KJ in 3bet pot blindwar vs unknown

KQ with at least one being a club. Though i would probably fold most turns.

CO 22,Ax,K7s,K9o,Q7s,Q9o,J7s,J9o,T7s,T9o,97s,87s

SB vs CO 3bet: 33+, A5s+, K8s+, A7o+, KJo

Not the complete answer you are looking for, but it is a start. I don't like your turn call with 0-6 outs, probably close to 2.5 outs since most of his hands contain a pair because of the A on the board.

But the outs isn't the only problem. The hands that you do beat, stuff like QJs, are very likely to be 3-barreled meaning you have to call on the river to pick him off.

Taking Ava's range AND a few more suited connectors AND assuming 100% turn cbet (best case scenario for you) leaves you with 15% equity (that you'll never realize in full). Letting him bet only aces or better + hands that you do in fact beat (actually a somewhat balanced range) doesn't change things much.

Hi!

Just quick look at this hand make me feel like this calldown is too light. Flopcall is justifiable since you have some BD potential,have live outs vs most non Ax hands and obv have SD value against part of his range. Most important reason for a call here though is that you dont want to exploitably fold too much on the flop(and you do have quite a bit of hands that will fold here)...but lets look at the equity:

Equity Win Tie
CO 33.78% 31.46% 2.32% KdJc
SB 66.22% 63.90% 2.32% 44+, A2s+, K9s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, 87s, A7o+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo

Vs unknown I see no reason to assume he is 3betting lighter( and on lower stakes 3b ranges are rather tight than loose). Equity is actually pretty good vs such range and in some cases you can see SD...but...

Turn gets harder since I would not assume that unknown opponent is double barrelling here with the same range. For sure he is cbetting with all his Ax,FDs...then as default I would at least half his bluffs(since its not hard to realise that you most likely call this flop with at least some kind of a hand) and also I would remove some weaker pairs...lets see...

Equity Win Tie
CO 23.50% 21.13% 2.38% KdJc
SB 76.50% 74.12% 2.38% JJ+, 88-44, A2s+, KJs+, K9s, QTs, J9s, T9s, 98s, 87s, QhJh, QcJc, KhTh, KcTc, JhTh, JcTc, Qh9h, Qc9c, A7o+, KJo, QTo, JTo

I think something like this is realistic...in any case very borderline situation. In such spots I usually seek shelter in balanced play.

I would call flop with all my Ax,7x,FDs,55+,KT+. Vs unknown I wouldnt go too as I see no reason to do so in such spot. So on this turn its not hard to realise that your hand is one of the worst in range besides some FDs.... at this point Im raising with A9+,FDs and maybe if you sometimes call a hand like 8h9h definatelly that too.
Im definatelly calling A8-,7x,55,88-KK and a hand like AA can easily be called again as well and raised on the river(but that is rly minimalistic part anyway). So only hands that are left are some rare Kx which can easily be folded. You have a ton of Ax,pockets,7x which you call and also a hand like KJ blocks a lot of hands that you wish he has at this point

As played river is now hard...unknown players are not that unlikely to be bad and overbluffy so getting 1:7,5 I dont see this as an easy fold and would prolly call ...but borderline again...

Equity Win Tie
BU 11.19% 10.88% 0.31% KdJc
SB 88.81% 88.49% 0.31% AA, 77-44, A2s+, T9s, 98s, KhJh, KcJc, QhJh, QcJc, KhTh, KcTc, QhTh, QcTc, JhTh, JcTc, Kh9h, Kc9c, Qh9h, Qc9c, Jh9h, Jc9c, A7o+

if he only bluffs with FDs and 89(which is realistic) then you can almost call but on average there will be some other hands here as well. Still I dont mind folding just for the balance sake and if he shows you like KQ you rly want to cry.

@Dawnfall

I think you forgot to enter the turn card in your equity calculation. I get 18% with the (very wide) range you gave, and 24% without the turn card. Turn fold looks easy.

hmmm...I checked again and I dont see any mistake:)

Originally posted by Dawnfall26
hmmm...I checked again and I dont see any mistake:)

Right. My mistake. Missed a couple of broadways

@Dawnfall26 How does your CO openraising range look like ?

33+,A2s+,K6s+,Q7s+,J8s+,T8s+,97s+,86s+,76s,A7o+,K8o+,Q8o+,J8o+,T8o+,98o

Something like that as default.

Well I have several problems:

- you are overbluffing the turn ,you have 228 combos in total, 156 are value, ~ 31,5% bluffs instead ~15,4% bluffs to make CO indifferent to calling the turn

- if you fold KJ on the turn you are massively overfolding, on the flop 12,5% should be folded, so from 422 combos ~ 53 = 369
( 33+,A2s+,K6s+,Q7s+,J9s+,97s,86s+,76s,Th9h,Jh8h,Th8h,9h8h,A7o+,K8o+,Q8o+,J9o+,Jd8h,Jh8d,Jh8s,Jh8c,Js8h,Jc8h )

on the turn 18% is what you need to fold, from 362 combos 296 should remain. I you fold KJ you fold 37% (1-228/362)
( 22+,A2s+,K6s+,QJs,Q7s,JTs,97s,87s,76s,QhTh,QcTc,Qh9h,Qc9c,Jh9h,Jc9c,Th9h,Tc9c,Qh8h,Qc8c,Jh8h,Jc8c,Th8h,Tc8c,9h8h,9c8c,8h6h,8c6c,A7o+,K8o+,QJo )

- also when you check the turn with a weak range like that you become quite readable, you have TT-99, KQ,KT, QJ, and you dont xr so your opponent can bet out shamelessly. Would you call down KQ in a spot like that ?

- but my the biggest problem is the river. As the SB, you should give up a lot of bluffs because on the river 11,7% should be bluffed. This leaves you with a very weak x range, if you dont x made hands your river is x = fold almost, so this result an overfold, and if you bluff ~30%+ that would be an overbluff and even QT had a profitable call. And if you x made hands then you give up value. Neither options seem to be good.

Using your SB 3bet range I'd c-bet the turn with something like this:

KK-88,55,AdAh,AdAs,AhAs,7d7s,7d7c,7s7c,6d6s,6d6c,6s6c,4d4h,4d4s,4h4s,98s,AdKd,AhKh,AsKs,AdQd,AhQh,AsQs,AdJd,AhJh,AsJs,AdTd,AhTh,AsTs,QhTh,QcTc,JhTh,JcTc,Ad9d,Ah9h,As9s,Kh9h,Kc9c,Qh9h,Qc9c,Jh9h,Jc9c,Th9h,Tc9c,Ad8d,Ah8h,As8s,Ad7d,As7s,8d7d,8s7s,8c7c,Ad6d,As6s,Ad5d,Ah5h,As5s,Ad4d,Ah4h,As4s,Ad3d,Ah3h,As3s,Ad2d,Ah2h,As2s,JTo,AdKh,AdKs,AdKc,AhKd,AhKs,AhKc,AsKd,AsKh,AsKc,AdQh,AdQs,AdQc,AhQd,AhQs,AhQc,AsQd,AsQh,AsQc,AdJh,AdJs,AdJc,AhJd,AhJs,AhJc,AsJd,AsJh,AsJc,AdTh,AdTs,AdTc,AhTd,AhTs,AhTc,AsTd,AsTh,AsTc,Ad9h,Ad9s,Ad9c,Ah9d,Ah9s,Ah9c,As9d,As9h,As9c,Ad8h,Ad8s,Ad8c,Ah8d,Ah8s,Ah8c,As8d,As8h,As8c,Ad7s,Ad7c,Ah7d,Ah7s,Ah7c,As7d,As7c

But this is also problematic due to the blocker effect:

the bottom of CO-s calling range consists of K-s,Q-s,T-s,9-s,8-s and SB-s bluffing range has the same cards. This means for exaple if the SB has JT in his bluffing range, and CO must call with KJ,KT,QJ, it blocks his bluff combos making SB less likely to bluff.

If CO folds according to a balanced strategy he should call down with K9, but despite that theoretically SB has enough bluffs in his range K9 wont have enough equity in reality because it blocks 98s, J9s, Q9s, KT blocks JT,QT,K9s.. and so on...

I had been thinking on this and I changed the SB-s range to this:

KK-88,55,AdAh,AdAs,AhAs,7d7s,7d7c,7s7c,6d6s,6d6c,6s6c,4d4h,4d4s,4h4s,QJs,98s,AdKd,AhKh,AsKs,AdQd,AhQh,AsQs,AdJd,AhJh,AsJs,AdTd,AhTh,AsTs,QhTh,QcTc,JhTh,JcTc,Ad9d,Ah9h,As9s,Qh9h,Qc9c,Jh9h,Jc9c,Th9h,Tc9c,Ad8d,Ah8h,As8s,Ad7d,As7s,8d7d,8s7s,8c7c,Ad6d,As6s,Ad5d,Ah5h,As5s,Ad4d,Ah4h,As4s,Ad3d,Ah3h,As3s,Ad2d,Ah2h,As2s,JTo,AdKh,AdKs,AdKc,AhKd,AhKs,AhKc,AsKd,AsKh,AsKc,AdQh,AdQs,AdQc,AhQd,AhQs,AhQc,AsQd,AsQh,AsQc,AdJh,AdJs,AdJc,AhJd,AhJs,AhJc,AsJd,AsJh,AsJc,AdTh,AdTs,AdTc,AhTd,AhTs,AhTc,AsTd,AsTh,AsTc,Ad9h,Ad9s,Ad9c,Ah9d,Ah9s,Ah9c,As9d,As9h,As9c,Ad8h,Ad8s,Ad8c,Ah8d,Ah8s,Ah8c,As8d,As8h,As8c,Ad7s,Ad7c,Ah7d,Ah7s,Ah7c,As7d,As7c,QdJs,QsJd

this is now good for K9 at least on the turn, but it makes SB overbluffing on the river, but the bottom of CO-s calling range on the turn is QT, and it makes the situation worse for that, having SB-s bluff range shifted so much towards Qx.

So no matter what I do I cant figure out a good range for SB, it ends up either over or underbluffing.

It gets harder when you realise SB could and should have a turn x/c, x/r and x/f range as well.

31.5% bluffs on the turn is fine, 15% is too low, that's the 1-street value only

It's definitely a tough call on the turn but I think I probably dump it, you'll pick up enough stuff on the turn to be able to bluff some of the lower parts of your range so I don't hate folding here.

Balance would probably dictate it's a call but it's certainly a river fold.

Flop I intentionally overfold, vs unknown on almost any limit I think its relativelly safe to assume that the chance him not being very good player is fairly high so I dont rly see that much point in playing totally balanced but preffer to play exploitable poker as I would assume ppl dont have balanced turn barreling ranges on such dry boards. Vs unknown player I would use balance only in spots where:
- board is such that any player will play perfectly on it
- hard borderline decitions

But I agree that maybe calling more Kx is not a bad idea.I would not call Qx or worse though.

Where did you get those numbers of bluffs and value?

My preflop raise/call range.... 35%
33+, A2s+, K6s+, Q7s+, J8s+, T8s+, 97s+, 86s+, 76s, A7o+, K8o+, Q8o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o

Flop call range(I call 100% of my range that doesnt fold)...ok I agree we should call more here...I added more Kx here...its still that we fold too much but like I said vs unknown I dont mind making exploitable plays...24%
33+, A2s+, K7s+, Q7s, 97s, 86s+, 76s, QcJc, QcTc, JcTc, Qc9c, Jc9c, Tc9c, Qc8c, Jc8c, Tc8c, 9c8c, Kc6c, A7o+, K8o+

Turn raising range...11,5%
AA, 77-55, 44-33, A9s+, A7s-A6s, A4s, 76s, KcQc, KcJc, QcJc, KcTc, QcTc, JcTc, Kc9c, Qc9c, Jc9c, Tc9c, Kc8c, Qc8c, Jc8c, Tc8c, 9c8c, A9o+, A7o
There are around 15% bluffs, now Im thinking we prolly dont even need to raise A9 on turn so that makes % of bluffs slightly higher which is about the right amount imo.

Turn calling range...7%
KK-88, 33, A8s, A5s, A3s-A2s, KQs, Q7s, 97s, 86s+, KQo

turn folding range is therefore 20-25%,again I dont see any fault in slightly explitable play,especially if you think that unknown turn barreling range will be very value oriented.

On the river I would then fold KQ,86 which I think is close to perfect balance

Why would you overfold the flop preemtively If you wanted to exploit preemtively then the move would be overcalling and not overfolding, because people c-bet 100% and that is an overbluff in most cases (except very narrow /tight range situations like 3bet vs MP2 on AKQ board). They overbluff because people dont call the flop enough and they have an auto profit on the flop c-bet. By overfolding you just donating them more money.

For example in this particular spot SB has 422 combos and only 216 of them have 50%<= EQ vs CO-s flop calling range(providing he folds balanced) and that means 48.8% of SB-s range is bluff.

CO gets 8:1 on the flop (11%) 5.5:1 on the turn (15%) and 7.5:1 immediate odds on the river(~12%) vs SB-s c-bets. 48% vs 11% is too much (even if these bluffs have EQ) and expecting a turn c-bet (implied odds) I'd rather overcall the flop than overfolding it.

BUT, I dont want to exploit someone I dont know, It might be a nit who is 3betting only top5, or a maniac who folds only bottom5 here, I dont know, so the best I can do is avoiding being exploited and fold as much that is needed to make my opponent indifferent to bluffing.

He has a successful bluff if I fold more than 12.5% (he risks 1 to win 7 so I need to fold on the 8th bet), so I fold exactly 12.5%, and on the flop CO has 422 combos , 422*0,125= ~369, and so forth ..on the turn 18.18..%(4.5:1), and on the river 13.3% (6.5:1)

the numbers come from here.

Boomer2k10:

I absolutely hate bluffing that much, and I don't like the model you introduced back in spring, because it leads to a lot of overbluffing or otherway unbalanced ranges. For example here in this particular hand if the river was the 8 :club:, which is a hell of a card for your bluffs even QJ which would be a fold on the river, has 13.6% EQ and 13.3% is needed to make a profitable call. That means if you c-bet the river with 100% of your turn range your opponent has an any2 call. Or you have the option to give up your bluffs and x/f, then your opponent has an any2 bet. There is not a single card that could come on the river, on which you wouldnt overbluff, so why would you bluff so much ?

IMO it is not the increase in quantity that make a good bluffing range because if you bluff like 50% on the turn and all your bluff range is made of draws, and the river is a then you'd still have 0% bluff on the river. On the other hand when your bluffs are distributed in equal weight among all possible rivercards, 15-16% (especially on static boards) could be more than enough, because you only need to bluff less than that (13%) on the river.

On a 8 which is the worst rivercard, K9 has 12.8%( EQ vs the range I posted and I used only 16% bluffs on the turn, and even with this range SB is overbluffing on a lot of cards (even QJ had a call on most of the rivers it just cant call the turn due to my Qx heavy bluffrange)

Well vs unknowns I usually play according to population tendecies. I believe most unknowns dont have their ranges balanced in 3bet pots on Axx boards. They will soo often give up or go into c/calldown mode on turn. Also I think even their preflop 3b ranges are tighter than normal.

My problem with this is that you make -EV moves vs maniacs and preflop agros and also regs who are barrel monkeys, they bluff you out too frequently and it depends on mere luck what kind of player you'll find in that seat,what happens when the unknown turns out to be a maniac 10 times in row ?

But you have at least 0EV (or close to 0) lines for bluffcatching playing a balanced strategy and if your opponent makes a mistake somewhere, your game becomes automatically +EV.

Well sure you will fold too much to overbluffers, but the oposite goes for underbluffers and I would personally assume latter are more likely so I wouldnt make light calldowns on boards where I think they will be heavily value oriented when they barrell 3 streets or in other words I think calling down KJ in this spot is -EV. All in all I dont think its rly a very important situation since it arrises very rarelly not to have any kind of info on your oponent.

I guess you can also look for such spots in your database and make some research of how general population tendencies are in this spot. That would imo be the best way to solve the problem.

If someone doesnt bluff enough it might be a -EV call down with KJ, but then he gives too many freecards for the lower part of your range leting you realize your equity with that. He also ruins his turn x range because he has two options with the bluff hands x/f or x/c and both are dominated by beting. You lose money calling down KJ but you gain more on the other lines, when you x it back or when you bet it out.

Remember that if you play balanced then your game is at least 0EV, if you play exploitative without solid reads it might not be.

Vs value part of his range you are pretty much at 0-20% equity. Vs his bluff part you are about 50-70% equity so I think you loose way more when he valueowns you than when you fold to his QJ,FD and there is also KQ.

If your oponent is only value oriented than you should balance in a different way,just playing KJ here and calling down vs such player is clearly -EV so in this regard you are also guessing how to balance your play.

Im assuming these facts:
- his preflop 3b is tighter than normal
- most ppl dont blindly barrel Axx boards in 3bet pots and are generally quite unbalanced,being more value oriented than not

And also I dont rly understand why you would want to balance your first few hands vs unknown oponent who also doesnt know you. Doesnt it make more sense to play vs a virtual player who acts as an average player on the stake that you are on. Such a player will almost for sure not going to be a very good player and the fact that he is unknown(therefore most likely isnt reg on that limit) makes him even worse.

I guess we disagree on this one, but I dont see any reason to go too deep in balance in such spots when you can play exploitable poker imo successfully.

Just becasue you're not a fan of the model doesn't mean you should use an incorrect one

Single street values for bluffing will not be correct under this circumstance. It's easy enough to disprove the theory by simply looking at flop play. According to 1-street theory you should only bluff the flop in a 3 bet pot about 12.5% of the time (your opponent is getting 7-1 to call minimum) which I'm pretty sure you can see isn't correct given that even in absolute worst case scenario (i.e. single raised pot where the board is something like 3 low-straight cards and 2-flush) a bot will c-bet the flop with at least 75% frequency and you simply don't hit the flop that often. Also it won't allow you to bluff at the correct frequency on the turn because your betting range doesn't have enough bluffs in it now.

Given we're talking our turn raising range here and not betting range the maths does change and we bluff a bit less (our opponent's getting better odds and it costs more to raise so in a 10BB pot probably looking at about 20% bluffs for raising to be spot on but this can change with board texture and opponent type)

Also given your example of certain cards crushing our range, that's why you have to adjust your range for future card distribution, which I've definitely gone over before. If you look at your bluffing range and see that it always hits a certain selection of cards and never hits others then your bluffing range is unbalanced even if it's at the correct frequency (it's why you'll see GTO-style players and bots bluff raise with K-High and Q-High on the turn where it often wouldn't appear to make much sense)

However the fine points of GTO play are probably unnecesary for the hand as these sorts of boards and pots tend to be where players are most unbalanced.