PLO50 AA98ss flop play?

villian likes to play back and your utg range does not fit the board,neither does his calling range. i guess checkback is the low variance play while i also think you need to call his raise because of the infos given. i wonder if a smaller cbet OTF is another option!?

now that i saw the spoiler my above statement statement holds. i like his reraise bcause it puts you in a tough spot OTF plus he has much equity vs OPs because of his 3 oversidecards to top2.

his river check is nice and for 1/2 pot left with two blockers when he has a read that you can barrel blockers too or turn aces into a bluff i think it was a good play from his pov

I do not think that the call on the flop is a good idea. I would just bet 1/3 on flop because the flop is really dry and you do not need to protect against draws. After that big reraise I would just fold, because in general I think that players will really rarely raise for bluff. If it's a value raise that will often be a set in my opinion on that kind of flop.

That is just my opinion and I am not really a plo crusher but trying to get one.

I personally use in single raised pots 1/3, 1/2 and 3/4 pot sizes in HU pots. 1/3 only on paired flops with normal stack depth at least. Flop is fairly dry but BB can obviously have some wraps or oesd as well.

Versus this player type I think its more of bet-call or check on flop. As default I dont mind bet-fold though check is very viable option also

I think some Txxx is fine to turn into bluff in villain shoes but I wonder if he should use more like some JJT9 type or maybe AT99. His hand dont have bd fd but I think its good enough to just call. But could be interesting to check with solver.

But keep in mind: If he would have a solid defend range BUvsUTG he doesnt have much wraps here because this range should be fairly tight vs UTG. Also with two low cards OTF there arent much set combos out there.

With your reads you have to get prepared to get played back postflop. So I think checkback is low variance, b/c is high variance but b/f is worst of all.he isnt even xraising potsize so you will get exploited by those players @Kostja

i don't remember where i picked this up - but i do think Pot on the Flop instead of 50% is a valid option aswell on a board like this.
maybe i am mixing something up, but i do think the board is low and dry enough for that line, just wish i could remember where i picked up that idea - maybe someone else has some thoughts on this / knows where i potentially picked this up? ^^.
Also like efkay's idea of checking and in general also think as played is fine. overall tricky spot and i guess just really hard to play.

whats your goal/plan for psb flop? we have high spr, dont want to broke flop and will almost never get action from worse hands!?

if spr would be lower and without bdfd i guess pot is an option

i think the idea is, just take the pot often enough on the flop // giving villain a very tough decision on the flop.
Its not really about this specific hand or what we are holding in general. just an alternative cbet route i guess.

Originally posted by efkay
But keep in mind: If he would have a solid defend range BUvsUTG he doesnt have much wraps here because this range should be fairly tight vs UTG. Also with two low cards OTF there arent much set combos out there.

Actually low to mid rundowns are not that bad defence hands from BB versus EP or MP range. Reason being they don't overlap that much with tight open range. I would actually prefer to defend hand like T986 over hand villain had in this case.

Pot cbet in deep SRP spots is not really advisable in HU. If you want to use it best candidate would be like some AK8 type flop where nut advantage is clearly on uncapped range.

i think i just mixed up this spot with a 3bet situation t_T after a cold shower and coffee quite sure this is what crossed my mind there, sorry for the confusion ♦.
That being said i do think check after being ep raiser here makes probably the most sense and putting some thought to it i prefer it over the 1/2pot cbet, but diffrence probably is still quite marginal ^^

Yeah with low SPR like less than 5 pot is very commonly used especially on rainbow high, low, low flops.

If the plan is to call a raise with backdoors, we are drawing to hit a draw. And most draws still find it hard to play turn vs pot bet (which is reasonable assumption versus an aggro).

If he is known aggro, that is either always aggro or attacks these boards often, his raise shouldn't be a surprise. Personally I would like to check back, as you can prettu much call his bet on most turns and that puts him into a tough spot to bluff on the river. You should have relatively easy road to realize your equity. But if you bet the flop and he raises, you have to call a big bet and hope turn gives you something good. If the turn was Kh, would you call a pot sized bet? If it was Qs or Js?

bet/call flop vs known aggro player has another purpose: to let these guys know you will call light and dont give up quick. how that history evolves on the table is up to you: if he ignores and continues aggression, fine for your made hands. if he adjusts down aggression you enjoy easy profits with cbets

but as mentioned earlier: checkback is definetly the low variance side on how to deal with aggros. bet/call if you want to play games.

Problem in that bet-call meta is that you don't get to showdown that often and therefore opponent doesn't even see your hand.

true. b/c line is really only a thing vs aggro players with history