Questions About a Spot

Ok villain in this hand is a reg. and folds to 3bets 74% of the time. So in this hand I have AK and felt like I should either be checking flop or double barreling. Probably c/f flop but decided to give it a go anyways. Now, I wonder if this makes a difference much but should I be more inclined to cbet with my low PP's (ie 33) here as opposed to AK? Seems like we now have 10 outs that will help us continue double barreling with high expectations of a fold. After thinking about that, does it even really matter? Should we be double barreling every time we decide to cbet (which should be rare) here when the turn is anything but a 5/77-QQ? Seems like he can't really call with a mid PP and will call with Qx (which I think he folds KQ/QJ/half of the time AQ pre) again ld0 and we can c/f river. I'm sure a lot of responses will be to just c/f flop with AK but thought it was worth asking anyways.


Full Tilt No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (6 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com

Button ($51.85)
Hero (SB) ($50)
BB ($10)
UTG ($50.50)
MP ($94.25)
CO ($50.75)

Preflop: Hero is SB with Khttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...miles/club.gif, Ahttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/spade.gif
2 folds, CO bets $1.75, 1 fold, Hero raises to $6, 1 fold, CO calls $4.25

Flop: ($12.50) 7http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/spade.gif, Qhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/heart.gif, 5http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...miles/club.gif (2 players)
Hero bets $8, CO calls $8

Turn: ($28.50) 6http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/heart.gif (2 players)
Hero

In real time I just fire out a CB 33/AK telling myself the flops dry enough that he'll give up enough air and probably check-fold the turn vs. a tightish player like this but that might be the worst option.

Having thought about it now given how tight his range is I probably advocate check-folding as I also think there might be quite a bit of reverse implied odds if we hit an A/K as KQs or AQ might make up alot of his flop calling range.

Thanks, Noble.

Any more responses?

methinks you handcuff your turn action with your flop cbet size

I'm horrible at bet sizing. I can't really decide what to do. I guess if my plan is to 2 barrel bluff and never triple I could bet smaller on the flop and bet large on the turn?

I think I would check this flop in both cases because I think he'll let you get away with it and this board isn't super great to try and get him off a bunch of his range which isn't really looking to fold on this board.

If he's tight vs. 3bs PF, that means he probably has a hand like 88-JJ,AQ,KQs

even if he folds 88-JJ, it's like... any combo of broadways he doesn't shove pre probably has a queen

I agree about cbet sizing, should be around 1/2 pot
because then you can 1/2 pot turn and based on timing and the river card you can shove river too

pre and flop are super standard imo. whats his fold to 3bet of 74% mean?? is he a loose reg or nit reg.

Vs nit reg meh check turn and could overbet bluff river. mostly just give up (obv we dont have any SD value)

Vs loose reg I can barrel one more.

His fold to 3bet is a bit distracting here. What's he calling 3bets with? He either calls with mid pairs if you think he thinks your 3betting a ton of non pair hands, or he's calling with Broadways if he thinks your 3 betting more pairs. What is he putting you on here to call a 3bet?

As played I shut down on the turn because we have a few outs and getting raised here would suck. Tough spot.

If he is a nit reg, like 10pfr and folds to cbets 74%, are we better off flatting pre? even oop?

If he's folding 74% to 3bets, I definitely flat this pre. Sounds like a nitty player I can bluffraise good flops

as played, you can either decide to bet bet or c/fold.
I think most of his range is mid pairs in this spot, some AQ, some AA/KK/QQ id imagine he's flatting against someone who is 3betting a lot.


personally if you've been pounding on a guy with 3bets and he finally calls, I would be not be bluffing light unless i get a great flop like AK2 :)

Thanks for the responses guys but tbh I was more interested in hearing about the theory behind having a small PP in this spot.

I 'think' the theory says that if you decide that this a spot where you need to double barrel or check-down/fold you should be more inclined to check fold the 33 because it's a bad hand to semi-bluff with as it has so few outs to improve and it has better showdown value (If he wants to check down his AK for e.g.) & you should be more inclined to DBL barrel the AK for the opposite reasons. (It has up to 6 outs to improve and less showdown value - vs. his low pp)

However as I mentioned there might be some reverse implied odds to hitting an A/K in this specific example and his range is pretty tight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmind

Thanks for the responses guys but tbh I was more interested in hearing about the theory behind having a small PP in this spot.

---

check fold you are way behind his range and he is likely calling this flop

Yeah I totally agree I'm just saying do we now have 10 outs with 33? If we hit a 3 or A/K on the turn aren't we basically going to win in some fashion now if he doesn't have AQ? I'm trying to argue that 33 > AK to double barrel here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmind

Yeah I totally agree I'm just saying do we now have 10 outs with 33? If we hit a 3 or A/K on the turn aren't we basically going to win in some fashion now if he doesn't have AQ? I'm trying to argue that 33 > AK to double barrel here.

---

How is it possible 33 is better to double barrell? In both cases you are behind when called, while AK has more outs to win.

Yeah vs. a weakish player if you have a tight 3B image you should get a lot of respect on A/K turns so using them as bluff outs with 33 makes alot of sense. (Bottom pair with a suited connector is even better.)

Good idea! Bluff outs is nothing new but it's not something I currently keep in mind in spots like these - thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mixchange

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmind

Yeah I totally agree I'm just saying do we now have 10 outs with 33? If we hit a 3 or A/K on the turn aren't we basically going to win in some fashion now if he doesn't have AQ? I'm trying to argue that 33 > AK to double barrel here.

---

How is it possible 33 is better to double barrell? In both cases you are behind when called, while AK has more outs to win.

---

You are misreading me I think. Maybe not.

I'm saying we can rep. an A/K and still hit a 3. So I'm saying, if we have AK, we only have 6 outs to win and he'll fold to a turn bet when one of our outs hits. With 33, he'll fold if an A/K hits, this time having all Aces and Kings in the deck giving us 2 more outs so 8 total, and then he'll continue/fold some of the time when a 3 hits. So, in the latter case we create 4 more outs. I'm not saying this is correct at all but I wonder if this makes sense/is ANYTHING meaningful to hands to different spots sort of like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mixchange

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmind

Yeah I totally agree I'm just saying do we now have 10 outs with 33? If we hit a 3 or A/K on the turn aren't we basically going to win in some fashion now if he doesn't have AQ? I'm trying to argue that 33 > AK to double barrel here.

---

How is it possible 33 is better to double barrell? In both cases you are behind when called, while AK has more outs to win.

---

You are misreading me I think. Maybe not.

I'm saying we can rep. an A/K and still hit a 3. So I'm saying, if we have AK, we only have 6 outs to win and he'll fold to a turn bet when one of our outs hits. With 33, he'll fold if an A/K hits, this time having all Aces and Kings in the deck giving us 2 more outs so 8 total, and then he'll continue/fold some of the time when a 3 hits. So, in the latter case we create 4 more outs. I'm not saying this is correct at all but I wonder if this makes sense/is ANYTHING meaningful to hands to different spots sort of like this.

---

ya i saw this logic after I read noble's post and overall feel a bit embarrassed about my replies. I guess its good to see where you're ignoring possibilities though!

I can't see a flaw in this bluffing logic saying 33 can be better than AK , but in the spot vs. a nitty flatting range I'd be check folding mostly, especially if I have been 3 betting and he's been folding and is likely to look me up

I see what you're saying, and I think its definitely good to think about this kind of thing. I think this might be the wrong board to consider that though.

On this particular board, some of his calling range is hands like TT-JJ, while an equally big part of his range is also AQ/KQ type hands, where your A and K outs might result in some reverse implied odds as opposed to a fold.

I think you can think more along the lines of an A/K or 3 being an out when you're bareling 33 in a single raised pot on a 259ss board or something like that. Though this is all strongly based on the assumption that he is capable of folding to a A/K on the turn or river, and if he's not clearly we'd much rather have AK than 33.

mixchange - you're still not getting it. Kidding ;). Thanks for the reply, no need to be embarrassed!

Thanks guys for the help!

Griff - in your example, it seems like we shouldn't really have a "D range" on the flop then in the ABCD theorem? Can this be right?

Q's kinda suck against a threebet calling range, I'd prob go ahead and c/f all streets barring an A or K falling, betting the flop and double barrelling seems alright as well. Is the 74% a PT3 number or a HEM number? If its PT3 there's no doubt id threebet AK pre, if its an HEM number its closer but i prob still would threebet it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kmind

Griff - in your example, it seems like we shouldn't really have a "D range" on the flop then in the ABCD theorem? Can this be right?

---

First off ABCD theorem is pretty sick, I can't believe I hadn'read it before/maybe I did & I didn't get it, I use similiar ranges myself which I created more from an article ISF posted about polarising your ranges to clearly define your value bets/bluffs etc. (Which I probably misinterpreted but w/e.)

Anyways I think, not to clued up on this, but that you should definitely have a D range because even though we've established a D range might be slightly -ev and check-folding is better in a vacuum, our range is usually pretty strong here and we want to be able to bet for value here alot (AQ,KK,AA, sets etc..) but if villain sees us check folding here too often (& he's a reg so he might) then he's less likely to pay off our A range. So we should have a slightly -D range so that our A range gets paid off more here.

Which I think is 'Shania' (A+D)=X & X>A even though D is negative.

Edit: I thought about it today and maybe our range won't usually be pretty strong here because of his high fold to 3B% we will have alot of 3B bluffs in our range. So I might change my mind about what I said above, I got a headache, I slept too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Q's kinda suck against a threebet calling range, I'd prob go ahead and c/f all streets barring an A or K falling, betting the flop and double barrelling seems alright as well. Is the 74% a PT3 number or a HEM number? If its PT3 there's no doubt id threebet AK pre, if its an HEM number its closer but i prob still would threebet it.

---

what's the difference in how they calculate it?