Rockstarfish

Hi Phil,

Since you asked for feedback, I thought I'd mention that I found this vid to be fantastic as far as highly-detailed/long-winded hand analysis goes. For instance, seeing a spot in context where the delayed C-bet with one sizing vs multiple sizings issue comes into play (re: Leaks Hiding In Plain Sight) - that would never have come into light were you simply running through more macro issues. Your depth of analysis and thought is inspiring and we're lucky to have a direct line to such insight.

That said, I'll also mention that for your posts especially, I'd personally love to see at least an occasional video where you intentionally keep the analysis much briefer and less detailed, maybe by talking through things at live-gameplay speed or close to it...not because I want to satisfy my ADHD and see a ton of hands - but because I sometimes find myself interested in hearing your thoughts with a bit more of a "zoomed out" perspective. I personally am not capable of sorting through the entire complexity you present in each hand in this video - at least not in real time. So I guess this is all to say, I'd be especially interested in the occasional real-time-Phil's-thoughts video, to peek into how your brain is working while at the tables and hear only what you think are the most important and primary issues at each decision point.

(Out of respect I'll also mention that suspect that much of the complex analysis you present in 5 minutes on video happens in 5 seconds in your head...in part because you do so much work away from the tables, making the analysis simpler and more automatic while playing...and I only know for certain that I'm not yet capable of such wizardry.)

Obviously brevity does not come easily to me either....

Thanks, as always, for your hard work and contributions to this community. I, for one, couldn't appreciate it more.

RockStarFish (aka Brian)

My first time posting in threads, so any comments or feedback welcomed...

My plan here at each of the decision points here is best approached by process of elimination:

1) Preflop - As Midori points out, there must be dead money in the pot for his raise to be to $9. At first glance it makes this PF spot more awkward...but the odds on your call remain the same here (2:1). Had it been $5 to call into a pot of $10, this suited ace hand seems to me a mandatory call, even with the ragginess of the hand. The SPR does decrease as a result of the pot size, but not so drastically that it changes the value of this hand here. All said, I eliiminate fold as a shade too tight. I think it is a +EV call, even against a reg (and definitely against a weaker player.)

2) Flop - One option not yet discussed is to donk flop. Because your range can have a reasonable amount of 2pr, sets, gutters and combo draws, I think it needs to be on the table for this somewhat dynamic flop. So options are:

X/r - As you have said already, I eliminate this as too aggressive for your holding and likely -EV as most worse hands fold, most better hands continue. Save this for some sets and high equity semi-bluffs, mainly.

X/c - Def a reasonable play, but as you may now guess, I think second best, since your hand is so vulnerable. Top and bottom pair with backdoor nut draw has a fair amount of equity in this pot against villain's opening range, but a lot of turn cards can queer your equity...raising is too optimistic, but X/c'ing does nothing to protect your equity. Much depends on your plan for the turn, but as you have pointed out, many turns (including this one) are uncomfortable for similar reasons of balancing protection and equity realization. X/x is kind of a nightmare for top/bttm pair. All in all, X/c is reasonable here and the most obvious choice...but...

Le Donk - I am no expert on the matter and I'd love more threads to discuss donking in general...but one principal to put out there is that (GTO) appropriate spots to donk flop arise much more often than good spots for donking turns. Most players donk flops too little - your range can frequently improve with 3 new cards, and protection benefits many holdings that do not want to X/r (ie this holding). Remeber, whether you have the lead or not, the point of leading out any street is to make the most of a polarized range. A turn brings only 1 new card, so it is more rare that oop's condensed flop X/c range has improved so significantly that it polarizes and leading makes sense. To me, this flop seems a good candidate to donk a reasonable amount (Maybe 5-7% of range? Ranges are wide here, so even that's a fair number of combos). I say our hand falls squarely in our value-donk range. Some 2pr's and lower sets that have some additional equity (ie backdoor nut flush draw) but are vulnerable in general. I'd prob balance this with some combo semi-bluffs, like 3-4-7-8 with two clubs...hands with enough equity to want to continue, but that are pleased to win uncontested.
I would say the plan here is to bet out and call when raised, then evaluate turns. Bet/fold seems far too tight, especially since many regs raise donks far too widely thinking they are exploiting weak ranges. As to sizing, I'd say 2/3 pot accomplishes most goals of max value and protection on this board. I could be sold on 1/2 pot, but it seems a shade too small on a board this dynamic.

Okay... that said, you didnt lead the flop, and (reasonably) took the X/c line. So the turn options following X/c are:

X/r - Not a terrible idea, given the added nut draw...but when you are called, you probably have only 9 outs to the flush, as top-bottom 2pr is so rarely ahead in that case.

X/c - I agree with most of the previously made points on this. The passive line has many drawbacks here...but with the nut draw, I think this line makes the most sense, given how we got here. 2pr may well be ahead right now, and 11 cards give you well-hidden, nutty hands on the river. Playing river oop if you dont improve will suck a reasonable amount...but all in all, after x/c'ing flop, i think this is a wise play.

X/f - Obviously feels too tight here. If he full pots, you are getting close to pot-committed, so that's just an icky spot. (an argument for donking flop...you get to lead turns like this one and not yet be pot-committed, since you control bet sizing)

Donk turn - Question: has the 5d strongly improved your range, making your previously condensed range more polar? Nah. It's a dynamic card, but both player's overall ranges remained similar (or so says me). Leading here is why they call it donking...firing scared money into the pot with a condensed/middling range...asking to get exploited. Giving villain the opportunity to play perfectly. I eliminate donking turn.

I will conclude with 2 more general thoughts about this hand (which I found to be very interesting and is a spot that can occur somewhat frequently).

1) Most of these decisions are somewhat close. Is folding preflop a costly error? Prob not, especially with the unusual pot size. Is donking flop far different EV than X/c? Nah. Both seem profitable choices and the difference is prob small. BUT

2) A wiser writer than me (Will Tipton) points out that a great reason for choosing any action at any point, is that it will bring your opponent to a region of the game tree where they do not play well. i.e. Many/most players at med stakes play poorly against well-balanced donk ranges. They mistakenly think the play must be highly exploitable and make wild adjustments to their usually-solid gameplay. I think donking here is possibly the "best" choice regardless...but add the high likelihood that your opponent will make more mistakes when you lead the flop, and I think it becomes a clear winner, imho.

I am not an expert on this complex matter, so if someone sees any major flaws in my analysis, don't hold back! I'd love to learn more about such things...that's why I'm up at 6:30am typing a bunch of nerdy crap 🤓