SH - KK 3b pot OOP wet board

If villain raises you 3x if would be almost all-in. I don't see that happening with villain holding TPTK without nut FD. Also him having all 3 combos of 22 pre might not be accurate.

I think this raising range would be more realistic:
QhQs,QhQc,QsQc,9d9s,9d9c,9s9c,2d2s,AhKh,AhQh,AhJh,AhTh,JhTh
What do you think?
You would have 27%.

Aaaahh. When I put my range in the equilator something must have gone wrong. Maybe it didn't display card removal properly.

So in this case it would be a clear bet/fold then? So we should bet/fold something smaller like 1/2 pot if we know we are taking this line. I can't see any other line making sense. x/raise makes sense vs aggro players I guess. But I think my standard line should be bet/fold 1/2 pot and re-evaluate turn.

Sounds good. We are definitely betting here because many weaker hand will call. But if he starts raising you on a 3bet pot on this board I think maybe it is better to give up.

Raises without pre-flop initiative on wet boards mean usually "I'm afraid of another cards"

@OP

I have not checked out anything in detail or read the thread. However, you must realize that the way you use Equilab (sry, gonna be frank now:)) is USELESS.

When ranges are reasonably tight, you must weigh the different possible different holdings. for example, say you think he might raise with AQ+. While he might do that, a not uncommon behavior is to call with them. Assign a probability that he actually raises with AQ. Then add only that many (compatible with assigned probability) AQ combos. Of course, AQ was just an example. You have all 3 possible 22 there. A factual number might be 0.5 or less combos of 22 (he called gigantic 3-bet).

See the problem?

Also don't forget about pot odds. If he raises, there will be 62.5 bb + his raise in the pot. If he 3x'es, you'll get some 3:1 from the pot (with little behind).

This is the first thing to consider, not to figure out whether he is bluffing. You can't fold only because someone inadvertently sneezes.

Originally posted by YohanN7
@OP

I have not checked out anything in detail or read the thread. However, you must realize that the way you use Equilab (sry, gonna be frank now:)) is USELESS.

When ranges are reasonably tight, you must weigh the different possible different holdings. for example, say you think he might raise with AQ+. While he might do that, a not uncommon behavior is to call with them. Assign a probability that he actually raises with AQ. Then add only that many (compatible with assigned probability) AQ combos. Of course, AQ was just an example. You have all 3 possible 22 there. A factual number might be 0.5 or less combos of 22 (he called gigantic 3-bet).

See the problem?

So just to clarify here. Just to make things simple lets say that we think 50% of the time villain raises AQo and 50% of the time he flats. Would we give him 50% of combo's for a raise, whilst trying to select those combos intelligently, for example, AhQh for a raise and AhQx for something that might flat? A bit of an over simplification but is that the idea. Or do we just estimate?

So, in the example with 22, because we think that villain is calling less frequently we therefore give him less combos. So if think he only calls a 1/3 of the time with 22 we would only give him 33% of combos of 22?

Or am I completely missing the point?

I know in Flopzilla there is a function to weight combos in that, might have to try that.

Originally posted by YohanN7
Also don't forget about pot odds. If he raises, there will be 62.5 bb + his raise in the pot. If he 3x'es, you'll get some 3:1 from the pot (with little behind).

This is the first thing to consider, not to figure out whether he is bluffing. You can't fold only because someone inadvertently sneezes.

Do you mean our reflex reaction to a raise shouldn't always be bet/fold? With this I agree. Don't get me wrong. I just like to try to plan ahead and know what my reaction will be if I bet. If I plan to bet/fold anyway I think I should bet smaller is my point.

I like the idea to bet/fold.

Originally posted by muel294

Originally posted by YohanN7
@OP

...
Yada yada
...
See the problem?

...
A bit of an over simplification but is that the idea. Or do we just estimate?
...
I know in Flopzilla there is a function to weight combos in that, might have to try that.

***

That is exactly the idea. The more though you put in to it, the better it gets. But it is time consumingX(

I have had Flopzilla. It is a great tool.

Cheers