NL25-5max-QQ in SB against steal from loose player

[Monaleen]

Boss Media (IPN) No-Limit Hold'em, €0.25 BB (5 handed) - Converter Tool from

UTG (€49.83)
Button (€64.53)
Hero (SB) (€24)
MP (€24.26)
BB (€27.03)

Reads:
leluccio has 2.5 buyins running 76/24/15 over 17 hands
20% Att. to steal (10 opportunities)
50% call flop cBet, 50% Fold to flop cBet (2 opportunities)
If hes paying attention over the 17 hands (all at this table) he would have me pegged as fairly aggro, likely to cBet, isolate limpers, etc
We had previously played a hand where he had called my cBet and folded to my turn double barrel

Preflop: Hero is SB with Q, Q
2 folds, Button bets €1.25, Hero raises to €4, 1 fold, Button calls €4
Preflop Analysis
Using the 20% Att to steal, following range 66+,A5s+,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,A9o+,KTo+,QTo+,JTo, SCs 76s+
Given how loose he is, and the probability he sees me as loose I'm not sure I can really narrow his range at all after he called 3Bet

Flop: (€8.25)
Flop Analysis
Pot is 8.25, effective stacks 20, I'm first to act.
Felt I had to C Bet for value, given he'd prob call with all sorts of dominated stuff, and would also probably bet anyway if I checked, given his stats, AF=15 etc (is this a reasonable assumption??)
Bet size (3/4) is because I wanted value from draws, should I have bet less?
8, 10, 10 (2 players)
Hero bets €6.18, Button calls €6.18

Turn: (€20.61)
Turn Analysis (Pot 20.6, I have 13.8)
Obviously this board is fairly scary, in hindsight I don't think you can construct a range villain calls with that I have pot odds for.
The reason I shoved was that I felt if I checked down for the rest of the hand villain would bet any 2 cards he held, certainly on River if not on Turn (again AF=15, after VPIP of 76, and I know its a small sample, but still).
6 (2 players)
Hero raises to €13.82 (All-In), Button calls €13.82

River: (€48.25) K (2 players, 1 all-in)

Total pot: €48.25 | Rake: €2.40
To continue from the turn analysis, was I wrong to get so married to overpair OOP against such a crazy player?
Should I have bet say 5 or 6 on Turn and be done if I get called, or should I have just checked down/folded?
Perhaps I should have taken the view that OOP this was such a tricky spot I should have abandoned putting more money in pot save for calling a micro bet on river?


Thanks in advance folks..

this is super standard there is no way he's folding JJ or 99
if he has a hand like 89 he's probably bad enough to call as well
and you won't believe how many times people call it off with like 66 in this spot

if he has a T or a flush it's kind of a cooler, your bet sizing on the turn made it unprofitable for him to call with a flush draw because you have almost nothing left in your stack if he does hit

so basically just shove and forget about it, let him worry about paying you off if he has a worse hand

[Keith]

now you've posted the Hand History, i suggest you go and delete the spurious posts by using the x icon thingy next to the quote edit thingys on your posts.

[Stacks]

this is super standard there is no way he's folding JJ or 99
if he has a hand like 89 he's probably bad enough to call as well
and you won't believe how many times people call it off with like 66 in this spot

if he has a T or a flush it's kind of a cooler, your bet sizing on the turn made it unprofitable for him to call with a flush draw because you have almost nothing left in your stack if he does hit

so basically just shove and forget about it, let him worry about paying you off if he has a worse hand

Are you drunk?

Of course he calls it off with 66 (hint: it's a fullhouse). And what is that about his turn bet sizing making a call unprofitable with a flush draw because we only have a little left in our stack if he calls and hits? Ummm turn is a shove. Shove != money left in our stack.

OP, I think you played fine. However, your logic is a good deal off in a few spots. Like for once, why would him betting 100% of his range if checked to make you more likely to shove the turn? If you read is certain that he will bet turn if checked to with 100% of his range, then you should be MORE likely to check turn. He likely isn't calling the turn shove with 100% of his range. Therefore, if he is shove 100%, then you are going to be more profitable checking and calling his shove.

I meant 77 not 66
and also I meant the villain's call on the flop is not profitable because we don't have any money behind (unless he has AKs)

[bigspenda73]

this is why it's cool to post your thoughts (hint for everyone else) because even though the HH looks perfectly played to me, as Stacks said your thinking was incorrect.

It's not enough to play the hand perfectly, it has to be for the correct reasons.

[Monaleen]

Thanks for replies.

In conclusion, in this situation where the next non micro bet will effectively be the last raise (I would be pot committed), given that we expect villain to be much more likely to bluff/semi-bluff than call while dominated it makes sense check/call the rest of the hand. This strategy is used only because of the read that villain is sunstantially more likely to bluff/semi-bluff than call when he is trailing. Obviously we reckon the gains from this line should exceed the -EV from letting villain see river for free in the instances where he is behind. I guess its kind of a way ahead/way behind situation where we dont want to do villain's betting for him, given that he might mess up the process of extracting value for himself by slowplaying etc?

Also nobody supports betting like 6 on the turn and then walking away from hand?