I agree with a lot of this but the only thing is underdefending is completely fine imo, I think you definitely need to make sure you're raising enough to put pressure on people but defending by calling is kind of a suckers game at low limits.
Dec. 6, 2019 | 2:36 a.m.
I was in a very similar position to you until recently, having a great time online but could not convert my winrate to live despite the seemingly softer pool. I think I've since somewhat worked out the formula for live and it really hurts because a lot of it involves doing stuff that you know is wrong in order to get to a spot where you can win.
So the first thing you have to do is raise to ridiculous sizes, whatever it takes to get a headsup (or sometimes 3-way) pot. I don't think you should tighten your range much as you do this either, yes it means you get into awkward spots and lose sometimes 10 or more BB from an open at a particularly splashy table when a nit 3 bets you but 3 bets are so rare in live games that it doesn't really matter.
You also need to iso super wide and often, if you have a hand that you're happy to play (i.e: its equity is not derived from stealing the blinds) then put in a massive iso and play heads up with the initial raiser (+any whales that can't get away but they're just a bonus) or just take it down immediately, limping behind with JTs hoping to hit something is in my opinion a suckers game and the reason is as follows: your advantage in live comes from hand reading and visibility and this decreases exponentially with every extra player in the pot. Say you iso the JTs and then the flop comes QT2 and you know you're up against a whale that donks medium-strong hands and they check to you, you are now holding a pretty nutted hand and are looking for at least 2 streets of value. This situation just sounds kind of dumb from an online perspective but is so common in live games, you'll just get a spot where you know you're good and you just give them the opportunity to give you 3 streets of value even if you don't think there's any way you should get paid off by their hand just because there's no chance of you losing the money you put in and they might "put you on a flushdraw".
Never ever pot control, if you think you're good then bet and bet big, the reason is just simple, you're never going to see a balanced bluff raising range, you can just snap fold to it against 90% of players and the ones who you don't it will be a trivial call against because they're just too spewy to ever fold any showdown value to.
Make your peace with being exploitable, vary your preflop raise sizings if you want, I do it more based on what I think will get me exactly 1 caller than hand strength but honestly no one cares anyway. Another side to this is forget bluff catching and top of your range, this guy either bluffs too much and we never fold or he doesn't bluff enough and we fold everything every time. Once again you can be exploitable in that you can only ever have value in a spot and that's fine, if they can't adjust you don't need to be balanced, I've seen people just this week look at a friend of mine, tell him he plays so tight pre he must have a hand here and then called off his cold 4B jam for 200BB with ATs (as a sidenote if you feel like you're getting a tight image just run a bluff on a nit then turn it over when they make some snide remark about how you always have value, no one understands the concept of adjusting to the player so they'll just think you're capable of running bluffs and now their ego won't let them fold in case it happens to them).
Finally this might be the most important, you need to understand the tendencies of every player at the table, if someone raises the flop multiway with a mediocre top pair then the next time they call you and you have a fairly decent top pair you now have the nuts. You also need to find the nits and hero folders, these are thinking players that almost understand live poker but not actual poker, they can see when they're behind your value range and will make some crazy folds as a result, players like this are also a great outlet for your instinct to bluff that you really need to suppress to play well live.
So basically in response to your question about being a nit, yes you can make that work but really the answer is to just pay the live poker tax to get heads up, make your peace with the 30BB single raised pot and then own people post flop by value betting them to death with marginal holdings and absolutely never paying them off, if you're comfortable enough in your reads about the players at the table you can do this with massive range disadvantages or way looser than would make you comfortable (like I'll iso big with any suited king if a massive whale limps - talking 0 pre flop folding range) but in reality there's a suitable middle ground to be struck especially when you first sit at the table. Also play deep, even if being super deep is a bit more stress on your bank roll, once you get used to live you're never getting stacked unless you thought you were value shoving (i.e: set over set bad) so you might as well get the full 400BB or whatever the table cap is when you 'cooler' them with 2 pair versus aces or something similar.
Dec. 6, 2019 | 2:35 a.m.
Non showdown isn't really about calling down more at lower limits, it's far more about claiming small pots that people give up on, denying equity and folding 1 pair hands that people aren't happy to get stacked with. People don't bluff enough at these limits so unless your call also has some outs to improve to go along with it then you're just sacrificing a disproportionate amount of showdown winnings to "fix" your non-showdown losses. I'd categorise myself as a very aggressive player that has 51% wwsf and I have a very healthy redline but I still don't make a habit of calling people down unless they give me a very good reason to.
Also this is going to hurt, but if you're down after 300,000 hands you're a losing player and denying that is only going to hurt your chances to improve.
Dec. 6, 2019 | 2:01 a.m.
that was supposed to be a shrugging emoji, my point was yeah giving up with bluffs is fine but you can just print money by bullying people
Equity realisation and denial are like opposite sides of the same coin.
So betting small denies a ton of equity because say you have king high and they have just 2 random unpaired cards with no draw, you bet small and you did get a worse hand to fold but you denied them 6 outs, doing this for a large portion of their range is very profitable.
Equity realisation is the opposite, say you have king high and they have a weak queen (or even a strong queen but they don't raise enough), you bet small, they call, you check back turn and then you hit a king on the river thus realising your equity as opposed to checking back flop, facing a bet and folding on the turn.
Also bet sizes should still escalate to above pot on bricks even when you bet big on the flop but that's a whole other topic.
The strategy you're talking about is polarising and you can still do this but just save it until the turn, the basic idea on the flop is when you have a range advantage you bet wide and often to force them to defend their weak range wide and often rather than just the strong part of it.
Nov. 25, 2019 | 10:43 p.m.
Wrote this as just a long piece of prose but gonna divide it up
1) increased difficulty in calling enough
So in response to your question about generating more fold equity, you will get more folds when you bet bigger however the relative number of folds may decrease. Say we bet 1/3 pot, villain has to defend 75% of their range to prevent this being profitable with any 2 (in actual fact villain can defend slightly less than this because checking back also has some ev that we are giving up by betting a lot of the time but that's another topic) and let's compare this to betting 2/3 pot where villain has to defend 60%. Essentially it comes down to the fact that defending 75% of your range is hard to do and people just won't manage it, the first 40-50% or so of your range is quite natural to defend as it's typically made up of pairs and gutshots but after that you start having to look for stuff with double backdoors or overcard with a backdoor.
2) passive play from villain means you don't need to fear getting raised (and they lose a lot of ev by raising too tight)
When you bet this small villain needs to raise wider for value because often times you're just going to check back turn and see a free river allowing you to realise a lot of equity for free so they need to put money in the pot themselves. On the board that you've used as an example, in a BTN vs BB scenario the BB should be checkraising a lot of top pair, I'm not sure where exactly the cut off falls but I'd imagine something around Q9-QJ+ is fine to go for value but people just aren't doing this enough or doing it with enough bluffs either, stuff like 9c8c is getting folded instead of called or raised. Basically this just makes your life very easy and their life very hard playing this strategy because you can comfortably bet fold a lot of more marginal defends like middle pair because the raising range is just way too strong so you can overfold to it massively.
3) equity realisation
Also as mentioned you get to check back turn a lot and just realise loads of equity, there is a lot of value in consistently getting to see all 5 cards on a run out. It also caps your opponents super hard, it's just such a massive ev loss for them to trap against this size because then they can never play for stacks with their strongest hands so you can go a bit nuts on turns and rivers (fyi big betting on the turn and river is not 60-75% of pot, its more like 120%+)
4) no lost value
And finally, the other effect of capping your opponents range is that your top pair + essentially becomes the nuts and you can look to play for stacks on brick run outs with really big bet sizings, if you have AQ you're not going 1/3, 2/3, 2/3 and just losing a bunch of value by getting less money from Qx in this scenario, you're going 1/3, 1.5x, 1.5x or something similar
Just in response to your question about turn strategy, of course it's ok to give up in fact you do want to give up with a lot of your bluffs on the river in theory however, just barrelling for really big sizings on turn and river against a capped range does tend to print money so 🤷
Nov. 25, 2019 | 8:15 p.m.
Range betting is definitely fine and this might not represent a massive gain in ev but you do have several hands in your range that are incentivised towards using a larger sizing that give up that ev if you decide to just bet your whole range small so whilst I tend to agree that using a single sizing at each node is certainly easier to execute you might be leaving some money on the table here.
Nov. 25, 2019 | 7:50 p.m.
Reopening the betting on the river against strong aggressive opponents with marginal hands tends to be a bad idea in theory because then a high % of the time you end up bluff catching in a bloated pot. It also has the side effect that in order for you to remain unexploitable when you face a raise you're going to have to bluff catch wider than you'd usually be comfortable with. However, neither of these things is a problem if you don't intend to bluff catch facing the raise, if you think they do not raise aggressively enough and are therefore comfortable folding all of your bluff catchers then I think it's fine to go ahead and bet for value. I think it's important that you're careful here though as you may run into a player capable of adjusting who notices your tendency to go for thin value too often on the river and starts to punish you for this. Essentially I'd just say do it against the players in the pool who trend a bit too loose passive which tends to be the majority in this spot.
In terms of putting this into practise I personally just always bet when I think I'm good even if it's super thin against people I perceive as weak players and I just wait for them to surprise me by paying me off, I know that's a bit vague but river spots are so specific it's hard not to be vague here. They don't pay me off all of the time but it does enough of the time and also has a side effect of allowing me to bluff more which is nice. Bear in mind that this all comes from playing 50/100nl so your experience at 200nl may differ. Sometimes you will look a bit stupid just betting into a nutted hand that villain decided to call 3 streets for some reason but it happens.
Nov. 19, 2019 | 4:30 p.m.
I think something like this is very dangerous to add into your game, yes it can help but you might just come up against someone like me who snap bets a lot as both a bluff and as value and you're going to end up levelling yourself thinking about timing tells rather than playing poker which makes you more likely to make a mistake.
Nov. 19, 2019 | 4:17 p.m.
People just don't tend to be too psyched to try and get folds from trips so on that basis I'd lean fold but then you're getting into a levelling game because this is the exact kind of spot that you can get massive overfolds from a tight solid reg. If you think villain is ever value betting worse this is a snap but I'm not sure they are, I think AQ- gets really thin on this river so I'd probably rather call spade blockers but with AK I think you're chopping sometimes so probably throw that in first I guess. That said I think this is a spot where someone who hasn't given much thought to how awkward it is for you to call down is going to underbluff. Also worth bearing in mind that if you're playing a lot of checks as you're supposed to on monotone boards oop and calling down some trappy stuff then this fold becomes a lot easier to make imo.
Nov. 15, 2019 | 3:47 a.m.
In terms of preflop idk if hero is doing this but I'd personally have a lot of combos of AA here, the ranges are so well defined here that I don't think you run into many problems flatting it even if the board runs out pretty nasty.
Nov. 15, 2019 | 3:38 a.m.
Honestly I'm very inclined to call this off and actually call off very light with my range (I'm probably calling AK here), AA are basically invulnerable on this turn and want you to keep putting in money with 0 (or 2) outs and pretty much the same with KK. If anything this is JJ/TT that really don't want to see an over card but it more just screams someone desperately trying to rep aces than someone who actually has them. Definitely not folding QQ here, on a very dynamic board this would make sense with overpairs just hoping to protect it's equity against flush and straight draws and get it in with some top pairs before a scare card comes but here it just really doesn't make any sense from a thinking player imo.
This is all just intuition though, not at home atm but I can run some pio sims later if you're interested in the theory view but it almost certainly calls this off and much more.
Nov. 15, 2019 | 3:13 a.m.
I personally like bet big turn (65-80% pot), check back river especially at 2nl because the population are stations and are not going to bluff raise enough so if you face a jam you can just fold and be fine with it but you're also likely to get value from worse. Also it's important to understand that the $EV of both plays when facing the 'nuts' is likely the same, lose a big bet here or call a big bet on the river, it's just the emotional EV of folding top pair without getting to see a showdown that hurts here which makes you want to check back but really people are not bluffing here or the river enough for me to want to check back. Also you just get to deny a bunch of equity from all of the draws on the board and get some value out of the NFD which probably calls flop and turn but definitely folds to a bet on the river when it misses.
I think in general this is a good way to play at low stakes - put money in on the turn with the intention of checking back river and get ready to muck if you face a raise - because it exploits the populations loose passive tendencies and also denies loads of equity so IP I think you should really err on the side of valuing a bit thinly in the knowledge that sometimes you get called by a better hand but it's likely to get you to showdown and is generally profitable. People just aren't going to adjust by adding in bluffs, the turn check raises will stay nutted and it will hurt the first few times but eventually you'll just fold those thin value bets like clockwork and won't need to see the cards to know you were beat (1 or 2 ill advised hero calls where they table the nuts will surely convince you if you get curious).
Nov. 9, 2019 | 10:34 a.m.
I think you should play as wide as your postflop edge will allow you to until someone starts exploiting you. I think it's fine to play tight but you are leaving money on the table in exchange for simplifying your strategy which is something you've got to decide if you're comfortable with. It's also important to understand whether you're being exploited either accidentally or on purpose and to reign things in a little when it's appropriate but I think being unexploitable is just setting EV on fire at low stakes.
Nov. 9, 2019 | 10:25 a.m.
I don't really think you can give them AQ as a flop 3B and villain doesn't get here with every combo of JT imo but then also doesn't get here with every combo that they might bluff in this spot as a lot of them would just call the flop.
I think the river call is pretty 0ev in the long run tbh and I'm not too bothered that I ran into a boat this time just more interested in the line as a whole and I was probably getting stacked anyway no matter how I played the hand on that run out so it doesn't really hurt to see the 99.
Nov. 8, 2019 | 11:33 a.m.
BTN opens to $1.25
BB calls with QcTc
Flop Ac9c8s $2.75
BTN bets $0.85
BB raises to $2.80
BTN raises to $9.77
Turn Qs $22.29
BTN bets $15.90
River Qd $54.09
BTN bets $23.08 and is all in
BTN shows 99
Preflop I'm going to be mixing a 3B with this hand but predominantly flatting.
On the flop I think BTN sizing is wrong but he could be doing this to exploit the pool as 50nl still hasn't started defending these range bets properly. I think I'm going to play my hand as a pure raise facing this sizing, from a GTO perspective I think I should be raising pretty thin for value here, not entire sure where the cut off would lie but facing this small bet I imagine I'd be looking to raise something like AT+. From an exploitative perspective I'm going to overbluff facing this raise because I don't think the population is defending enough, I don't have any specific reads on villain but am fairly confident in this in general. Facing the 3B I just think I have too much equity to fold at this stage but it's not a nice spot to be in.
Not really sure what to make of the turn, it does complete the straight with JT which we can both show up with and also brings in a backdoor flushdraw. If I have JT I might want to jam here just to fold out all of villains flushdraws which get to play fairly perfectly on the river and I don't want them realising that equity for free and also to get calls from sets before a scare card rolls off or 2 pair before it gets counterfeit. So with that in mind I feel like this might be the perfect combo to jam as I block JT and still have a lot of equity when called but I'm now paired up and can take a pot off the NFD which is likely to check back the river so I feel like there's a lot at play here. I'm not entirely sure about villains sizing either because I'm just unfamiliar with spots where the flop gets 3B in general.
The river I feel like I just have to either give villain no bluffs and fold or bluff catch this hand because with not even all of the combos of 99 and 88 in my range I'm really struggling for calls. I can see A9/A8 being a better call in that I block boats and unblock flushdraws but I think the Tc blocker is no too bad to have because I block JcTc which is villains most likely straight although I do block KcTc, Tc8c, Tc7c which could take this line. A8 and A9 might make up enough calls as I'll have 18 combos of them so if I'm overfolding it won't be by miles but I also feel like it's quite an attractive bluff spot for villain in that a bunch of my 2 pair just got counterfeit so he should be aware how hard it is for me to find calls.
Would appreciate any and all insight as I am fairly unfamiliar with pots where the flop gets 3B on the whole and I think this is quite a weird and interesting spot.
Nov. 8, 2019 | 5:10 a.m.
I think folding turn or river at these stakes is fine, you can call down as well but I think you're unlikely to see people bluffing this spot optimally and you have plenty of trips/boats to call down to the point where you're not going to be heavily exploited for letting go of overpairs. The bigger problem in the hand is the flop play where you should either be betting small or checking. I think this is a prime candidate to check back because your aces need very little protection and you'd like them to catch up a bit (there is a lot of value in them hitting top pair), I'd rather bet a weaker over pair that can still get value but benefits more from protection. You also block ace highs which means you're blocking the bits of their range that you're almost certain to see a check back from thereby increasing the value of checking.
Nov. 8, 2019 | 2:23 a.m.
So one of the problems that you will encounter if you start overbetting too big is that you incentivise trapping too heavily, say we take an extreme case and we decide to shove on brick turns with a balanced polar range then we won't actually have a nuts advantage because villain will call all of their nut-ish combos on the flop. This doesn't really become a problem until we start getting above 2x pot but it is something to keep in mind.
Usually the sizing of the overbet is a function of the equity of your nutted combos, on disconnected rainbow boards these combos will have close to 100% equity against villain and as a result we can go really big - one example of this I saw recently is at 200BB+ on a dry ace high board we just forget about all combos worse than 2 pair and can maximise ev with a 2.5x turn sizing. However as the board gets more dynamic and the equity of our nutted combos decreases alongside the fact that we want to bet with a wider range for more protection we want to size down more towards the 1.2x mark. This initially seemed counter intuitive to me because bigger sizing = more protection BUT for a smaller section of your range.
Another thing to consider is that often bricks aren't pure bricks in that they do bring in the occasional new strong hand to defend as villain may bink 2 pair, a set or even a straight and as we start betting bigger the proportion of their range that they have to defend which is made up of these new strong hands becomes bigger and bigger until you get to a point where you're not really putting much pressure on their range at all because they have too many comfortable call downs/raises to fight back with.
Finally from an exploitative perspective there is a massive difference in fold equity between 90% and 120% pot but then much less of a drop off as you continue to size up because villains can often find the comfortable defends which may make up the top 30% of their range but then struggle with the more marginal stuff.
Nov. 5, 2019 | 8:57 p.m.
Your line is fine but you can fine tune it slightly, on very dry ace high boards IP in 3B pot when we bet our entire range we typically want to use really small sizings (around 15%). This allows us to push our equity advantage on these boards very effectively and also is very strong from an exploit point of view because people will struggle to call and raise enough, when node locking to account for the general tend towards overly passive play with marginal value hands this actually captures a greater pot share than playing a slightly larger size even if we do it perfectly. Other than that I think everything is played fine from a theory point of view but you may want to ask consider whether you're getting enough folds to make bluffing the river with any combo +ev at those stakes although you do have probably the best hand to do it with in my opinion.
Nov. 4, 2019 | 5:42 a.m.
I think the most important tag is whether someone under or over bluffs, if you can successfully identify this then it makes all of your river decisions against them incredibly easy, you either call all your bluff catchers or fold all of them. This seems like a massive adjustment to make but I think this is incredibly valuable and very easy to implement.
After that I think it's important to tag the non believers/stations because you can reduce your bluffing frequency against them and still get paid and start to value them thinner than you would otherwise.
The last tag that I use regularly (other than tagging fish/whales) is "trappy/passive", it just saves you a massive headache when you're facing a river raise after nothing got there or a similar situation and it also lets you know that you are facing a stronger uncapped range on the turn/river so you don't go too nuts but you are also less likely to get raised off your equity.
Nov. 4, 2019 | 5:36 a.m.
So the turn is actually a nice point to learn about bet sizings in general because it really illustrates how we should pick our bet sizings. At any given node when we decide to use one singular sizing our betting frequency is determined by the equity of our range and bet sizing is determined by its polarity. So now we need to look at how this turn card interacts with our range. Essentially what has happened is that we have lost several nutted combos as they are now blocked by the board (some K9 and K7) or have been counterfeit (97) but the combos still within our value range are close to 100% equity (they only lose in cooler situations) and so this means that the equity of our range has decreased due to the proportion of nutted combos to bluffs going down but the polarity has massively increased as our nutted combos are almost invulnerable. As a result of this we should be checking at a high frequency and giving up with all but our strongest bluffs but when we do bet we should be betting really big.
Oct. 21, 2019 | 5:04 p.m.
Something which I think it's important to note is just how easy it is for villain to overbluff here, you actually need to be quite disciplined to stay balanced in this spot with all of the draws on the flop so I'd bluff catch in this spot because I think a lot of villains are going to get here with way too many bluffs. If the board was AT554 that makes a huge difference to the ratio of value to bluffs villain gets to this spot with and I'd be much more tempted to let it go.
Oct. 18, 2019 | 3:01 p.m.
So first of all I think you should 3B larger, you're giving people way too good a price to realise their equity in position with a variety of hands which all have tremendous implied odds against your range.
On the flop I think we should be checking at a very high frequency given how well this flop connects with our opponents range and due to the amount of run outs that we will have difficulty playing from OOP. Also at 100BB deep check raising to play a 2 street game with vulnerable hands is a very viable strategy. I think betting this hand can be fine but it should be at a mixed frequency because you have a lot of AxKd and AdKx is probably just substantially better so we don't want to bet all of these combos because then we're going to have too many turn give ups so we become very vulnerable to being floated on the flop and then losing the pot on the turn.
I think on the turn we should be checking pretty much our entire range here I think, we're at a sizeable disadvantage in terms of the amount of 9x in our range especially as IP will float pre flop probably as light as 97s given the small sizing.
On the river I think checking is fine, maybe you can block bet for a quarter pot because I think you do have an advantage in sets and AQ so IP can't really go too wild raising you but hard to say whether you're ahead of the calling range.
Oct. 7, 2019 | 12:35 a.m.
I think you can consider exploitably overbluffing this spot because on this run out and given action villain is very likely to have a one pair hand and people don't like looking silly getting stacked by the nuts with a one pair hand in live games, yes we run in T9s a lot but when we don't I think you're just looking at a sad fold from a lot of hands. That said I think that we definitely do have some better combos to bluff (AT for instance) however not having a diamond in our hand is quite nice because we unblock all the QdXd hands that are snap folding to any sizing.
More importantly I would note that I think we should be considering checking this combo on the flop as I think betting all of your gutters on this texture is going to give your range some troubles on later streets (particularly that you're going to end up with too many give ups and no delayed cbets with any equity that aren't value bets) and there is some equity to checking this hand which we can hope to start realising with a check back. On the turn I think you should polarise and should be potting it (or slightly larger because people overfold massively to even small overbets) because that card is very bricky and a lot of your value hands are going to want a large amount of protection given the amount of unfavourable run outs possible. This also sets up a nice river shove on bricks where you have decent blockers. Your sizing on the turn is typical of a favourable turn card that we're claiming gives us a range advantage and I really don't see it on the 8d so I'd much rather go bigger and push the fact that we just have all these sets, 2 pair and overpairs that they don't (especially after flatting on the flop against a half pot bet with deep stacks to play for).
Aaaand another thing, bad regs play well against regular sizings, by pushing your sizings away from the norm (either larger or smaller) you push them into areas where they cannot roughly approximate a good strategy, every single poker player has spent their entire poker careers passively training the right proportion of their range to call down against a 2/3 pot bet so why put them to that test when you can take them out of their comfort zone and make their standard call feel much more scary.
Oct. 5, 2019 | 5:01 p.m.
I think this is a spot that without reads you can actually let go because if you're right that this has a lot of pocket pairs it's marginally profitable, but if you're wrong it's losing a lot so the benefit of being right is fairly minimal compared to the cost of being wrong.
Oct. 4, 2019 | 11:29 p.m.
I like your sizing but I think it's also worth considering checking on a dynamic board OOP to 2 players. You're going to end up checking and making your hand very face up on a lot of run outs so I think it's fine to start on the flop. You're still going to stack AK on bricks most likely so I don't think it's too big a problem to miss a street of value at this spr.
Oct. 3, 2019 | 1:56 a.m.
With rake considerations flatting IP is pretty -EV at 25nl, personally I would just play a linear 3B or fold range and maybe play some cold calls with some implied odds hands against weak players who will pay you off when you hit and with passive players behind who won't punish you by squeezing a lot.
Also linear 3B ranges are generally a lot easier to play post flop which I think is an oft understated factor because the % efficiency that you can play your strategy at is just as important as the EV that it actually generates.
Sept. 30, 2019 | 3 a.m.
River is just a set up to perfectly get called by every better hand and fold every worse one, that just seems super thin to me if you're calling it a value bet and I don't really expect to fold any 2 pair here so I'm confused with what the goal is. I feel like, just from seeing this hand, you're resistant to changing between being aggressive or passive within a hand which is something that I actually see fairly often, x/r -> x/c just doesn't exist for a lot of people as a line. That might be overdrawing my conclusions but it's actually an important mind set thing for within hands that a lot of people miss to not get too attached to the concept of your hand as a bluff, value bet or bluff catcher because until the river it's just an equity number against your opponent's range that exists within your range as a whole.
Also I just want to quickly look at just how strong villains range is here and how easy it is for them to find calls (if we assume they don't 3B the flop IP which most people don't). Ignoring your ace blocker because I just want to look at what they are going to call down against you they have 9 AK, 9 AQ (apparently although that seems like a weird flop bet to me but w/e), 9 KQ, 2 K9s, 2 Q9s, 3 AA, 3 KK, 3 QQ, 3 99, 16 JT and then probably some AJ and AT (you block the combos of this with the As but again just this is their perspective for calling down). That 59 combos of 2 pair+ alongside some strong top pairs as well so really don't want to overbluff and if I don't want to overbluff then I'm not turning my top pairs into bluffs which seems like what you're doing here.