PLO50 2nd Nut Full

Raising turn seems reasonable. We have a tone of redraws to go along our middle set.

As played, I think I would call the river. He could 3b AAxx but I could see hands like KTxxdd going for small sizing there. Even hands like Axxxdd.

Well played and call river. I don´t agree to turn-raising, 3-betting range oop has the range advantage here with the AAxx.

Your hand is the strongest to fit your minimum defending range. He also might be barreling :Ax::Jx: or :Qx::Jx:. No way folding this.

Second 3bet in 160 hands, and it's a min3bet. :f_mad::f_mad::f_mad:

It surely looks like Aces, but on the other hand as the player is recreational they can surprise you. Don't hero fold against recreationals, unless you have really good reads.

I dont raise turn and fold river

I don't raise TURN, and I never FOLD river...

well, I quickly decided by analyzing patterns and villain but on the other hand folding third nuts when flop & turn were so cheap I can see the point of ‚what else shall we call besides nuts?‘ but is that enough to justify a 60% potbet? unblocking diamonds is…

pokerjuice anyone?

Originally posted by efkay

pokerjuice anyone?

Unfortunately not. I think GTO it´s likely a call otr but after that $ 3.67 reraise we are likely to be already miles away from what could be called GTO.

yes, of course if i would go ahead and check some solver lines with standard ranges and so on, it would never fold at least. but its not minraising preflop in my ranges and also doesnt bet super small on flop and turn on drawy board ♦ so think surely not very applicable irl here.
we would need around 30%, with AA and a combo of AJ we have like 22%, so i would say it needs a bit more to call. it is true that recs sometimes do random stuff, but don't know how to give that weight in the calculation and if i should at all, bc so far this guy didn't make random stuff with his preflop 3bets most likely.
i just folded and think im fine with it.
fun fact i was check his other 3bet too. because was curious if he maybe just misclicked. it was one month ago and almost identical line. ♦
too small 3bet pre. ace high flop, bet small flop, turn and bigger at the river, except it was not paired. unfortunaly not gone to showdown, so no real takeaway there.
e. for mdf i think we have also take the actual spot into account, which is so rare and if im overfolding the river on ace high boards against his "barrels", so let it be. i dont think he was even thinking to exploit there when betting so small and in the long run just value cut himself overall in that case

If he is a regular he is likely to be aware of his range advantage on Ace- high board and is highly incentivized to triple barrel if he 1. lacks SDV and/or 2. senses FE due to your image. His range is allowed to be more loose when the sizing is smaller (it´s still a mistake since we want to lower the SPR oop in general). More hands in a range means more potential bluffs.

I mean what hands you call here otr? You don´t have AAxx by yourself. Your hand is the best you can have otr just below :Ax::Jx: and :Jx::Jx:. So you basically fold anything unless you hit a Q♥ or an :Tx:? You cannot rely on the ♣ bd-flush too much in general since you won´t hit that backdoor often enough to justify the flop call. Same for the gutter which barely has implieds because the board is so heavy. So if you are going to fold a fullhouse you better fold to the bet on any Ace-flop at first place since you have no solid plan for dry and locked runouts in general that would contain enough calling hands. Your play is highly exploitative suited for a villain that would bluff flops and turns and then suddenly gives up on rivers with his whole bluffing range despite that river favouring ones´ top-range. Sry but this line without such very specific read looks quite weak to me.

If he was a reg, the whole hand before the river would have been very different.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
If he was a reg, the whole hand before the river would have been very different.

Why? Because a bad player would have a stronger or weaker range or bluff more or less? I am confused.

Btw: I think there is a misunderstanding about player profiles. So far there is no reason to me to assume he is not a regular.

160 hand is a low sample but I would say, the VPIP (below 50) and PFR (below 25) still means villain despite his preflop 3-bet sizing is more likely to be a regular than not. I would not say yet he is no regular for sure when the PFR does not go up over the next few hundreds of hands.

I personally classify regular as player who play on a regular basis trying to win money in general so not just TAGs but Bad loose players (vpip >30 and <50), Nits and tight-passive (like 30/10 etc..) are regulars to me aswell since the main quality of a regular is not his preflop stats but the habit to play regularly -> regular (with ambition to win in general and for this reason any kind of holistic strategy applied, even if it is a losing strategy since the counterpart to reg is not "loose" but rather it´d be a wahle who is "bad" or "unaspiring" player still playing on a regular basis but not specified for preflop his style either so this could include stations and maniacs both alike).

Originally posted by Mascherano95
If he is a regular he is likely to be aware of his range advantage on Ace- high board and is highly incentivized to triple barrel if he 1. lacks SDV and/or 2. senses FE due to your image. His range is allowed to be more loose when the sizing is smaller (it´s still a mistake since we want to lower the SPR oop in general). More hands in a range means more potential bluffs.

I mean what hands you call here otr? You don´t have AAxx by yourself. Your hand is the best you can have otr just below :Ax::Jx: and :Jx::Jx:. So you basically fold anything unless you hit a Q♥ or an :Tx:? You cannot rely on the ♣ bd-flush too much in general since you won´t hit that backdoor often enough to justify the flop call. Same for the gutter which barely has implieds because the board is so heavy. So if you are going to fold a fullhouse you better fold to the bet on any Ace-flop at first place since you have no solid plan for dry and locked runouts in general that would contain enough calling hands. Your play is highly exploitative suited for a villain that would bluff flops and turns and then suddenly gives up on rivers with his whole bluffing range despite that river favouring ones´ top-range. Sry but this line without such very specific read looks quite weak to me.

np,
my read/basic information is 2nd 3bet at a bit over 160 hands, imo that's quite reliable information. of course against an unknown with 20/50 hands or a player with other tendencies, etc i won't even ask if i should fold here. besides that, i recognized villain here for the first time, so hes definitely not playing regularly.
on the flop i dont have to consider folding here, when he gives me a very good price with a strong made hand, gs +bdfd, i have position and the sizing is more indicating at that moment that he's not going to barrel strong, same for turn as well. im not fan of giving players no credit at all, but with that line i dont think that hes really aware of important stuff and just gives me an easy time. so of course i cant or dont need to fold here anything so far.
at the river unimproved we "fall back into the problem" that we play against a percived very narrow range and now hes betting strong, also we block a lot of stuff and for that price i think its better to fold and not look him up in that very rare case and overall i will still show profit against that line where he made the mistakes and for example if a rec is capable of folding topset aces against action/big bets is questionable.
and once again we speak about a spot, where villain 3bets the second time (with a minraise sizing) and then underbets flop and turn,so i dont think he is setting up an exploitive play here.^^

How many regs do min3bet twice in 160hands? How many regs use less than 1/4 sizing on 2fd boards on the turn? Flop sizing might be reasonable, if he has AA+fd etc. But his line preflop and on the turn are far from what regs do. And he is 40/15/1, which is not what reg should have.

To clarify, to me reg means someone who tries to play good poker with somewhat TAG style. Not about how often he plays.

When someone uses strategies that we understand, we can make better assumption about his ranges and strategies. But when someone plays in "non-profitable way" his decisions are most often based on feelings. Feeling-based decisions lack consistency, which means that his range can be very different than what we would normally assume. Like his bet on the turn, mathematically nor strategically it doesn't really make sense with any reasonable range, so his decision is not based on math or strategy. It's based on feelings. And therefore when we think about his ranges, we shouldn't base our estimations for him to have a rational strategy in them.

Originally posted by Kyyberi

To clarify, to me reg means someone who tries to play good poker with somewhat TAG style. Not about how often he plays.

Usually player who play more often also tend to be better so there is no clear demarcation between those categories, I guessed your point right, that´s why I made this additional comment about my understanding of what is a regular. It is a concept first introduced in literature by Ed Miller, a professional NLHE-Player. I do not distinguish if a player plays good or bad actually because such an information would not be helpful at the table anyways. The same way as we could be biased by presuming player with solid preflop stats like 25/15 must be a solid player. Playing tight or aggressive does not necessarily mean to be good (ie nits or maniacs).

Most fish 3-bet pot too. Strictly spoken the 3-bet sizing does not give us information about the players´ skill level.

Originally posted by BradNitt
y

Originally posted by BradNitt

Originally posted by Mascherano95
If he is a regular he is likely to be aware of his range advantage on Ace- high board and is highly incentivized to triple barrel if he 1. lacks SDV and/or 2. senses FE due to your image. His range is allowed to be more loose when the sizing is smaller (it´s still a mistake since we want to lower the SPR oop in general). More hands in a range means more potential bluffs.

I mean what hands you call here otr? You don´t have AAxx by yourself. Your hand is the best you can have otr just below :Ax::Jx: and :Jx::Jx:. So you basically fold anything unless you hit a Q♥ or an :Tx:? You cannot rely on the ♣ bd-flush too much in general since you won´t hit that backdoor often enough to justify the flop call. Same for the gutter which barely has implieds because the board is so heavy. So if you are going to fold a fullhouse you better fold to the bet on any Ace-flop at first place since you have no solid plan for dry and locked runouts in general that would contain enough calling hands. Your play is highly exploitative suited for a villain that would bluff flops and turns and then suddenly gives up on rivers with his whole bluffing range despite that river favouring ones´ top-range. Sry but this line without such very specific read looks quite weak to me.

np,
my read/basic information is 2nd 3bet at a bit over 160 hands, imo that's quite reliable information. of course against an unknown with 20/50 hands or a player with other tendencies, etc i won't even ask if i should fold here. besides that, i recognized villain here for the first time, so hes definitely not playing regularly.
on the flop i dont have to consider folding here, when he gives me a very good price with a strong made hand, gs +bdfd, i have position and the sizing is more indicating at that moment that he's not going to barrel strong, same for turn as well. im not fan of giving players no credit at all, but with that line i dont think that hes really aware of important stuff and just gives me an easy time. so of course i cant or dont need to fold here anything so far.
at the river unimproved we "fall back into the problem" that we play against a percived very narrow range and now hes betting strong, also we block a lot of stuff and for that price i think its better to fold and not look him up in that very rare case and overall i will still show profit against that line where he made the mistakes and for example if a rec is capable of folding topset aces against action/big bets is questionable.
and once again we speak about a spot, where villain 3bets the second time (with a minraise sizing) and then underbets flop and turn,so i dont think he is setting up an exploitive play here.^^

and a combo of AJ we have like 22%, so i would say it needs a bit more to call. it is true that recs sometimes do random stuff, but don't know how to give that weight in the calculation and if i should at all, bc so far this guy didn't make random stuff with his preflop 3bets most likely.
i just folded and think im fine with it.
fun fact i was check his other 3bet too. because was curious if he maybe just misclicked. it was one month ago and almost identical line. ♦
too small 3bet pre. ace high flop, bet small flop, turn and bigger at the river, except it was not paired. unfortunaly not gone to showdown, so no real takeaway there.
e. for mdf i think we have also take the actual spot into account, which is so rare and if im overfolding the river on ace high boards against his "barrels", so let it be. i dont think he was even thinking to exploit there when betting so small and in the long run just value cut himself overall in that case

A rule of thumb I´ve heard of is you need like 1000 hands to make rough assumptions about 3-bet tendencies. So 160 hands is virtually nothing, it could be AAxx both times, it could be two missclicks, it could be quite a lot of things.

Because logically you would not fold your hand if you know villain is betting a weaker hand than yours with your argument to fold otr you primarily give him AAxx and at the same time a not sufficient bluff portion for odds to bluffcatch. On the flop he bets half pot laying you 3:1 odds so you need 25% Equity for both turn and river (let´s be generous and assume he would check the turn 100% giving you the freecard). With the gutshot and backdoorflushdraw you can give yourself 3x + 1x bd-♣ + 1x Q♥ = 5 outs x 3% (board is unlocked since a flush or straight ott still can be overtaken by paired rivers) = 15% Equity. You have no implieds odds since our full is not good enough to call further barrels. Following your range assumption it´d still be a clear fold.

he is betting 36% on the flop and i have ~20%equity in worstcase against aces

In general when player is defined as reg it means he has somewhat reasonable strategy or if I say player seems reggy I mean I have not seen anything clearly bad. No open limping MP, no very questionable open raise or 3bet sizings, reasonable hands shown in showdown, sensible postflop bet sizes etc.

We always work with incomplete information of opponent strategy but stats and hands shown are helpful to profile opponent. If player does stuff that make sense from theoretical view it will obviously increase chance that he has reasonable strategy. To say that this information is not helping in tables is quite flawed view. We won't have specific reads but we can make some assumptions.

So in short there is no magic number in amount of hands that make stats usable. It's just about weight we place on them to alter our default line. When stat is skewed heavily into extreme we can put weight more on small sample as well.

Even single open limp is good indicator of recreational player and with that alone we can make some assumptions of usual tendencies. In this sample with 45/15/1 villain very likely limps and/or calls raises way too wide and 3bets very tight. Possibly more than AA but likely very AA heavy way.

For postflop actions define range. Cbetting small on flop doesn't necessarily tell much but once he triple barrels we have to give more credit. That combined with very low 3bet stat should be worry some. That said I probably wouldn't fold in heroes shoes when we also get somewhat of discount (compared to pot size bet). But I don't really hate fold either in this case.

BTW even if we knew villain has AA its not bad to call flop. There is high chance villain does give implied odds to us and we will anyway also block pairing runouts having set of our own. Direct pot odds needed for flop call is around 20%.

Originally posted by BradNitt
he is betting 36% on the flop and i have ~20%equity in worstcase against aces

Which is a fold.

To call $2,83 when the pot is $10,67 you need 20,96 % Equity. On the flop against AAxx you have 19,03 % = FOOOLD

Originally posted by ghaleon

BTW even if we knew villain has AA its not bad to call flop. There is high chance villain does give implied odds to us and we will anyway also block pairing runouts having set of our own. Direct pot odds needed for flop call is around 20%.

I did not say it is bad to fold the flop. I said it is bad to fold the river.

So I say 160 hands and 2x 3-bets is not enough to deviate from GTO. But if you insist on villain being a 40/10 weak-passive nutpeddler, nutpeddling against a nutpeddler is not the best strategy either. In this case if we give him such a narrow 3-bet range like AAxx only our preflop call is already very marginal and otf it is a fold due to insuficcient odds. This outcome of my recommendation is kinda ridiculous because your assumptions are ridiculous.

But if we ingame realize that the spot lacks informational reliability, also bc it´s always a deep part of the gametree on rivers, why not just play GTO. Solver is folding 0% for a reason and I just cannot confirm the assumptions you have here. Villain very well could bluff the river with hands especially when the flop sizing is small since it is more likely to contain a bluff. Why?

First because mathematically with smaller sizings you are allowed to bet more frequently, so his continuing ranges will be wider too.
Second unbalanced bet-sizings sometimes display the mental comfort someone has about his hand so a small sizing signals usually weakness, this is more true when villain is not a reg.

I don´t think we have implieds odds. Villain is not going to bluff a paired river with air but will check-call his top-set when the river brings a flush? Makes no sense to me.

Since I am kinda repeating myself on similar (marginal) big pot spots over and over again there might be another reason for all those hero-folds otr...