Scary card on river in reasonably sized pot in 6-max ZOOM

I would just call villains 3bet pre.
Since you 3bet and villain calls, I expect this flop to hit him nicely. Still I'm not sure if you can check call, so maybe one and done OTF would be good?
When he checks behind OTF and just calls OTT I'm not putting him on a very strong range. He can still definitely have good hands but I'm not sure you can fold if he bets river 0.o

I checked this with Snowie and it would actually 4bet this pre.
OTF it would play mixed strategy and bet this 80% of the time and check 20%, but the EV of both options are exactly the same.
As played it would check the turn too but betting has only marginally smaller EV.
After villain calls your turn bet, Snowie thinks you should shove the river but checking has only marginally smaller EV.

If villain decides to shove OTR, Snowie thinks you should call. Villain can have some 2 pair hands and a lot of missed draws.

The 4b is a bit loose for me. Just call the 3B and see a flop.
As played, bet more on Turn.

More like pot sized bet on turn? Seems pushy

Originally posted by la55i

When he checks behind OTF and just calls OTT I'm not putting him on a very strong range. He can still definitely have good hands but I'm not sure you can fold if he bets river 0.o

Surely K/Q/J/T combos tend to be the minimum he can check flop and call turn with? Seems hard to call with one pair on turn as there is not much good that can come on the river. Considering he called 4-bet pre these are a much lower fraction of his range than the hands that would make the straight or full house by the river?

Originally posted by Vaars
More like pot sized bet on turn? Seems pushy

0.70 - 0.90.

Ok well mine was 0.70 so at the low end of your range

Yours is 0.57.
It is a bit low.

Oh wait maybe not... Thought it was, must have done something strange when I played it

Oh I see, thought you meant fraction of the pot... Still dunno why pot is $0.93 when the 4-bet and call were $0.42 each... Oh well

I'd say calling preflop is a pretty lousy play. There'll be at least an overcard about (1 - (34/50)*(33/49)*(32/48))*100%, approximately 70% of the time. Two overcards is not a rare occurance (that I don't feel like caluculating the probability of). Gonna donk or check-call? Check-call once or twice? Expect to get paid without initiative when you hit a miracle T?

No, 4-bet-folding is pretty obvious, and folding is better than flat-calling i m o.

Wouldn't that logic apply to every pocket pair? If we have 99 or 88 there will be overcards. Donk or xc with those? If xc, then once or twice? -> 4betting every pocket pair is better? We have to draw the line somewhere and for me it is here

This is a call in w34z3l's ranges and Snowie's ranges.
My plan would be to check call once even if there is one overcard. If there is two overcards I might just give up.

That logic does apply to all pp's, and of course the line has to be drawn somewhere. 4-betting 22 is to loose, but I think calling with it is too lose too. Not enough implied odds, no position, no initiative. What to do with the really tricky hands (for me it would be 88/77) should depend on the opponent.

I don't like the practice of going with someone else's ranges, in this case because both w34z3l and Snowie (probably rightly) assume that they play well once the flop comes. I don't have that confidence myself OOP, and I doubt very much that the average poster here has the ability to play marginal hands OOP as good as Snowie and w34z3l. This is the same reason I strongly dislike squeeze-mania OOP, even if it is theoretically profitable for very good players.

I have expressed the same opinion before; postflop should be learnt first, then GTO-like preflop play.

I think I can agree with you here
TT is decent 4bet fold hand, especially if hero is not very good at playing postflop.

Also I agree that going blindly with someone else's ranges is not the best move. Unfortunately I don't have the tools (and not enough knowledge atm) to develop perfect ranges for me, so I have to look up to coaches, Snowie and my own database and see what is working and what is not

Yeah, that's probably a good approach. But once ranges are somewhat decent (that shouldn't take too long), it may be a waste of time to polish them, since

• the right decisions vs unknown (assumed perfectly playing opponents) are already marginal
• the right decisions vs known (certainly not perfectly playing) villains may differ hugely from those against the perfect variant.

I usually just call/raise/fold if I feel right about it. No charts (that are just a pain to memorize anyway), but a "solid grounding" in charts once seen.