100NL - AA vs Gross Spot on Turn vs Fish
Posted by johnmorgan
Posted by
johnmorgan
posted in
Low Stakes
100NL - AA vs Gross Spot on Turn vs Fish
CO is 24/14 with AFq 48 over 194 hands. Folds to Flop Cbet 57% (7 hands). WTSD is 42% (33 hand sample). I have him marked as a fish. He has previously 3bet KK & AQo once each. Flatting range includes TT.
BTN is 26/11 with AFq 29 over 113 hands. Folds to F Cbet 67% (6 hands). WTSD is 9% (22 hand sample).
I can't see I'm ahead of much when he shoves turn except JJ. 50% likelihood JJ is 3betting pre-flop due to AQo being in his 3-betting range but TT in his flatting range. TT/99/88/QJ/J7s/T9/T8/98 are all in his range here.
Standard fold? Sometimes we just need a little reassurance... (haha!)
Loading 7 Comments...
u cant be auto 3/4 cbetting this board with AA multiway to begin with, as played its a really easy fold
Thanks for the reply.
Could you explain why re: sizing please? Even versus 2 fishy players? Because there range versus us just has so much equity being lots of two pairs, sets, straights, pairs + draws.
Would you x/c or bet smaller?
these boards will run out very poorly for your range more than you can confidently bet three streets big, meaning your going to have to bluff catch with hands like AA sometimes. If you want to bet for value, going 1/4 pot is going to the sizing that keeps weak you can get value again later in. The rest of ranges will be draws that you can't make fold anyway.
As played, yes you can fold peacefully.
As JamesYang said, its a bit ambitious to cbet this flop in a 3 way pot, since there are a LOT of combos of 2p+ in opponents flatting ranges. I suggest to check call most of the time on this flop and reevaluate on the turn and be particulary aware of sizings, timing tells, etc.
Thanks for the comment. Yes, looking back on the hand and doing some review, our equity on the flop against both players PF flatting ranges is around 40%. Against their calling ranges, this is drops to ~30%.
Like you say x/c looks the better option.
Note I play 6 max not full ring but would assume full ring people open up 99+ and AJ+ , appreciate solvers may say different, I was shocked to see 50nl rake structure 6 max UTG RFI selections having basically any ace and all suited KX
Working on a supposed full ring UTG open range of AJ+ and 99+ and JTs+ (a touch wider wouldn't suprise but neither a touch tighter )
I just think that he may not be 3betting 50% of JJ vs UTG based on him 3betting AQ. With AQ having blocker effects reducing AA and QQ from 6 combos of each to 3 combos of each and reducing AK from 16 combos to 12 combos I just think AQ is going to be a superior 3bet due to blocking UTG's continue by call or 4bet range where as JJ would make it more likely that UTG doesn't have JJ or JTs and and more likely he has the nuts as far as contiunuing goes if he had such a tiht range to begin with. Maybe If there is a prolific squeezer and UTG fold's to 3bets too much or opens too wide and this is actually knows that JJ as a 3bet may make a lot more sense. I can't see how he knows that with a small sample. It would be kwl to hear if someone thinks I'm missing something or thinks differently or even what a good UTG range is full ring for 100 NL rake structure, that would be ace (pun)
You can pretty much automatically x range on any board that's 3 to a straight except the broadway straight boards as OOP raiser I think, that may not be entirely accurate and a touch over simplified but is going to help you have a cohesive strategy rather than trying to nail some very low frequency mixed betting strategies.
Be the first to add a comment