PLO25 9865ds 3bet pot, triple barrel bluff

Sound bad, but combo wise it is a give up on the River. Best hand You rep from the begining is AA.
He folds AKxx and Axss. I think he often has straight or something super strong.

Once we bet the flop, I thinks it's obvious he has Axxx almost all of the time. In my experience thinking players (and recreationals) are often quite reluctant to fold it, unless the board goes too scary. He has opened Axxx from UTG, which should weight his range towards the better and connected part of Axxx. Meaning he has other broadway cards in it. Once he calls the turn, I think he is not folding river easily. And with 2p+straight blocker he should call.

Stack depths are good for triple barrell, but I would just check turn and get a free river.

On the river I would valuebet AA/KK for sure, once he quickly checks. I would expect him to check-call with A+ and straight blocker very often, as he can easily think that hero reps AAQJ which is very thin. That's the same reason I wouldn't bluff the river.

I forgot to mention he might hero call you. I would do so with top 2

Preflop:

So my hand prefers HU pot with low suits and is nicely connected so decided to 3bet. Trainer wise EV of call would be around 0.3 and 3bet 0.5. VIllain is supposed to fold to 3bet 46% of time which is unlikely. So I would imagine EV of 3bet to not be as clearly better.

His deviation in form of F3B or postflop tendencies will have a lot stronger impact on EV than in 0.5 - 0.3 = 0.2 bb.

Flop:

Once we bet the flop, I thinks it's obvious he has Axxx almost all of the time. In my experience thinking players (and recreationals) are often quite reluctant to fold it, unless the board goes too scary.

I agree to this. Some players surely call a smallish bet and fold to a second barrel without 2pair improvement, some will just go with it. I think many TAG´s also call hands preflop but fold naked top-pair on an Ace-board against a solid 3bet range it is a common leak (better fold preflop). Those are the basic notes I makes about dry A-flops in 3bp.

About betting 1/3 pot: Solver bets like 80-90% in this situation with half-pot. So in order to compensate the smaller bet with a higher frequency, we´d have to bet like 110% ie. in a BU vs UTG situation - which is not possible. There was another hand bet sizing we discussed where that principle applied too.

Turn & River:

I like the 2barrel ott, as we have picked up Equity but no SDV. We block drawing components, the low sidecards among the A♠:xx reduces the likelyhood of twopairs and sets. The K♣: is also a good card for our range to keep bluffing. I think the river is a little marginal without straightblocker but if you triple-barrel your AA/KK sets here regularly aswell as you proabably should have some bluffs here too, all in all I think the bluff-shove is fine. In our studies we might vary turn-river runouts to see how bluffs composition change.

I would expect him to check-call with A+ and straight blocker very often

Yes I think he should do that, also top2pair like regie mentioned should call. But that by itself imo should not prevent us from bluffing. It´s just some part of his range and we need bluffs no matter what he´s doing. The low straightdraw blockers + no SDV + villains profile are a pros to do it. Check back river waiting for a better opportunity is perfectly fine too as many regs start out too tight and we want to observe and be more sure about basic tendencies before making huge plays. Multiple streets plays highly with more marginal handstrengths (or bluffs) and also static textures depend heavily on reads and stats, so I´d feel more comfortable with more hands played (in 3bp on dry textures let´s say) as river spots statistically occur less often. If you say you always triple-barrel bluff busted oesd´s, gs´s that pick up equity but no SDV on turn-cards that´s probably a valid strategical path to begin with.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
Once we bet the flop, I thinks it's obvious he has Axxx almost all of the time.

Once he calls our flop bet. After the bet, before calling his range is the same as his flop checking range. ♦

Big if true

Yes, once he calls the bet. I thought it was obvious, as the hand wouldn't be posted if opponent folded the flop.

River is mentally nasty. Flop bet is ok, turn barrell with all that equity is ok, and on the river the only way to win the hand is to bet. And it is somewhat unlikely that he has a straight (if he only calls with a straight, the shove is +EV easily). But we also know that when hero reps straight on the river, he reps quite narrow range. And we know that opponent might understand this and make hero call. If we assume that he calls river with AK+ or A and straight blocker, it probably isn't +EV to shove (I miss PokerJuice for these spots), but betting is the only way to win the hand...

Classical spot where emotion say bet, cold logic says give up.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
Yes, once he calls the bet. I thought it was obvious, as the hand wouldn't be posted if opponent folded the flop.

River is mentally nasty. Flop bet is ok, turn barrell with all that equity is ok, and on the river the only way to win the hand is to bet. And it is somewhat unlikely that he has a straight (if he only calls with a straight, the shove is +EV easily). But we also know that when hero reps straight on the river, he reps quite narrow range. And we know that opponent might understand this and make hero call. If we assume that he calls river with AK+ or A and straight blocker, it probably isn't +EV to shove (I miss PokerJuice for these spots), but betting is the only way to win the hand...

Classical spot where emotion say bet, cold logic says give up.

Yes. Nasty indeed but I would not say check-back is set by logic. On the river the average opponent tends to overfold and betting in general when having no SDV is theoretically a logical sound reasoning if we are not sure about frequencies as solver usually is bluffing quite freuquently aswell to keep up the pressure. And despite villain should call many of his turn calling range and might do so our play still would be fine theorywise as we have to bluff and lose in order to keep our strategy solid.

But with our particular hand I think it can make sense to check back here too to avoid unnecessary speculative moves in gray area if we lack information about this specific spot (we don´t know how many strong made hand villains´ turn calling range includes, a more frequent check-raise frequency would give us green light for further river aggression) so since we block villains´ drawing range like flushdraws and straightdraws, having no straight-blocker ourself and also having no pair blocker is actually not favourable so combowise the EV and strategy of betting should not suffer too much when checking back some more turn bluffs.

I almost agree with River Bet saying we need bluff in range, but we dont. We often check River because it is the right play agaist his range.

We need to put Velue hands in range he Might beat on River like AKxx two pair.

He does not beat AAxx and straight

Originally posted by regie
I almost agree with River Bet saying we need bluff in range, but we dont. We often check River because it is the right play agaist his range.

We need to put Velue hands in range he Might beat on River like AKxx two pair.

He does not beat AAxx and straight

We always need bluffs when betting in all games of Poker according to "Theory of Poker".

It is true that we can bluff less if we have the information that villan has callhappy tendencies (which we have none).

Sorry. I agree.

Someone in mastermind discord had run monker on this. Apparently turn is gto wise pure check but there is very high double barrel frequency overall. Not surprising with all of the AA, AKK, AK in our range. Issue in betting turn is also facing x-r but I think its not as big issue as I would assume x-r range to have often higher fd.

In river we should bomb most of our air part but having 56 is not good theory wise as we want villain to have that inside wrap. Question becomes how does pool see this sort of spot and if villain is right kind of opponent to fold enough. Personally I very rarely see big bluffs with deeper stacks (from non maniac sorts) and its likely better to overfold in these spots on average. It could be issue if opponent think my value range is only nuts on river. Well I would say not totally absurd line but only recommendable with decent reads on opponent.

Apparently turn is gto wise pure check but there is very high double barrel frequency overall.

Yes. I am surely far away from exact GTO-combos but to me it makes sense I should try to approach GTO-frequencies. Imo this should be sufficient if we dont screw up equity performance too much. For this I select combos that I find "natural" to pick using "logic" (the concept of logic according to Tom Chambers, concepts like blockers, SDV etc...) until I get the desired frequency.

56 is not good theory wise as we want villain to have that inside wrap.

+1

Yes. That´s quite sophisticated stuff already.. selecting sidecards for river actions when turn complexity is a mess already. You´ll get those hints analyzing river situations with monkers and put thought into its selection.