PLO25 AJ93ds 3bet pot postflop line?

Pre-flop 3bet seems interesting as well.
I would most likely call out of position to try to keep the pot smaller. Not sure a 3bet bluff works well in PLO.

Flop I would Cbet most likely or you expect villain doesn't like to fold.
Turn seems alright.

River I would most likely call with the bluff catcher.

Cheers,
SDK1987

Originally posted by SDK1987

I would most likely call out of position to try to keep the pot smaller.

♠_thumbsup:

Yeah preflop seems marginal ...

Ok just checked solver, which does call sometimes and folds this hand in SB vs BU. You have to be careful, your range should be around 9% in this situation. I personally would fold but calling is fine if you know what to do postflop. You can also 3-bet if BU steals too much.

With the nutflushdraw you should lead the flop, check-call without it. (OOP in 3bp it seems to be we play turnaround than in srp where we bet when we have nutdraw).

Checking surely no "mistake". Check-calling turn seems to be fine too.

River is ugly in terms of having an easy decision. I think we have to close our eyes and call in a vacuum, there is still sth like
the law of inertia.

But I think depandant on certain players we may be able to find a highly exploitative fold from time to time.

Big overpair+nfd is actually going decent amount for x-r on these wet low boards as flop is not hitting our 3bet range strong most of time. I was also planning to x-r flop here. But I believe this one would be better to bet without showdown value as we benefit from folds quite a lot. But of course any reads are important. Like if villain is passive we want to be just cbetting pocket+nfd mainly as well.

Originally posted by ghaleon
Big overpair+nfd is actually going decent amount for x-r on these wet low boards as flop is not hitting our 3bet range strong most of time. I was also planning to x-r flop here. But I believe this one would be better to bet without showdown value as we benefit from folds quite a lot. But of course any reads are important. Like if villain is passive we want to be just cbetting pocket+nfd mainly as well.

I once more checked the solver. Idk how appropriate the solver is, because as villains are just not calling balanced. They tend to call too many ip, which can makes things worse . I find those spots really hard too. If villain is picky in stealin in 3bp ip you need to be picky with hands to check-raise since he will have better board coverage against your high-cards heavy 3bet range.

Solver is check-raising:
-all Bottom-2pairs
-naked top-2pair that block the A♥: or have a or (but no nfd!)
-top-2pair with bdfd
-premium overpairs with flushdraw (also no nfd!)

The pot check-raising hands compromise around 14% whereas he check-calls 42%. With gutshots like :Ax::3x: + flushdraw he is check-calling 2times more often than check-raising, he only check-raises gutshots + flushdraw + toppair blocker (set and 2pair+draw is still a dangerous portion of villains range). With nutflushdraw he is not check-raising at all, but check-calling (as I said and this makes sense because of the visibility).