SH, A7s CO vs MP Bluff 3betting

How about xc turn. I prefer it better.
And we cannot rule out sets on turn, they are all possible there.

Originally posted by nitrol
How about xc turn. I prefer it better.
And we cannot rule out sets on turn, they are all possible there.

Checking back the turn seems fine, but I think that I still have some fold equity with betting (better hands like AK, AJ or AT, JJ-99 can fold). I also didn't rulled out sets, as it could be seen in equilab analysis.

Did not see 44/33 and they are possible.

Pre and Flop seems fine with your reasoning. On the turn I would prefer a much larger sizing, to increase our foldequity and make it easier to call an All-In. Would size almost potsize here. Many guys don't believe you, call half-pot all day long, and still call their midpairs vs. another bet and on the river you don't know what to do.

As played it's definitely close. But I don't see him shoving Qx here. Thus, his range should be rather polarized between nuts and draws.

The problem I see is that the board is very draw heavy. You have more outs than only a SD or FD. Normally when you hold the advantage of having either a SD or FD, I would keep betting since fold equity will be far superior than getting there. In this case, I would want to x behind MP's x.

You've got to be better about 32% of the time to justify calling there. I would just call pre in the first place with a weak kicker.

I would call this pre and maybe bet bigger OTT. Otherwise this looks good. I don't think that villain will shove KQ here. Still you have decent equity and I think calling is fine.

3bet is fine. Bet turn bigger and then its easier to call a shove. Other than that wp.

I made a little mistake in my previous post. I would actually fold this pre. For me it is not good enough for calling vs MP and my 3bet bluff range is lower AXs. This is just my preference. Ofc we can decide to play this hand and when we do 3betting is better than calling.

I agree this is probably quite close to being a breakeven call; whether it's slightly +EV or slightly -EV I don't know. You do have a million outs to the nuts or practically-nuts and you're getting like 2:1 so it can't be that bad.

Nothing draw heavy with the board in 3b pot. MP should not have that much low cards in his calling range oop.

Originally posted by Dadramel
You've got to be better about 32% of the time to justify calling there. I would just call pre in the first place with a weak kicker.

I personally would rather fold pre than call, especially when we still have a BTN left to act. I think the hand is too weak to call.

EV of folding: -41bb (invested 9bb pre+11bbotf+21bbott= 100bb(starting stack)-59bb= 41bb

EV of calling: -38,3bb 200,15bb*0,3083 = 61,7bb -> 100bb-61,7bb= -38,3bb

41-38,33= 2,67bb

So The EV of calling is 2,67bb higher than folding. if your equity calculation is correct. If we include rake + the fact that villains range might be tighter folding might be better option. On the other hand it doesn't really matter if you fold or call here- its really close.

If we bet bigger ott, lets say we bet 32bb:

EV of folding; 100- (9+11+32)= -48bb

EV of calling (still the same because ranges doesn't change, we still get it all-in as a ~30%dog): -38,3bb

48-38,3=+9,7bb

So by betting the turn bigger we make the ev of calling +9,7bb instead of +2,67bb therefor it's easier to make the call when we bet bigger. By betting bigger ott we have to always call- it should always have higher EV than folding. = easier decisions.

Bigger bet could also have more fold equity ott = +ev.

EDIT:

I think that is fine to 3 bet this hand if you don't 3bet it 100% of the time. Like flat 70% and 3bet 30% etc depending on the villain.

Originally posted by marsa08
I think that is fine to 3 bet this hand if you don't 3bet it 100% of the time. Like flat 70% and 3bet 30% etc depending on the villain.

This hand is too weak to call vs MP. I would call ATs+ here and bluff A2s-A5s. If you want to have a bluff range of A2s-A9s then go for it. Either way this is a fold or a 3bet.

The only option for calling is when villain opens a bit wider than normal. But here, we don't have such info...it is 3b or fold.

Originally posted by marsa08
I think that is fine to 3 bet this hand if you don't 3bet it 100% of the time. Like flat 70% and 3bet 30% etc depending on the villain.

What I meant by this was that don't 3bet this hand 100% of the time.

Originally posted by marsa08

Originally posted by marsa08
I think that is fine to 3 bet this hand if you don't 3bet it 100% of the time. Like flat 70% and 3bet 30% etc depending on the villain.

What I meant by this was that don't 3bet this hand 100% of the time.

Vs what kind of players you would 3bet this hand and why?

Vs some one with too high fold to 3 bet.
Vs some one who has high fold to cbet but doesn't fold enough to 3bets.
Vs decent regs sometimes as a bluff.

Vs too high fold to 3bet I think it is ok. Vs low f23bet but high f2cbet I would increase the value 3bet range and 3bet more broadways and leave the bluff range out. Vs regs I would not do this because of the reasons mentioned above. I'm not saying 3betting A7s is necessarily bad, just discussing whether it is optimal