fantastadonk

Interesting spot, I feel we are supposed to check with KK, AA at some freq. which makes AKo probably mix leaning towards checking. If we do bet; sizing I guess we are supposed to go geometric which would be a bit more then 2/3 maybe?

Flop: I strongly prefer c/c, given board and villain type, overs like AK, AQ are probably getting check back a some freq. If I was villain, knowing that opponent c/r merge range, I would want to cbet at a lower frequency and polarize my range which is maybe exactly what villain is doing.

Just a side note that MDF applies poorly if turn range is improperly constructed.

As played I would say easy fold on river. However if villain is decent to good and can turn made hands into bluff (99-88-87) we simply need to protect our turn range by checking a portion of our own J's. Basically we need to be mindful how we construct our turn checking range. If villain is super aggro then I can conceive calling with AA which would be a small % of population.

Just jam no? Kx is pretty inelastic and we get called by draws pretty often.

Also on board with bet folding.

Flop I feel is mainly a x/back but unsure. Turn should mostly be a x/back, if bet I'd go on the small side. River is tough, I'm not sure we have to many value hands that want to bet big here, villain may not have too many hands that want to call however.

Turn bet is most problematic; when we bet big we give away value to the value portion of villain's range while we could simply realize our equity by checking back. Also if villain x/jam some his value range, that's a terrible outcome for our hand.

Looks fine, your line and range also contains quite a few flushes.

shouldn't it be the opposite?

If villain is super aggro calling river seems fine. I'd expect villain to simply shove his high to medium equity bluffs on the turn which makes this line strange.

I think we can raise UTG but can't 3bet vs BB x/r on the flop. River is always a fold for me, it's hard for villain to find bluffs in that line. PF call is pretty meh in my opinion.

I think we need to cbet smaller or check. I feel a portion of our EV comes from hands like AJ, KQ, KT, when the turn is a none club A,K,Q,J,T and he pairs, we get an extra street of value. If we cbet too big those hands will outright fold on the flop. It's also a pretty good spot for BB to bluff raise so we reduce his bluff EV when we cbet smaller. As played I tend to be sticky in obvious bluff spots and call once to force villain to bluff twice.

When I encountered that situation my thought was that average pot in a strategy was bigger hence rake made it worse even if captured EV could be better. Not 100% sure however.

There doesn't seem to be too many downsides to betting the river small vs described opponent. If you never get bluffed and can squeeze out a bit of value great. Probably not a huge EV difference between checking but I can see it being a bit higher.

If both are on the nitty side their range can be quite Ax heavy while your range is seemingly wide. Id be careful to not over cbet Ax flops as we might be burning money barreling. I think your hand realizes it's equity quite nicely just checking back.

I do like the smaller turn sizing. I think we have to be mindful about checking some Aces to not have to always x/f river but x/f KK is probably best.

I think that line is fine. There definitely some other lines that hand can take with some benefits and drawbacks. Are we often bluffing the flop?

Tournament 3bet ranges tend to be different from cash game 3bet ranges simply due to SPR. Hand performance usually change with stack depth. I'm not very well versed in low SPR 3bet ranges but remember reading some interesting stuff in Janda's latest book.

Our goal is to deny our opponent's ability to realize his equity or to reduce his pot share. 3 betting usually accomplish that goal more effectively then just calling.

In the sim I ran, A8cc specifically was calling 3/4 of the time EV 0.13, ranges were (17%3B, 17%Call) QJ had a higher river call EV fwiw. I also feel population might not be betting turn as aggressively by taking a lot of the weaker Ax on a check back line and not mixing in enough turn bluffs, I don't know if you feel the same way. Maybe that balances out the value to bluff ratio on the river but I'm not sure.

No smaller the further from the button. I believe the goal is to reduce IP 3Bet EV which means if IP doesn't 3bet it's whatever. Check Kalupso answer.

If I remember correctly Snowie opens ~45% 3x otb, vs ~60% 2x otb preferring the 3x option. Changing our raise size changes our range slightly but shouldn't change our winrate too much.

Thats current theory correct, smaller the further we are from button.

Looks Fine.

Flop I tend to x back but betting is fine if villain doesnt xr. As played im betting turn small. River is meh! Unless villain is aggro I like folding.

I'm not sure about the turn bet with that sizing. On the river I usually assume that villain's range is Kx heavy given turn sizing.

I'd also fold. It's a reminder of being self aware of our range and xf frequency on the flop.

Not super stoked vs unknown but also not folding.

We would need more info about the tree; flop ranges for ip and oop, stack depth, whos doing the betting.. Its often the case that the added value of multiple betsizes isnt very big. Strategies will change however.

If you are using PT4, you can check for player tendencies in Reports/All Players Report

For example some population stats for PS 50z:

Cbet flop: 56.28
Fold to flop Cbet: 45.03
Probe turn: 44.37
Fold to turn probe: 51.38
Probe river: 52.18
Fold to river probe: 60.12