downflux01

I mean I'd also arrive here with other flushes, 99 (88 even I think) and strong trips with AK, so I would say it isnt that tight. Im not sure if someone if people start go into bluffcatching mode with their PPs+clubs if I turn it up too much OTR, since as you said, we dont have as many trips that want to bet big here.

When in the past I used to pick anything remotely bluffable (regardless of their EV, if its breakeven or marginal), I was surprised to see that bluffing here with the mentioned AsQx combos is actually pretty good EV wise.

crazyriver If im facing too much action, yes, because I dont think Tx is going to overplay like that too often.. but my assumption is that most of his (semi)-bluffs are not going to shove as a bluff OTR to frequently, so I dont have a tough decision if I have to fold. Shove OTF seems a bit risky, a fold too nitty yet - so Id prefer the middle of both and call

I would bet small river as well, youll get called by counterfeited 65s, some PPs that went for a value/protection raise OTF (66-88, not sure where vils limping threshold lies PF to limp behind, so Id be careful to give him JJ-KK like you did OTR) and that should be enough, with the intention to bet/fold that is

I could see that being profitable, probably in theory one of the worst PPs to be doing that with, since AA doesnt need the protection as much as other PPs do. Id argue its a somewhat big variance play, since people are pretty honest here and on the next streets, so we could navigate it smoothly.

Yeah probably a pretty good hand to bet big with here, I assume I talked myself into betting smaller, because of the paired 7 on the board (and I can have those as well with 87s, 76s) where I wouldnt bet trips as big to let my opponent catch up. But probably fine to exploitatively size up here

Maybe yeah, seems like he needs to always bluff here and there arent many combos left. So youd still check KT, would you bet AT though OTT?

Considering overfolding: I meant more in the region of PPs below the board, Im expecting a reasonable amount of calls with BW cards.

The set value bet makes sense, thanks!

Would you incorporate this into the overbet bluffing range OTR? I mean on one hand, we make it less likely for him to call by blocking the KJ combos and unblock two pair, but at the same time, we would want him to have KJ if we get here with AK.

If we have a player that isnt capable to fold two pairs/toppairs here, im probably just half potting it to get him off weaker pairs. But I guess people should find a fold even with their twopairs here if we overbet, and then thats better

Is that to achieve a value to bluff ratio of 2:1? Because I always thought I had to somewhat even out the value combos (40 here) with a similar number of bluffs (32)

I just figured, when I looked at the proper frequencies, I first establish the value range and afterwards go in each section of the range where there was some frequency of 4betting going on and pick a combo. I always made sure that the number of combos are somewhat close to value combos I have (JJ+, AK being 40, so I was looking to be somewhat in that range also with my bluff combos) .. or you think the ratio should be lower, so value to bluff should be 2:1? I havent done much studying around this topic and figured its a good solution to simplify my strategy

Yup, lost it - he had KK

My 4b range is the following here: JJ+, AKs, A5s, KTs, AKo, ATo, KTo

It is constructed that way so its easier to remember what to 4b. Because per theory, you should take different holding and 4b them at some frequency, so I just chose the 4b combos I have from EP (A5s, KTs), and extended it by two combos to make up for the wider value range we have in BU facing a SB 3b. So the holdings that you mentioned (KQo, AJo-AQo) and stuff Im actually flatting.

Now I figured I could maybe share some thoughts to see how others proceed on such blanks, because at the end of the day, if you 4b KJo/KQo, per range construction I could imagine we would have to pay attention to the same criteria or have the same challenge - would you bet KJo/KQo on that turn and if yes, which combos would you choose? But seeing comments like those from JamesYang , I can see that some might not be open for it :D

A little mistake on my part - the total EV wont be 52, but something along of 48-49 (so for a 10% increase in EV compared to jam), since I didnt properly remove the one KcTd combo from the small bet percentage above if he would raise his nut flush (screen shows 86% + 14% + 7%, which is 107%. It should be 79%, 14%, 7% for a total of 100%)

Agree with _michael_ , size up preflop. Im playing 3b only range here and KTs would be in it. Depending on the opponent, I think you could exploitatively keep the size somewhat down (maybe make it like 0.58), assume that all his lower pairs are still going to fold and get away with it on those limits. If the opponent is sticky, then size up.

9 wont be a great card to barrel on, you would get folds from 8x at most and his range improved overall, while still calling your second barrel pretty often.

I like everything till turn, but I dont see what youre getting called by OTR with that sizing. I assume BB wont click it back OTF with a FD that often multiway, but that its more often a strong Tx trying to not fold out your toppair. Now if that holds true, counting his combos, he has 2 combos of ATo you chop with, 12 combos of trips of which 3 combos have rivered a flush (KcTd, QcTd, JcTd).

If I bet something like 8 and assume all of his trips call that, we have around the same EV (maybe like 2% more, so negligible) as betting large hoping to get those calls by the rivered flushes. Admittedly, I thought were gonna be off better, hence why I started to break it down. But what it does not account for is the fact that your opponent can reraise in this spot to get value from worse flushes you raised OTT. And I dont think its unreasonable to assume that someone raises a rivered nut flush here on that board (or even second nut flush) so the EV would go up to at least 52 in comparison to jam, where its 44.

You think they play a 9x like that or check it OTT more often? Im asking because of the blocker effect, because if we dont give him that, id imagine bluffcatching with 3x and high cards is better (to block potential stronger 7x that can bet OTF like that), no?

Other than that, do you see arguments to cbet such a holding in a non-checking strategy?