Dr.Degen

Its a really common spot the open HJ get 3b by BU. its a legit discussion to be discussing the fringe parts of the range.

We havent even gotten to the fun part post flop part of the hand yet

@matostar invoking a fallacy of false equivalence argument (apples and oranges) is a bit of a cop out (without applying actual legitimate reasons for why... I'm searching for the truth so I'm injecting these potential reasons into your arguments as noticed above in the comment where i posted the 6.8% range applying arguments such as equity realization and reverse implied odds)... as there is entire spectrum of hands that are played with a preflop eV of <1bb and our main tool of analysis is the same statistical models for all.

Also looking at the 6.8% range I posted earlier you can see that there are many hands in that range that AQo performs quite well against running out 5 cards.

What gets a bit gross is we need to start checkraise bluffing air and leading a lot of boards (leading 456, 457, 467, 567, 568, 578 ie middling connected boards that almost always whiff non pair parts of nit 3b ranges and put immense pressure on even overpairs) which feels a bit sick and its something that as humans we're not really used to (clasically x/r 2p+ and big equity draws was deemed the nut play). We are leveraging a lot of chips for a small eV gain.

There may be some psychological aspects to taking a ganesh (from rounders) approach to folding away a lot of low +eV and low +EQ based hands. This can make life and play just generally less stressful and potentially easier to maintain an A-Game for a lot of players, however some players may froth the high leverage degeneracy and thrive in "sick" games though.

There may even be some unsolved utility/eU models (that models like ICM attempt to solve) that could/shouldargue against taking this kind of a spot. For example if we are 200bb in a 100bb buy in max game, where we can find higher eV hands against other deep stack suboptimal performing viillain. Potentially there is utility arguments to preserving the deep stack for better spots rather than marginal +eV spots for huge swings. And with that stack dynamic unless there is a 500bb deep mega-whale frothing to spew off all his chips, gaining chips earns us less overall eV long term than losing chips costs us...

MatoStar so youre willing to leave EV on the table against villain that arent playing near close to optimal postflop by folding away profitable spots preflop? there are probably many spots where you take <1bb eV preflop

also keep in mind that at this point villains 6.8% over a small sample gets bumped up to a higher frequency now (8.1% at time of reviewing hand)

Maybe a little less raw-equity than you ascribe (with some realization and reverse implied issues) but I agree that preflop 4b/c mixing is the best way to play even vs a 5-8% 3b nit. I think we start clear folding at the <4.5%

I'm very skeptical of the "its a clear fold" like the other 2 posters mentioned

GTO pf ranges have a mixed strategy 33% 4b 66% call MP v BU @100bb, so its hardly an easy fold. Even vs a super snug 7% range we have very decent equity.

maybe thats right... his button 3b was the highest at 6.8%
In game I still thought against a nitty 3b we squeeze out the required equity to take a flop. but considerations being we may have the required equity vs an all in shove with the same pot odds vs same range, but equity realization and reverse implied odds can be a problem and folding might be actually be the best option.

Looking at a 6.8% range we get below

We all hate folding, you get a look at 6.8% linear range and you take a flop right?? or do you take an off suit Ax combo and turn it into a 4b bluff?

Can you expand on this idea a bit Clarkey? I kind of get the sentiment but if you can riff a bit deeper on this idea to give a more holistic view of what you mean and how we can apply the concept to our games will be very helpful. I'm just pondering it like a Zen Koan without really having an end-game or clear concept in view of the thought.

If you maybe were referring to my own comment on the 4d4x hand on the mono disconnected KML board, my gut reaction was to 3 barrel for the following reasons:

-Villains range is relatively capped (no AdQd and restricted AdXd combos {even though he/pool probably isn't 3b the AdXd combos with correct frequency) and no KK.
-We have a 4d blocker to villains trashier flushes and Kd4d & Qd4d (once again may be over folded)
-We unblock most villains "float 2 fold river" combos like KxXd- & 8xXd
-Villain wont be x/r us with enough required frequency putting us in tough spots to overfold our range
-Villain wont be able to hero us off with enough of his SD value combos
-We still have a cheeky bit of equity with our flush draw if villain floats 2 with say KTo no d and a diamond peels off freezing our 3barrel strat

I also thought checking exposes us to turn and river leads putting us into mainly SD types of realization rather than nonSD (except vs a double check where we can stab). However I might be downplaying and not being aware of late street re-raises and on what boards we can take those kind of lines

Even against villain that are super SD happy and allow us to check down we still are going to give away a lot of free equity realization taking a passive line (giving feeling a free street vs Td9x sucks right>?)

I generally lean towards the spewey side rather than nitty side of things when misapplying my thoughts and making mistakes. Solvers often like to 3barrel under pairs (i assume for the unblocking "float 2, fold river" combos) so for all the above I assumed this would be a solver approved 3 barrel and was super shocked to see a 90% check, even after I node locked villain to only x/r 88 and made flushes

in video you seemed super 50/50 and not really fussed for check/small bet/big bet lines

FWIW I would be 66% flop and turn, and 66-85% river

Why is my thought process and reasons for 3 barreling all off suit run outs super flawed? Why does solver have such a high x/x percentage with this hand? Is this something that works say up to NL100 or NL200 and then starts to get owned by players who can call 3 and x/r enough frequency to make life super tough?

Just simmed it. Pio checks flop 4d4x 91% of the time xD

14:25 Tripling this hand on this board allllllllllll day

I was wrong in my first comment your adjustment of '4b wide value' strategy is higher eV I believe than the 4b polar strategy.
The strategy i recommended is more effective vs tougher nittier regs whos main leak is overfolding.

Wide value range is better vs players with wide call 4b% and face up '5b only for value' no bluff range.

Im including JJ and TT in the 4b range now, as well as the strongest suited stuff AJs+ and KQs. KJs i assume is outside of that "crushing his" range that the wide value 4bet strategy is attacking. I dont 4b the polar stuff anymore.

JJ and TT should play better and easier with smaller stack-to-pots with initiative, compared to OOP with deeper SPRs. There will be more swings and variance but if villain always 5b stronger range no traps and calls worse hands super wide these 4b should print long term.

Only continuing vs 5b with QQ+ and AK

I think best to keep this in your flatting range and take some more polar 4b with the top of your folding range. a couple of KT-K9s, A4-A5s, KQ-KJo should do the job

whoops :s

for some reason I thought the BB came in with a CC...

I think I would've played the hand the same as you, looking at all the potential suited connector and other underpair/bds+bdf type ie solver type savage bluffs.

However I've been paying out the ass recently over defending post flop spots and my results bias memory is showing the majority of villain are just so top-heavy linear.

Given this top-heavy node lock, we should definitely fold the river and probably even fold to the 2nd barrel after the check raise.

I'm back to wondering again if we should check back flop aswell HU as we dont get 3 streets of value here vs anything worse (AQ finds a 3 streets hero?) and checking back balances the times we have KK/QQ/JJ.

Villain may be tempted on the turn to make either some of the lighter calls or turn stab any bluffs and Ax, as playing our range with a checkback rather than exploit betting toptop or better and checking the rest is probably what villain assumes we are doing also

I think we get 2 streets of value more with a x/b/b line than say a b/x/b or b/b/b line.

A great idea would be to implement a "post preview" so we can review and error check our posts before they go up on the internet forever...ever...ever...ever

i probably go broke here and get called down by TT donking flop 1/3, continuing turn 1/2 and shoving river. folding to reraises on any streets.

mainly because we have the only reppable small pair and suited connector combos (given the mini 4b size... as if villain ever 4b 2x w/ 78s)

I'd make a top of non-nutted range check flop multiway here. HU different story but the cold caller and raise caller have a lot more TT, 99, ATs, A9s and 9Ts in their ranges than we do so delay cbetting the flop and going for bluff catch vs leads on turn and betting turn when checked too.

I dont think we get 3 streets when betting flop and we prob get 2 streets betting flop or betting turn but we minimize damage when behind in this flop check scenario