TT in BB (18bb) v BN's (14bb) 4.25x RFI/30% field remaining

You have no FE here. He bet 30% of his stack and would be happy to get it in. Many players will jam with 14 bb's preflop OTB.

My experience has this as either JJ or AA/KK kind of hands. AK should be jamming rather than want BB to call 4.25 bb's. The reason is that if BB has a PP and calls they will stop n go jam a lot of non A/K flops. But even if it is AK as you think is possible they will never fold preflop. If you have a read that it could be AK then by all means call and win if no A or K comes. But understand that JJ will take all 14 blinds from you. And in my experience JJ is the hand that people have like 80% of the time when they over raise preflop.

If we were on the bubble then the reason people play this way is to be able to fold hands like AJ+/TT/JJ/99 and even QQ if SB and BB both jam. Because they want to get into the money. An ICM thing. There is no ICM thing here 10 players away from the money.

I can't comment on accuracy of your ranging, but I respect the attempts to be precise and creative--specific combos, polar construction. Good efforts, guys.

Under your ranging, I think it's very easy to rule out jamming:

• You get few to no folds. Maybe not exact 0; as stupid as it seems, maybe you get 10% of folds? Maybe?
  

• You're <50% when called (which is basically always--OK, round down 10% to 0% 😀 )
  

I think (and can prove) that, given your ranging, all-in is demonstrably worse than calling.

I'm having a hard time coming up with anything that doesn't result in folding TT--and stronger, too.

I'm leaning towards jamming QQ-AA and calling AK. That's about it 😮

I feel like Rick's JJ+random stuff is a better guess than your JJ+AK. But who ****in' knows. Not a crazy thing to ask the guy after the hand what he was thinking about; you'd be surprised what kinda valuable beans people will just happily spill.

I guess, perhaps, interpreting the open sizing as hyper "defensive" is the most obvious

That would make sense, like y'all say, specifically with JJ. Doesn't everyone in these things "hate JJ"?

Whatever he's got, he wants you to fold NOW--or give him a chance to still fold later. What if a Queen comes on the turn, oh bother! Oh the humanity 😮

Do people treat AK as "defensively" as JJ? Yes or no--and why?

I feel like TT and AQ could easily be put in that same bucket of things exploitably played defensively.

I've even seen posts from @Mr Rick where he muses about how much he's lost with AQ. How it may be the #1 combo to get him knocked out of tournaments. I'm not going crazy, right Rick?

Then jam would become highly superior if he's that capped with lots of TT, 99, AQ.

What about 33%/33%/33% fold call jam? 😀

Kind of agree about not having any FE but then what does BN do with AQ here, for instance? Does he just jam or raise 2x instead? For context, BN was a rec and had doubled-up a few hands previous, which may have affected his decision-making. In respect of ICM, while we're not near enough to the bubble, my understanding is that with less than 30% of the field remaining there are some ICM considerations (e.g. no need to push a small equity edge against a similar sized stack), although I'm a cash player adjusting to tournament play, so will defer to more experienced MTT players.

What you're saying here is similar to how I was thinking, although in-game the large size screamed AK to me before I actually considered the possibility of JJ and then AJ-AQ/99 etc. Also let's not forget it's a BN RFI, and, while a rec mightn't understand how wide he can and can't go with this stack size, it should be different to a 4x RFI from UTG, although maybe not. Another consideration is that BN might've been fully aware of his actual stack-size, having just doubled-up/survived being knocked-out.

I would have to have the most extreme tell in the world to fold here. Like I had seen him open fold AQ face up from the button and say, "that's a parking lot hand."

Just jam. Math is math and there are a lot more worse hands in the deck than there are better ones. This is 15 bb effective BB vs button. I don't know why the same logic you guys are applying to him to mean he's betting big for protection with JJ couldn't also apply to something we're way ahead of like 77.

For reference if button jams 15 bb this is the GTO calling range:

I literally got knocked out of the WSOP Mini main with AQ in a similar spot. A woman opened in EP at 3.5x (maybe even 4x) and I jammed with AQo and like 17 blinds she called with AA. Sigh.

Though I leaned towards JJ in this thread I think it is probably more likely AA/KK because no matter what the flop is Villain isn't going to want to fold. It could also be AK and Villain would never fold but somehow wants people to think that they don't have AK when they jam a low flop. Also, in theory it could be a way for Villain to want you to think it is an overpowering hand like AA/KK so you will fold hands like 99-JJ whereas if they jam then people will often call with 77-JJ and they will be flipping with AJ+.

This sizing is like a request to get a call so they can make more than 2 1/2 blinds.

Many years ago at Foxwoods an EP player raised to 4x and in my head I thought JJ but because I had like 12 blinds I just jammed with TT. The guy had like 15 blinds and called with JJ and I didn't cash (we were near the bubble but not at the bubble). Ever since I just get the sense that people that over bet preflop have JJ and often they do. This spot is slightly different because its almost as if they want a call. So it is very tricky. We can't set mine. We can fold and then would cry if they turned over AK or 99. We can call and then have no clue how to deal with a flop jam. We can go all in and then try to make the money with just 4 blinds. But if we are up against a wild player then it could be random.

I typically jam with marginal hands here when we are not in the money. Here I just don't know. I think it is just about reads and if no reads then what the player looks like. A gambler? A bully? A tight player? An old person? Are they smart? Are they a cash player? Are they talking? Are they looking at you? Are their hands trembling? Is their knee bouncing?

If we are going to call with a PP then I would not continue unless there was no A or K on the flop. I just don't think it matters here...

Look, I mean when you're wrong here--it's embarrassing. Like your shorts tore at the free throw line in an NBA game, undies exposed to the whole arena; you just got picked off at first; coach punted on 3rd down

When you're right--man you're picking up a huge amount of EV on the field.

It's an extremely high uncertainty spot.

Just make an assumption and go with it.

77, 66? **** yeah some guys who do this will have em. Maybe lots of guys. Don't I look stupid when that's the case?

If you ain't losing, you ain't trying.

Yeah really, this is where people get confused about what a GTO framework entails--which DEFINITELY includes the scientific and artistic skill of knowing when to resort to these kinds of ultra personal and human soft data points.

I will note, to GWF's post, that both of these are over EP opens. Even a scared/tight player is going to be wider on the button than from EP.

I'm not surprised by this chart and acknowledge that we're clearly near the top of our range with TT at 15bb eff. Point is that BN didn't jam and didn't min-raise, which of course you understand, but there isn't likely a chart for a 4.25x RFI. So while the issue of the extent to which the large sizing narrows a typical BN range shouldn't be relevant due to our raw preflop equity, there might be a case for arguing that it functions an extreme tell that warrants an equally exploitative response. But also acknowledge that I could be overthinking it.

Oh, I definitely think it does. It's the positions that make this one difficult. If he raised this size UTG and you were +1, then, sure, it's a fold and you might not even need to think too hard about it. It's still a question of ranges, and those ranges still change based on position.

Like, would you ever think he does this with a premium hand? What's the best hand you think he does this with? What's the worst?

And then there's the positional adjustment. Does he raise smaller with premium hands, and what does he consider a premium? Like is this a scenario where his UTG/8 range is JJ-KK, AK, but his BT range might be more like 77-JJ, AJo+, ATs+?

That's the real question. I would tend to think that from the button he might do this with some medium pairs, but I don't know. TT is kinda tricky in that spot. In the moment, I probably convince myself he has enough medium pairs under tens that I have to stack off.

I tend to agree, for, while there are rare cases where recs aren't positionally aware, I'd say this rec understood that being on the BN is different from UTG. My concern was that he's effectively splitting his range between min-raise, large-raise and shove at 14bb --- not in a sophisticated way but more on account of risk-averse thinking. The question then is what does he do with 77-99 and ATs-AQ because we need him to have at least 99-JJ plus a fair chunk of AQ as well as all of AK (and no KK+) to make the call based on Chip EV. If he just min-raised or shoved, it wouldn't be a significant spot (i.e., easy shove or call with our TT). Could we say, for instance that from UTG he's shoving 77-99 but on the BN he's raising these 4.25x? That might be a decent assumption.

I definitely agree with you that an exploitative response is warranted. I just disagree with the massive degree to which you're deviating.

The way I approach these spots is to try to use roughly GTO ranges as a baseline. Then I make adjustments as appropriate, with my confidence in a particular read correlating with how much I adjust.

So assuming you're very confident in your read. We're supposed to be getting it in with basically any ace and any pair. I could see exploitatively adjusting to fold something as strong as A7 or maybe even something like pocket 6s. Even that would be a huge exploitative adjustment.

Folding pocket tens is just too extreme, IMO, given how short the stacks are and given that he is opening from the button.

Now seeing as this is a thread, I wouldn't be surprised if you ran into AA or JJ or something, but we shouldn't be results oriented if he happened to have it one time. It's easy to focus on the rare occasions when we run into a monster, and start passing up on tons of high EV spots.

TT is typically just golden here. I'm mentally fist-pumping as I look at my hand, then I'm forcing myself to take a few seconds so I don't look too excited before I announce all in.

Obviously, snap calling a BTN shove and shoving over a normal BTN raise. If you think he isn't doing this with 99 or Axs or anything you dominate, then it might be a fold. Read-dependent.

I agree with much of what you say and it loosely corresponds with how I thought and played in game.

Afterwards, the more I thought about the unusual raise size at that stack depth, as well as knowing BN's actual hand, the more the idea of BN being highly risk-averse and highly condensed with this large RFI size made sense. While I can agree that using GTO ranges as a baseline for any adjustments is a reliable default, there are occasions when the read/exploit is so extreme that such ranges can be effectively jettisoned, especially for a BN v BB scenario, where stacking-off thresholds are wider than most other spots.

Three key points about this hand still resonate :

• 1. Certain recs tend to be more risk-averse when they have just survived their tournament life;
  
• 2. When more risk-averse they are less attentive to position;
  
• 3. And when more risk-averse they might bet larger to avoid awkward post-flop spots with hands they know can't fold such as AK and JJ (and perhaps AJ-AQ/77-99 etc.).
  

Probably the best rule of thumb is to assign such a player an EP range when they're in LP (against which TT is still a shove at this stack depth). But, also, as soon they bleed chips these recs will revert to more typical shoving ranges. Obviously saying a 4.25x RFI at 15bb with 30% remaining always fits the above pattern is taking this logic too far; it's more of a heuristic to consider based on profiling than a fixed exploit.

I think you want to be careful making too many assumptions or generalizations when considering drastic exploitative adjustments.

It's best if you can demonstrate patterns that apply to that specific player. For example, every time they have done X they have shown down Y.

On the other hand they may just not understand opening sizes and they could be using the large size with their whole range. I've definitely played with recreational players that do that too. They tend to open tighter than GTO ranges, but the sizing doesn't necessarily mean they're completely nutted.

Anyway when you're 14 bb effective with TT in the BB and he has AK on the button, the chips are supposed to go in.