I think it's a call vs that sizing. Having an A is good because you don't block bluffs.
I really don't have a strong picture of what your range looks like on the river either. Using a solver would be best.
I'd assume few Jx, a lot 7x alot 4x , Alot of Ahigh, low pocket pairs , maybe some KQo.
Though i feel when regs bet half pot or sizings that look like they want to get called , they just have it.
But I've pretty much given up on these types of population reads because unless your a bot with millions of hands to look at , you'll be subject to a lot of bias.
June 25, 2020 | 4:37 a.m.
Ofcourse I'd adjust , if the player is a tight 3 bettor . But overall I think this GTO range should do well vs any normal 3bet range, given that its a solved range.
One thing I haven't worked on is how IP 3bettors strategy differs , due to my range having more pocket pairs and suited connectors than range that is mostly 99-QQ, AK,AQs,AJs, A10s, KQs, KJs, and some QJs.
June 23, 2020 | 9:08 p.m.
Spots like this I dislike. Mainly with how I think about the hand in game.
19/10 seems like a weaker reg.
So he could possibly be value betting AKo. But no clue how likely this assumption is, but leaning towards unlikely, given that he's a semi-reg.
Another assumption could be made , that most regs would barrel AA and JJ on the turn at a decent frequency, maybe checked on flop, and just called on the river.
Given his 4.5 low 3 bet, he unlikely has a lot of flush draws in his range. K10s, KJs, Q10s, 109s, and possibly low frequency K9s, 87s, 98s, Q9s.
And I would think that most flushes are barreled (good assumption i think)
So that leaves his river value range to be a low weight of slow played flushes and slow played sets. Maybe 1-2 combos.
His possible bluffs would be QhQx(possibly low weight), 10h10h, 9h9x , 8h8x (likely low weight), maybe some A10-2s (I think unlikely), some KQo with a heart that didn't want to barrel (unlikely) , and QJo with a heart that didn't barrel (unlikely).
So I like a call here , given his low value combos , possible bluffs , and dominated value hands.
Though in-game I think I might make the possible error of folding. As I get caught up in trying to picture/think about the exact # of combos with the weights based on the assumptions I make. And before I know it have 5 seconds to act and I fold because I see he's a 19/10 and I assume that these players never ever bluff. :D
June 23, 2020 | 8:51 p.m.
I didn't solve/create them. A friend sent me them pre solved.
Good to see it matches other ranges. Yeah GTO ranges are weird . If I remember correctly MP has a wider 3 bet range vs UTG than BU or CO.
I like how the ranges could be easy to play . With a lot of hands , you either flop something or you don't such as low pocket pairs.
Though I think OP overall has a decent check raise strategy in a lot of spots , and low pocket pairs are included in it. And I haven't really done a lot of solver work to get a good sense of how the ranges plays, frequencies, and heuristics. So I have some work to do with these ranges
June 23, 2020 | 7:32 p.m.
UTG vs 3 bet CO is calling 44-22 at 100% frequency. As well as 87s, 76s, 65s, and 54s when they aren't used as 4bets. And folding 99-88 at a 25% frequency .
Also AQo,KJs,K10s are being called at a frequency UTG vs CO, but folded 100% when not used as a 4bet UTG vs BU, which doesn't make sense.
June 21, 2020 | 8:49 p.m.
This UTG calling vs BU 3 bet is suppose to be a solved range, but always thought hands like 88-22 and medium to low suited connected are folds. In this range, they're calling about 50% of the time. As well as hands like A9s/A5s, calling about 25% of the time.
June 21, 2020 | 8:47 p.m.
Was unsure if I made the wrong play. Because on one hand I think that most players especially recs would bet their nut flushes. So very few nut combos. On the other hand, this check raise just seems underbluffed. I need about 18% equity.
No reads on the player , just 6 hands ins and he's limped into a hand.
June 21, 2020 | 7:05 a.m.
I think most recs and regs will see this line as very underbluff, which vs a rec is very likely the case. Though I don't think you will get to this line with most regs.
What do you think about possibly overbluffing this line vs recs? A part of me thinks that there's a good chance that most recs will overfold to this.