can make a straight.

OTT, 54hh which I'm taking as a sub for our hand here, only keeps betting 20% of the time (vs range betting 38%). The hands that the solver is pounding forward with are A2/A3hh, all JT, all AJ, 22-44 100%. It's mostly giving up with the Axo, and the larger Axhh are checking back.

OTR, OOP is supposed to check 100% and IP is jamming all value Qx and higher. AJ is checking back, A3 is checking back, and pretty much all the other bluffs that bet turn are jamming including 54hh.

If we had checked back the turn and V checks river, then 54hh (and 65hh) are betting.

TLDR: The combos we want to start this bluff line with are A2/A3hh, and offsuit Ax that interfere Q9/QT type hands.

We want to have a 3! range because the SB doesn't have many airball bluffs here. SB has a hand. That includes primarily Qx and FDs, some pps. So if we have 77 and just boated up or AQ - we want to be for value. We get more value out of FDs on the flop than we can get on the turn and we'll get none on the river. So because V has a hand, we want to 3! to get value from out monsters that beat strong made hands and draws.

V should 4! with a lot of her made hands for the same reason (we have quite a few FDs and Qx that will be very sticky).

Yes, let's 3B 77. Don't know about AQ. Doesn't seem like a good spot to bluff.

I don't see why we need to be balanced. Villain is face up at least trips. Maybe sometimes she has a flush draw.

wild thread

It's hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that we should 3B the flop as a bluff because the SB's x/r range is QX, FD's, and PP's.

I can see 3B'ing 77 and Q7. I don't know how often we're getting to the flop the way we did with AQ, and if we happen to have AQ, I'm not sure how often we should 3B it. It seems like the most likely outcomes are we fold out worse hands and get jammed on by better.

It's even harder for me to think we're going to be "very sticky" with our FD's and QX if she x/r-4B's. Like, she x/r's, we 3B with a FD or random QX, she 4B's, presumably all-in, and we're going to stack off, because...why, exactly? We think she's FOS, and x/r-4B'ing as a bluff???

We have an unimaginative V opening UTG. We have a reg grinder flatting in the SB. We defended the BB with 65hh. Yeah, we flopped a draw to the 26th nuts, but it's okay to just fold when UTG c-bets and she x/r's. I could even get behind peeling one for $25 and seeing what happens.

3B'ing as a bluff, even 0.4% of the time (or whatever the solver-approved frequency is), is too FPS for me. We can just flat call, keep the pot size more manageable, and make a play for it on a later street if we get the opportunity.

yah i mean what hes saying is wrong for multiway sims but he just keep doubling down

a reasonable takeaway from here is when trips are represented well in everyones or at least multiple range (~15%) things are not being done thinly or all that aggressively because you're going to funnel people down to a good hand way too often. imo would be very different hand if the board is q77 compared to qq7. is worth pointing out bb has by far the fewest trips+ combos on QQ7 (8ish vs 15 for both ep / sb) so it becomes really difficult to show much aggression at all let alone with weak bluffs. things just change so much when you add another person (its almost like adding another street of betting because of mdf)

i think i used slightly different pre ranges but same stacks / pot size. this is bb continuing strategy on q77tt. just a very different hand when trips+ are signif less likely for our opps. (2% sb, 3% hj, ~6 for bb). even still you dont blindly continue all fds

sorry multiple sizing options too. you just filter people down / make their decisions way too easy when you're using larger sizings here (if u use a size that needs to work ~50% of the time, both of them need to defend a quarter of their range, so by the time you get to the river they only need to defend like 5-8% of their initial pre range and you are going to have very few hands that have 50+% equity vs that range)

i fully expect to come back to walls of text about why im wrong but this is how things work in these spots. if you dont want to do the math, or dont have a (multiway)solver, just understand when ever you make a bet you're "forcing" your opponent to defend a certain % of his range, correlated to your bet size (trying to make bluffs indifferent). when there are multiple of them they get to defend way less hands because they have a whole other person(s) to split that responsbility with. so by the time you get to the river, ranges are going to be much much stronger than they would be in a headsup pot.

If we're going to 3! at all, we should have some bluffs in theory. Maybe live it isn't necessary to be balanced at all, but if V is ever x/r with FDs/pps then I'd say that we should have a bluff sometimes to target that portion of Vs range. Maybe this V doesn't ever have FDs or pps. Some Vs definitely do. (I do)

Well, we aren't going to stack off. If she jams its an easy fold there is a ton of money behind. If she clicks it to $150, are we folding Qx? Are we folding AJhh? We shouldn't. Though I'm definitely kicking myself for raising to $75 at that point.

I don't think flatting is a huge mistake and IRL is probably better. 65hh is actually weak enough to just fold sometimes. Bluffing here isn't huge EV, it's more one of those plays to ensure you can go for maximum value when you have the goods. I was mostly curious about:

1: Which hands should we prefer to bluff with?
2: If we do bluff, should we press it for 3-streets?

I'm not saying anyone should bluff here a lot, our default with 65hh should be to fold. We should probably reserve bluffing at all for when player in SB is someone that we believe is prone to get OOL. Like if Banana was in the SB, maybe you want to break out this bluff. If you bluff this spot once a year, you're probably doing it too frequently.

But, once you start the bluff with the 3!, I think its essential you follow through accurately. Turns out that with the bottom of your range hearts, you're only supposed to follow through OTT rarely. My instinct was to push it frequently which was wrong. But would be right with hands like JT/A2hh/22.

These situations interest me because sometimes I find myself starting a stupid bluff on the flop and then trying to find a way to bail myself out on the turn. It's nice to know which hands should just abort and which should just blast off in theory. Fortunately, V made a mistake and led river, which bailed Banana out from jamming river. Live Vs are often nice like that and save us from our own ambitiousness.

Interesting theory, but this is just a fold on the flop. It is likely the checkraiser has a Q and the bettor could have had one too. You have a bad flush draw. If you make the flush, you could get stacked by a boat or higher flush.

It isn't a good idea to make a play with the 3! or later on after calling, because it isn't going to be easy to get trips to fold.

You need to do a lot of folding in 1/3 games preflop and on the flop. OP seems to not have a fold button.

I can't remember ever seeing this flop action in any hand before, at least not by players with hands that weren't super strong. Definitely not on paired boards. We're pretty far out in left field if we're seeing cold 3B bluffs and x/r-calls with bluffs from reg grinders playing OOP multi-way.

I have to wonder - if she x/r's, and we 3B, would she 4B to a size that's less than all in, or just jam all the hands in her x/r range that want to continue? Our 3B looks pretty strong, no? What are we repping, if not QX plus?

If we think we can make her fold QX, does she think she can make us fold QX? If we're allowed to 3B bluff over her x/r, is she allowed to 4B jam as a bluff?

Like, you're giving her JJ-88, QX, and flush draws. Do none of her non-nutted hands get jammed, ever? They don't, right? Which is why we can just fold everything, including our QX, right?

So, say we do somehow get here with AQo, we 3B, and she 4B jams on us. Are we folding? Because we think she only has Q7/77 when she jams?

Do we even have AJhh in range as a flat call pre? Maybe we have some trashy suited aces. What QX combos do we have? Not very many, right? If she does click it, and we call, what cards are our QX combos hoping to dodge? Or are we just praying we fill up?

Are we even all that confident in our nut flush if we get there and she continues betting, or she check-calls? I wouldn't be. I'd be concerned she has a boat and was praying we'd make our flush. I'm assuming we're betting it if we get there and she checks. I'm also assuming we'd fold to another x/r at that point, but we're so far down this rabbit hole I won't be shocked if you say we just pay her off.

This is the problem I see with 3B'ing any hand that isn't 77 or Q7.

I think Sub is dead right. Her flatting range in the SB is probably going to include a fair number of QX combos that she didn't think were quite strong enough to 3B pre over a UTG open, mostly AQo, KQo, and QJs. She's probably not flatting pre and x/r'ing this flop with very many AXs combos, or 88-JJ.

With the PFR still in the hand, 3B'ing as a bluff because we think she's bluffing or because we think we can make her fold trips is wild. The PFR could be sitting there watching this with AQ/KQ and wondering WTF is happening.

The SBs x/r or the BB 3!? I see the x/r quite a bit in games that have $1k+ buy-ins. Typical $1/$3 I don't see x/r often at all. So maybe I'm giving SB too much credit to x/r light sometimes because she typically plays a bigger game and isn't the average $1/$3 passive nit. I probably over x/r from the blinds because players have a very hard time playing accurately vs a x/r in the blinds. They just give you credit for whatever a huge hand is because from the blinds ranges are wide. In any Texas MTS game, people are x/r here with FDs and JJ with some frequency. I'm probably doing it too much because UTG V is almost always c-betting too frequently and x/r here with ATC is printing.

The 3! from the BB is definitely rare. (And should be). That's one of the reasons we can expect it to work relatively frequently. Whether it works or not depends heavily on whether V is x/r with only Qx or has JJ or FD type hands.

If she jams, then we can fold everything but very thick value. That's a pretty huge overbet. We can fold all of our bluffs because her "bluffs" at that sizing would be Qx. In theory, she should never jam. So play poker and figure out if she is a player that is spewing or if we can fold the 2nd nuts. If she overbets 4x, we can fold everything but the nuts and we are unexploitable if she overbets that large. We only need to call if we have over 41% equity vs her range. Which with the computer 4! range is around AQ or better. Vs a live V, we might need to call even tighter.

If she clicks it back, then her range is more weighted to Qx, and we can call with made hands and high-equity bluffs (computer loves A2hh) that are capable of catching up to her non-boat Qx.

I don't think we can make her fold Qx ever. We can sometimes cooler QJ catching a flush with bluffing hands like A2hh, we can bluff her off of FDs and pps like JJ. If she has Qx, the bluff isn't going to work.

If she's playing good poker, she should have non-nutted hands for every action she takes. Is she playing good poker? I don't know. Most people don't. So if we don't think she's capable of betting light, we should fold everything but the nuts. If V 4!s we have to fold a lot. The size of her 4! will dictate how tight we should call. If you're getting good pot odds to draw at the flush, then you should continue with your better FDs, because V is OOP and is going to slow down a lot if she isn't boated. So we can play the turn pretty straightforward - if we miss fold to further aggression or check it back and if we hit pile in the money and sometimes we beat QJ, sometimes we lose to a boat. V shouldn't have many boats on the flop because is she calling pre with Q7? She really only has 77 for the boats. So if a heart below a 7 comes in, we can just pile in the money. If the K/J/T/9 hearts come and she bets into us, I'm probably just calling.

AJhh is mixing preflop, so we have some but not all. Like I said, the solver likes A2/A3hh as the bluffs which we have pretty pure preflop - we aren't squeezing and we aren't folding closing the action. BB has a bunch of Qx combos. Q5s-QJs and QTo-KQo at varying frequencies and AQo isn't an automatic squeeze so a sliver of that. IRL, I think a lot of us are flatting AQo vs UTG open more than the computer is.

SB doesn't have a lot of Q. SB has QTo-KQo and a sliver of Q9s and only QT/QJ. KQs should 3! a ton AQo should 3! a ton. SB doesn't have the advantage of closing the action so has to play a ton tighter with Qx holdings and more aggressively with the better Qx holdings. BB has the nut advantage. BB can have Q7, SB should never have Q7. BB should have more KQ. Both share 77 with similar frequency. Though I upped SBs potential for KQo and KQs because I believe the typical live player will flat these from SB even though they almost never should.

Yes. Sometimes we're going to hit our flush and we're going to pay her off. That's poker. Sometimes she has a boat. But she also isn't folding Qx. If its the J or T of hearts, I feel pretty miserable about betting though in theory we probably should. If the 4h rolls off, I'm not worried about her haveing Q4, I'm not worried about her having Q7. If she has a boat OTF, its 77. The K turn isn't the best because maybe KQ passed on the 3!, but it isn't the worst. I'd say J is the worst and T a close second to complete her boat.

I don't pretend to "know" what she would do. People do bet FDs and pps here. I've seen her play one hand and I don't even have a showdown so I have no idea what she is doing. Banana is better suited to make that read. There are players who will x/r FDs and pps here and there are many players who never would bet anything but Qx. Whether she is one or not, I don't know.

If you aren't x/r from the SB with a FD or JJ, you should be. Mostly because Banana isn't going to be sitting to your left very often and a x/r here is going to get through frequently enough to print because usually neither the BB nor UTG has Qx, and they aren't going to 3! if they don't. If you are going to 3!, you definitely should only do it against players you are confident are capable of x/r with pps and FDs. Because if they aren't you can just exploitatively call/fold depending on equity vs QJ. Versus genpop, I agree the default should probably be to fold this hand. If Yami is sitting to your right, you should probably 3! light sometimes.

I think vs genpop, you can WAY over x/r from either of the blinds especially on a board like this one that is either smash or whiff type of texture.

I do not think V made a mistake so much as targeted a weak Q that likely will not bet river but likely will call river bet. Were they wrong as to what Banana had yes; vs range was it a bad bet I do not think so.

Heads up, I think SB gets to x/r flop, to rep QX and 77, and bluff with her FD's and some PP's. HU, she can attack the PFR's c-bet a lot.

When it's multi-way, and the BB checks in flow, remaining uncapped, I don't think she gets to liberally rep QX and 77 by bluffing with her FD's and PP's. Her bluffing frequency goes down, almost to zero.

I definitely don't think BB gets to start 3B'ing as a bluff at any frequency high enough to make this a line we need to have understood and prepared to deploy. The BB can't start repping hands he mostly doesn't have, versus two opponents who could credibly have those hands, including one who may as well be wearing a flashing neon sign reading "trips or better".

That's how I see it, without needing a solver to explain it to me. I think the solvers largely back me up on this. Real world experience certainly does.