3 bet defending going not so well this time. Any suggestions?

My standard play pre would be to call the 3bet but I don't think 4bet would be very bad. But no way you are folding AQo from these positions

I don't really see a point in check raising here. Usually you should value xr hands that are very strong and as a bluff hands that retain their equity well. This hand is not very strong in a 3bet pot. Having A♠: makes it a bit better but still wouldn't xr here. Your sizing was ok imo.

Against that flop 3bet I think fold is the best option.

Hi, PF depends on your range but in this positions its clearly call for me versus this villain. He can bluffs here suited Ax etc., which you crush easily. Against villains with tighter 3bet range you can try 4bet for bluff OOP or just fold. But in this case I call it all the time.
On the flop its clear call for me. You are in 3bet spot and i dont think you beat enough hands from his value range (maybe KQ if he 3bet it, vs AQ you go even, QJ/QT dont 3bet i think (if yes, good for you, take note)). You can easily call with AQ with spade. You are blocking some draws, so you dont need protect this hand. You have just top pair in 3bet spot, dont overplay it.
Players on NL2 are weak in 3bet pots and I think he can overcbet flop, maybe with all his bluffs, so you can easily.

Originally posted by pdfbq

Anyways... No total disaster

I think it is total disaster on the flop. You bluff folded with TPTK with backdoor nfd I guess? You was expecting him to fold better? Or was it "information check-raise" with almost half of effective stack already in?

This is not what you want to do here, if you're not going with this hand just call and keep his range wider and see if turn helps.

Awful raise/fold flop. Don't play this hand at all next time if you manage to spew it like this on a dream board.

Call preflop, there are many other (better or worse) hands to 4bet and you need quite strong hands in your calling range if you don't want BU to rape you.
Flop is a check/call though, because if you don't call that you're gonna get so weak when you do find a call flop... you even have the ace of spades dude !

Originally posted by SeagalSteven
I think it is total disaster on the flop. You bluff folded with TPTK with backdoor nfd I guess? You was expecting him to fold better? Or was it "information check-raise" with almost half of effective stack already in?

? Bluff ? I had top pair top kicker.
? Half effective stack already in ? I had less than 1/12 in..!
On a check call check fold line I would have saved myself 21.5 bb.
Apparently that is a tital disaster for you. Well, it is not for me

Yes calling would have been better, that's the whole point of posting here isn't it?

But my question: the problem you guys have is me folding here or check raising here? I can not distill this from the answers.

Well I guess it must be bluff when you folded? That is why it's so puzzling what happened here

When you check-raise / folded you invested 44bb in this hand, effective stacks 116bb so that is almost half of it.

The board is very favorable for you, but check-raise does not make sense. If villain has weaker hand, he is not calling your raise. He could call with draw, but you've As. If he jams a draw and you fold AQ it's horrible result.

Check-raise therefore has no value. If you call he can have worse hand and maybe invest more with bluff, or you can improve.

? Bluff ? I had top pair top kicker.

Yes I would say this is a bluff. Your hand is too weak to check raise as value in a 3bet pot. And it is not very suitable xr in a single raised pot either.

the problem you guys have is me folding here or check raising here?

The problem is the check raise. I think when you face a 3bet OTF it is a clear fold. Villain has QQ+,Q8s in his range and you block many of his flush draws.

"Having A♠: makes it a bit better but still wouldn't xr here. Your sizing was ok imo. "

Are you sure it is good that we have A♠: here? It makes his value range relatively (to his bluff/semi-bluff range) stronger as we block every AXs.

Very good question. I had to think this through again but I think I'm going to stick with that the A♠: is ok.

Let's assume this xr was a bluff. Now we have nut backdoor flushdraw so we have some cards OTT that we can continue barreling. We also block some flush draws so he might be folding a bigger part of his range?

So having the A♠: when xr bluffing is ok I think, but when we get 3bet OTF things might be different. Could we say this is a bit similar to 3betting preflop? UTG opens and we 3bet bluff with A5s from MP. It is an ok hand to bluff with because we block hands that might call but when we face a 4bet we are screwed.

So when we start thinking about calling the flop 3bet, then having that A♠: might get bad for us. But then again, how many nut flush draws is villain going to play like this? I would say if he shoves with a draw, it probably is a combo draw. Not many of those are possible here.

But anyway, my point was that when bluffing OTF having a nutBDFD is good. When value check raising we want villain to have more draws in his range. When thinking about calling the 3bet having a draw blocker might be bad or not.

I would check call the flop and most turns, then on the river I'd fold unimproved even though the button player looks decent and capable of bluffing

"Let's assume this xr was a bluff."
if we assume that xr was a bluff, with TPTK, then why do we call preflop? waiting for QQX flops?:)

When I talked about check raising and having blockers & backdoor draws that was more like general advice, not necessarily for this specific hand.

Raising top pair (Q) in a 3bet pot is just bad, as many others have already said here. Raising top pairs is not good in single raised pots either in my opinion. We want to raise very good hands and bluffs. As you said this hand doesn't make sense as a bluff, but it doesn't make sense as value raise either.

When I said in my first post that A♠: can make this a little bit better, I meant that in general when we do check raise it is good if we have a hand that can improve to the nuts and we have some turn cards that we can keep barreling on. Could have left that part out because check raising is bad here nonetheless.

I agree, in this form.
If I want to bluff and I have FE, it's good to have the possibility for the nuts on later streets (and villain will have half that AA combos which is good as well). But here that's not the case. At least we have showdown value (if not then we must assume a pre BU vs CO 3bet range of 0.9 or something like that:)).

Thank you all guys. One HUGE learning moment here is the A of spade I had. I did *not* used that fact at all in my play.

Reason I check raised was to protect my hand. I knew he would bet and my plan was check raise but I missed the A of space thing as said.
Actually, his insta jam surprised me.

A spade on the turn could stop him from betting next to the fact that it improves my hand.

I still do not see exactly how I could loose less. I can see how I could win more by improving but not when say a blank hits the board. Check call again?

But again huge learning moment here so tnx again!

If you for example decide to check call this on flop and turn, you might end up losing the same amount of money but it doesn't mean your play was as good / as bad.
Ranges are already tighter since this is a 3bet pot and when you raise you isolate yourself against very strong range when you get called. So when you just call here villain has more bluffs and more weaker made hands in his range.

actually the sample size is so small (VPIP: 17.79, PFR: 12.88, 3Bet Preflop: 9.38, Hands: 166) that to decide what the best is, is very hard. I think that VPIP and PFR might have some meaning, but 3bet stat is useless.
let's assume that he is a nitty villain. my strategy would be to get to showdown as cheap as possible.:) I would call on flop, but fold on the turn for more agression. without more reads...

Originally posted by paatika I would call on flop, but fold on the turn for more agression. without more reads...

Yup.. now there is the problem. That is exactly how I blow off my opponenots normally ...

The A of spades... The A of spades... Damn!

No problems there. Calling a blank turn would be totally fine too. AQ is probably on top of our range so depending on villain, board runout and bet sizes we can consider calling it down.

I believe that would be close to "theoretically optimal" way of playing this. Ofc if we have some reads we can adjust.