The sample size will def skew the stats, and not much can be pulled from this. However, none of the stats look inherently bad. I don't typically run 17/13 at FR, usually around 14/11 - 15/12. The 3bet% looks fine, but is obv relative depending on the players, etc. I would say if your AF of 1.65 is standard, then you are probably being a bit too passive, but once again it depends.

[K9s] - I think it's fine. I typically open 3x from Co/Bu just because my range is very wide. Especially at FR where players typically don't care at all about defending their blinds, and it becomes relatively easy to steal with a huge range, without having to worry about getting 3bet or called and c/r often.

The 4bet is fine assuming villain is (1) 3betting a wide range and (2) Isn't stacking off light. I think it's a standard assumption to make with stacks that indicate he does 3bet light, and no history to indicate that he should stack off against you light.

I wouldn't advocate calling K9s here because it does have some pretty iffy reverse implied odds situations postflop, that can be difficult to deal with, and therefore prone to mistakes. Especially since you have the Blocker, I would perfer jus to 4bet/fold here and be +EV based on fold equity.

[QQ] - Obv standard given the stats of the UTG. And yeah, you obviously stack off against UTG. If Co backraises or something, it's kind of a tricky spot. Especially if you think he is aware enough to be 3betting UTG with a wide range because UTG is such a fish, in which case Co should rarely have QQ+/AK in his range for flatting the fish's open (unless he felt he was getting squeezed often).

I'm kind of indifferent on the correct 3bet sizing. I think $9-$10 is fine because UTG will call with a wide range. However, I can see merits in 3betting larger. One being, it does cut down on CO's implied odds if UTG calls. Another reason being is UTG is such a fish, he probably won't take into account bet sizing all that much when making his decision.

[AQo] - This is a spot where I think we should probably mix up the frequency with which we call and 3bet. We are certainly ahead of villain's range so folding is out of the question. Calling keeps his entire range in, and since he likes to c-bet often we can do a number of things postflop. Whether that be c/calling when we hit or have Ahi, or c/r bluffing when he cbets a flop that hits our range.

3betting isn't a bad option either, but depends kind of how he would react to 3bets. If he is folding most all but the top of his range (TT+, AQ+), which seems kind of the standard at FR, then I would be much more inclined to call AQ here. If he is 4bet bluffing, or calling a wide range (such as suited connectors, AJ, etc), then I think 3bet/shoving is probably best.

As a 'general' rule, we should be 3betting out of he SB with a higher frequency than out of the BB, because in the BB we close the action, whereas from the SB we do not.

[JTo] - Pretty standard. Whether villain limps often or not isn't really a large concern. If he limp/calls often, then that's fine as we get loads of profitable cbet spots, as well as having a fine hand like JT. If he limp/fold often, then again that's +EV for us. Even if he limps rarely as you said this villain does, it's still +EV for us to isolate him because (1) we have the BU, and (2) his range is pretty transparent if he limp/calls. His range will be something like suited connectors or small pps, and we can cbet, and barrel profitably in alot of spots.

Only time I wouldn't iso is if it was a villain that almost never limped without the intention of limp/raising. In that case I would probably limp behind with JTo, and certainly limp behind JTs.

[TT] - Meh... Idk here. So rarely do you see anything but total fish limp/raising. I would hate not raising TT here, but if you have a read that he only limps in this spot with the intention of limp/raising, and you suspect he is only doing this with his nut hands, then yes limping behind would be best.

TimStone from 200nl limp/raises me quite a bit. I've seen a few showdowns and he is doing so with 66/AQ, so if this was him I would raise TT, and call his limp/raise.

Yes, fold is standard when he 4bets.

[A6o] - Standard Iso. I'm isolating a very wide range when someone this bad limps, and I have the button. I certainly am not passing up this opportunity with A6. When SB 3bets, yeah, I just want to fold. His sizing intrigues me. It's small enough I kind of want to call and play a flop in position. But reverse implied odds screw us here, so I don't like that option. Also, I think his range is relatively strong here when he 3bets. Kinda seems like he wants to keep the fish in, while building the pot a bit more, and that's why he 3bet small. So yeah, nh.

[T8s] - meh.. If you have a decent sample size to include that he is in fact 3betting light, and respecting 4bets, you can probably 4bet a wide range in this spot. But, tbh, I would look at his 9/7 stats, and fold here. Especially with his sizing.

[99] - I think playing preflop, or the flop in any other manner is bad. I'm interested in the turn action though. I think I like calling the turn here better than shoving. Villain bets large enough that the pot will be big enough on the river to put the money in, even if he checks. But the main reason is, our turn range is so strong for raising the turn, he should be bet/folding all but like A9, 22, AA here. I think him stacking off with AK is pretty optimistic on his part.

If he doesn't notice our range, then yeah I think it's fine to shove the turn, as his range is strong for betting multiway on flop, and betting pot on turn. But other than that, I like flatting, and getting it in on the river.

[AKo] - preflop/flop = standard. Turn, I don't really like the shove. That's a HUGE overbet. We obviously raise, but I don't see why we don't just make a large committing raise rather than a shove. I mean obviously if he is a big enough fish that he won't fold his draws no matter what, then shoving is fine (as you said). Just pointing out that a shove is by no means 'standard' here because most would fold all of their draws (kinda think this guy might also).

[88] - I think this is fine actually. Against a retard, they will donk some very strange hands. I couldn't imagine folding the turn to a donk. I think raising the flop is +EV, but not sure if it's better than calling or not. River is kind of marginal, but probably still a call unless villain is passive, because he would still bet 77, 6x, flush draws, AK, AJ, etc type retarded hands. I could not imagine folding AQ on this river if we got here.

[KQo] - I think preflop is either a fold or 4bet. If it was KQs, then I think it becomes closer to a call. But we are going to get owned by a decent player postflop pretty often. As played, I just c/f flop.

[AA] - Meh, it's really gay, but I don't think there is much value in a river bet. I'd feel uber retarded not betting river, but I doubt he calls Khi, and Ahi is unlikely. Plus given the chances he could have Jx, Tx and play it this way. I think maybe we just check back river.

[99] - I think this is pretty standard. I couldn't imagine c/r this flop with 99 here. And against a retard that I don't give credit for ever folding a decent hand I wouldn't even consider turning 99 into a bluff on the turn. So I think it's between either c/folding or c/calling. Kinda close because donks can't value bet thin, and he is pretty likely to check behind the turn with Tx, JJ, so his range becomes either like 44/33/Qx/air. But, idk.. I just don't like c/calling turn, then having to c/f river. So I play it the same.


All I got for now.