Rate my play - AKo 5/10/20

how isnt it? tons of FE and if called still have 38% equity.

We have tons of FE vs a turn range that is 100% overpairs and 38% equity? You sure about both those statements?

But we do not have tons of FE vs an overpair with this V. If you are going to bother to make reads on how Vs deviate from perfect play use them.

You don't have 38% if called. He isn't likely calling with AK. It is good if you get him to fold AK even though you would be freerolling. You were 32% against QQ no diamond. You would be 30% against QQ with a diamond, and 27% against KK no diamond and 20% against AA no diamond. You are probably about 28% against a calling range.

If he folds hands that may chop or might bluff you on the river, that is good. If he was folding any overpairs that would be good.

We can't assume because he had a relatively bad overpair and wasn't folding that without reads some villain would never fold an overpair. We can't assume he always has an overpair. So it isn't certain the shove was bad.

I mean we can absolutely assume both of these. How many times have you played 4b pots vs mid 50’s chatter box when they're doing the 4betting and it wasn't an overpair?

We can also assume he ''never'' folds an overpair because OP literally told us he doesn't. We actually have that read.

The title really should be ''bluffing into a villain who has an OP 99% of the time and no fold button, rate my play''.

The only point is jamming the turn is if he had pairs he would fold, but I'm assuming without specific reads his 4b range is AK+,QQ+ or even tighter. If that's his true range the only advantage to jamming would be to fold chop hands, but that's not many combos. We're 31% vs QQ, 26% vs KK, 21% vs AA - those are the hands that will call you so you're in bad shape when you get called if that's his 4b range.

This is laying it on pretty thick. The OP has given one hand where V has made a bad call with an overpair. The evidence that is more robust is that V opens too wide, which might indicate being generally more aggressive than normal. V is also losing money, which may or may not mean something.

There are three ways we can play.
1. We can play as close as possible to textbook/balanced/GTO/whatever you want to call it.
2. We can make deviations based on what we believe are population tendancies. These might be robust but they can also be rigged by things like confirmation bias (a classic one being "nobody ever 3bets/4bets/calls a shove with anything less than KK" - we remember every time we get stacked, we forget the times we bluff shove and get folds, or call with QQ and are up against JJ or AQ)
3. We can make deviations based on reads on an individual player, but these are even more liable to be error-prone because most of us are trying to get inside our opponent's head and psychoanalyse them, when in fact we would be better just focussing on fundamentals.

The deviations we make should generally be reserved for situations which are otherwise borderline and can tip our decision one way or another. Making massive deviations (huge bluffs, hero folds, hero calls) is usually just a punt.

Preflop for example, all options are on the table, population is usually tight here but individual opponent is loose so they sort of cancel each other out, and OP decides to call rather than shove because OP has already shoved preflop with AKo. Seems perfectly reasonable.

The turn decision - in a vacuum this seems like a very standard play and generally likely to fold out hands like the one which V actually held. Our sample size of one hand where V calls down isn't enough to make a big deviation. Maybe he learns from his previous error and is now far more likely to fold. Who knows.

Of course, now we see the result we can adjust and assign more weight to the read we have on V. A sample of two hands making the same error is substantially more significant than a sample of one.

I'm not going to respond to each point as I don't really disagree with much but the highlighted to me is nonsense. The most reliable information we have available to us right now(during the hand) is the fact that V didn't fold an overpair in a spot he probably should've found a fold. Going by ''Made a very bad call previously to get stacked when he got sticky with a big PP''. That is the absolute best piece of information we have. Nothing comes close.

To then justify trying to bluff this same villain of an overpair is silly to me. I'm sorry but to pretend we need to see him call down with an overpair twice just so we can confirm he doesn't like folding overpairs is silly.

The read is he always has an over pair and he doesn't fold over pairs, because he had an over pair and didn't fold it.

i know this. my read was opposite of whats true. if it were me and I made a bad sticky call earlier, id be hesitant to do the same again later in the sesh especially stuck a bunch. I have admitted this mistake

IM talking real time in a vaccuum

i DID forget to mention he has shown 63o as a bluff (in 4bet pots) at least 3 times. in this session. does that help the read

Grunch:

PRE - your 3B sizing seems large. Are you sizing up to exploit the fact V is stuck, possibly tilted, and thus likely to continue too wide?

The logic makes sense, but maybe not the hand selection. I'd be on board with a big PP. Even AKs if we want to expand the range a bit. It doesn't seem as good with AKo.

When V 4B's, I wouldn't be happy about it. He just put in over 25% of his stack. I'd assign him a very strong range, and assume we need to improve significantly post flop.

I might cut our losses and fold now, expecting V to c-bet all flops and possibly jam a lot of turns.

FLOP - I agree his range is likely weighted towards over-pairs. Maybe he has some AK in range. Why are we calling, not folding? We missed, and he isn't slowing down.

Put yourself in V's position. Would you think your IP opponent has AA/KK here? If you knew IP previously 5B with AKo, wouldn't that make you think IP has something in the TT-QQ/AK/AQs band? Wouldn't you target all those hands if you were OOP and had QQ+?

I get that he gave us a good price to float. But we could be drawing dead. We might be drawing to 6 outs at best. Maybe only 3 vs KK. He's likely to bomb turn on a brick. We'll be getting to the turn with less than 1 SPR.

TURN - okay, we got a sliver of hope with the Td.

I don't know if this is a spot where a solver would be indifferent facing a shove as V. Not sure it matters when V is human. He's stuck, and apparently loose-sticky. It's pretty unlikely he has a flush, but that doesn't mean he'll believe we have one, or that we have AA, or that he'll fold to a jam either way.

I think the jam is probably fine in theory, when we get here this way. I don't have the energy to figure out how often he needs to fold for our bluff to break even, but I'd think we have enough equity that he probably doesn't need to fold at a very high frequency. That's good, when he's probably not folding very often.

If the reveal is that he folded, I'd think either our read was off, or we happened to catch him tilt-spewing.

*internal chuckle*

You mean he 4! bluffed with 63o 3 times? Doesn't sound like a good play (better to have 76s or A3s or something is totally bluffing), and maybe you mean different similar hands. Then harder to put him on always an overpair here. When he bets small and then checks when the 3-flush hits, it does look like he has value. If he had a bluff, he would presumably bluff postflop.

I really don't think it would be a good play for him to x/f QQ or similar here so shallow. Do you really have a flush that often?

Just skimmed the rest of the thread.

I understand making a play based on the idea that our opponent may have learned from a prior mistake. But we might want to be careful how much credit we give a tilted opponent for being able to make in-game adjustments resulting in them suddenly over-folding.

We may also want to ask if his prior stack off was obviously and objectively bad, and if he's likely to over-adjust by folding an over-pair here, in a spot where he should probably pure call, at least in theory. If a solver would under-fold, I'd think a tilted and sticky opponent would fold even less.

Lastly, even tilted and bad opponents are often capable of intuiting when our line doesn't necessarily add up, even if they wouldn't be capable of clearly explaining why. Once V puts over 25% of his stack in, I'd think he's not folding to a jam pre. He may be capable of logically connecting the dots to conclude we don't have top of range when we flat call, making QQ the effective nuts on the flop.

Yeah, we could have some flushes here, or TT, but also maybe just the naked Ad, or JJ that assumes V is pot controlling with two over-cards and decides to jam for value & protection. Occasionally V sees the flush card as an opportunity to give us rope.

"F**k it, I call" is the battle cry of all the bad players who can live with a bad call / bad beat, but can't live with the possibility they may have made a bad fold. V already told us he needs to see it. We should listen.

thank you. great post

no 63o 1000% same hand 3 times. its his "favorite hand" "he once won a 25k pot with it in LexO's private game in florida"

but he still has Overpair imho. or 63o lmao

If you want a place where your progress is actually saved and tracked globally, Evoplay Arena is a solid choice. I love checking my position every morning to see how the board has shifted. Link for entry: https://arenaevoplay.games/?utm_source=forum&utm_medium=shilling&utm_campaign=aren_launch

Seems like a very good read to include in your OP. Also goes against your read of ''100% overpair''.

No offense boss, but something isn't adding up. Also doesn't help you're ignoring very simple questions.

We'll just file this one under ''doubtful''.

yeah i honestly forgot all about it. (I wasnt thinking about it during the hand being 100% honest)

what simple questions am I ignoring?

Honestly, population tendency might still be more important here although it supports the same conclusion (population cannot get over the excitement of picking up a premium pair and just won't fold it).

Might actually be more interesting if the question was whether to run this bluff with a single-hand read that maybe V does lay down an overpair here.

I agree and I wouldn't be bluffing a mid 50s chatter box lol.

I would probably fold preflop a lot vs the 4bet, unless I think they're a studied player with some bluffs? What's the range we're hoping to be up against? It's probably not wider than QQ+, AKs which absolutely schmokes us. On the flop we're up against the same range with (virtually) no bluffs, so I don't feel the need to call that $200 bet. We're less likely to light that money on fire if we just go to the sportsbook. On the turn, I don't see a hand that folds except black-jacks (hmmm). And again, he probably doesn't 4-bet that so idk what we're doing tbh.

Why would we assume villain has no bluff 4!s when he has shown 63o 3 times after 4-betting?

Is it a good play for villain to fold a big pair here? It isn't like it is deep and multiway in a single raised pot on wet medium or low board. The SPR was about 1.2 on the flop. You have QQ and the flop is 853 2-flush. It isn't like it was AKx or T97 3-flush or something like that.