[MID] 5/10, Nut flush on paired board
3 player hand
BB is a loose aggro reg that got felted by me the first hand we played today after he bluffed it off and he
Wrong read that SB knows what he is doing. SB is a fish, and almost certainly a losing player at 5/10. Call with K3o in the SB and minclick with close to the nuts on the river because he doesn't want you to fold. His river sizing is particularly bad when you bet big. You either have a big hand or a bluff, so he should try for more value.
As to the flop being the best played street, preflop is obviously good and standard. River, you could say go bigger or go smaller. Maybe raising river would have been better, although it would lose more against his hand. I am not sure about the big bet on the turn with one of the two flush draws.
Checking back NFD on a disconnected two tone board is something I do pretty frequently 3-way. I definitely do not range bet here and like to have hands that can turn the nuts in my check back range for disguise and balance. I favor checking back broadway NFDs and Cbetting rag NFDs.
Why would you check back a texture like this that favors your range and is somewhat disconnected? Furthermore you have NFD 200 bb deep IP - your opponent is a ****** that flatted K3o out of the SB. Does GTO sims favor cbetting K83r? Are we getting x/r here by air alot to make checking back correct? The fact that the SB is calling K3o tells me a couple things - he's not a winning player(maybe), or he doesn't respect your game that he feels he can play K3o out of the SB 200 bb profitably. I get GTO sims saying don't cbet here as you're over cbetting and can be exploited, but I don't think these opponents will try to exploit you enough and you can always call a x/r light.
Serious question to the GTO/Solver crowd - a "GTO" play means it cannot be exploited by your opponent assuming the opponent is playing GTO. If two players are truly playing GTO isn't your expectation negative post rake? Seems like playing GTO is never correct or else you're losing money.
“Seems to know what he’s doing” proceeds to flat K3o from sb to btn open lol
I dont understand the “not happy about it part” do people just massively underbluff and underep their hands in your 5/10 player pool?
Min click on the river seems like it’s almost never a bluff. It’s tough to have much of a read on a new player one way or another after one orbit.
Does the GTO flat calling range for SB include K3o? You can't directly apply answers from solvers when opponents deviate far from GTO.
Cbet because it favors your range, it is a flop they could easily miss, and you have the nut flush draw. Obviously, you would be happy taking it down on the flop or the turn with a draw.
Min click on the river seems like it's almost never a bluff. It's tough to have much of a read on a new player one way or another after one orbit.
There can't be very many scenarios in which OOP would go for a check-min-click as a bluff. Maybe he has TX that thinks he sometimes wins if you check it back, and your bet sizing makes him think you've got some thin value that will snap fold.
It's fishy AF, but...apparently that's his thing.
He could be clicking it with worse value. We're $2k eff to start and there's only $275 in the pot getting to the river. He might think your less than PSB looks like a bluff or super-thin value, and opens the door for him to raise with a hand he wasn't sure was best, but now he thinks it might be.
Turn the situation around, and put yourself in V's spot with QJhh or AK/KQ. Would you not consider raise-folding for value with trip K's or the 2nd nut flush, facing the same line you took here?
That speaks to why most of us were on the fence about 3B'ing your hand. If he's raise-folding for value with a worse hand, or he was trapping with a nutted hand, there's no point in 3B'ing.
It's a really weird spot. I don't see how you can fold the NF when V clicks it, and you're getting almost 4.3 to 1. You only have to be good 19% of the time. If he has worse flushes, trips, and occasionally the FPS bluff in his range, how can we fold when we only lose to boats, and it's really hard for him to have one?
Does the GTO flat calling range for SB include K3o? You can't directly apply answers from solvers when opponents deviate far from GTO.
Cbet because it favors your range, it is a flop they could easily miss, and you have the nut flush draw. Obviously, you would be happy taking it down on the flop or the turn with a draw.
You do realize that range-betting here means we'd c-bet with JJ, 77, A5s no heart, AQo, JTs, etc, yes? Like, regardless of what we have, we're just betting into two opponents who called from the blinds. Are you SURE this is the hill you want to die on?
It wouldn't surprise me if K8s and K3s are sometimes defends vs a BTN open in what I assume is a time-raked game. If V can have those suited combos, he can have some boats on the river, and the fact that he showed up with an offsuit combo likely matters less than how he responds to a c-bet after flopping 2P on this board.
For the sake of argument, assume we're just range-betting this flop, even when we completely whiff, and don't have the equity we have here.
Are we happy taking it down on the flop, and not getting a single street of post-flop value? Is it not possible there's more value in checking back, inducing our OOP opponents to stab at it on a future street, when we may have improved, and even if not, we might be able to leverage our position and potential nut advantage to steal the pot away, after it's been made bigger?
If we're playing lower stakes, where the pot is being raked, I would rather take it down when it's bigger. You do realize that it costs us nothing to check back when we whiff, and we lose more when we c-bet and fold to a x/r, or we check back the turn, and fold when they stab river, yes?
Suppose we don't take it down on the flop, and one or both opponents call. Now what? Are we going to barrel off? Give up? What's the plan after we range bet with nothing, get called, and don't improve?
Suppose we get called, and we DO improve, to 2nd pair top kicker. Now what? Is our hand any good? Would it be any good if we improve to top pair, 3rd kicker?
Does this board actually favor our range as the PFR? Are we supposed to have any 2P combos here? I suppose we could have all the over-pairs, sets and TP combos, but I'd think our opponents are going to have just as much 88 and 33, and probably a ton of flush draws, and could have a lot of KX. Maybe they have more 2P combos than we do.
C-betting with the NFD when we're deep enough to call a x/r and we can cooler our opponent's lower FD's and TP+ makes some sense. Blindly range-betting doesn't seem optimal, even if our opponents are nowhere near equilibrium.
In fact, if we're assuming our opponents are deviating this much, making it harder to range them, and harder to rule out 2P combos, that would seem like more reason not to range-bet, and more reason to structure our c-bets around hands that have the most equity against the top of our opponents' ranges.
Like, even if we don't know who has the range advantage here, or who's supposed to have more 2P, if it's just possible our opponents could have 2P, why c-bet with some hand that has little to no equity when they actually do have 2P? Do you really want to c-bet JJ on a K-high board?
I tend to think we should be c-betting this board with our actual hand, because of the SPR and our equity vs our opponents' ranges. I don't know that we need to be overly focused on range advantage at this SPR. We're probably not folding before seeing the river, almost no matter what happens on flop and turn.
Some of these questions are obviously opponent-dependent, and I'm not playing with them to make a detailed read about what their exact ranges are.What I know is the live poker population over calls preflop in both of their positions. This is pretty obvious if you look at GTO ranges and compare them to what people regularly show down with after flatting from the blinds in live p
its very easy for both to defend 40-50% of range (this would be the equivalent of you betting 25% otf and then 3/4-potting the turn) vs a small sizing
i dont really see the point of deception in flop play if we are unhappy to face a river x/minraise lol
for arguments sake i gave sb and bb the bottom 90% of hands each and have ip only using b25 and it bets 90% (which could be simplified to 100) which is still not 100
no idea if any of this matters but i think people front load aggression way too much and end up imbalanced blah blah
If they're both calling 40-50% of range on the flop a 1/4 pot bet is immediately profitable with air.
The EV with our exact hand (ATfd) should in theory be similar whether we bet small, check or bet bigger on the flop.
The value of the small range (or almost range) flop bet is to squeeze extra EV out of our air, by exploiting our opponents' tendency to over fold. There is also some deception and simplicity value too.
You do touch on a key consideration though: It is important that we stay aware of our own range on future streets. If our flop bet gets called I'm immediately shutting down with my air hands. It's OK to overfold turn and/or river when we take this line since the flop bet is immediately profitable. We actually should be over folding turn after they over fold flop and arrive to the turn with a stronger than equilibrium range.
Plus if we were playing an equilibrium strategy on the flop, our air would have just folded to a turn or river probe anyway. Why not pick up the extra EV by betting flop?
I don't know if they both have 50% ranges, but the SB seems to. Yeah, this flop is good for your range and they probably both miss it a lot, so cbet it with air.
If the SB had some really tight range, like the solver assumes, than the SB would usually have something on this flop.
I don't know if they both have 50% ranges, but the SB seems to. Yeah, this flop is good for your range and they probably both miss it a lot, so cbet it with air.
If the SB had some really tight range, like the solver assumes, than the SB would usually have something on this flop.
I meant we profit on the flop with a 1/4 pot bet with air if they fold more than 50% of the range that they arrive to the flop with.
I'm not saying they call preflop with 50% of hands (not necessarily anyway).
Even a relatively tight range will miss this flop 2/3 of the time. It's tough to continue enough against small bets on a board that mostly misses everything.
At the current stage of the poker meta game people have learned to continue against small bets with weak hands like gutshots and backdoor flush draws, which is relatively close to being the correct response on a lot of boards. On this board there are no gutshots and there are only two suits. As a result a lot of the heuristics people rely on to make sure they're defending enough don't apply and by default they end up over folding.
Solvers are useful in terms of why they recommend certain plays. It is misleading to say the solver recommends not cbetting here when they solver is assuming perfect preflop play and correct ranges, which is totally different from ranges of live fish.
