10NL Fast-Fold: AA from SB facing UTG min-raise 260 BBs effective
Posted by EffenRiver
Posted by
EffenRiver
posted in
Low Stakes
10NL Fast-Fold: AA from SB facing UTG min-raise 260 BBs effective
This hand is an example of a situation in which I believe that we should play AA somewhat passively, given the flop texture and preflop action. I'm pretty comfortable with turn and river action - they seem to play themselves, as villain's range on the flop is a ton of smaller PPs, 7x, and probably an abnormally high number of random floats, with only combos that beat us (of which there are very few) likely to give us any significant action. I'd be interested to hear alternate opinions on this. I'm mainly looking for thoughts on 2 decision points:
Preflop 3-bet sizing: given villain's min-raise from UTG, I figured his range to be fairly wide, and decided to size down considerably from standard. My decision was based on a desire to widen both villain's calling and 4-betting ranges here. After the hand was over, I wonder if our stack sizes, being so deep, should have had me sizing up above standard rather than down.
Flop action: As I said, I believe this hand should play passively, in general, but I'm wondering if I should have considered checking this flop rather than c-betting. If we are going to c-bet most of the time here, what type of sizing should we be going with? I felt my flop sizing was actually too small, though I'm not inclined to go too much bigger. I'm wondering where we think the best sizing lies, or if we should bet here at all. Protection is clearly not an issue here, so we need to extract max value from a range of hands that is going to have missed a ton.
NL Holdem $0.1(BB)
HJ ($10.41)
CO ($42.95)
BTN ($10.98)
HERO ($54.91)
BB ($11.17)
UTG ($25.92)
Dealt to Hero: As Ah
UTG Raises To $0.20, HJ Folds, CO Folds, BTN Folds, HERO Raises To $0.55, BB Folds, UTG Calls $0.35
Hero SPR on Flop: [21.14 effective]
Flop ($1.20): 7h Js Jc
HERO Bets $0.30 (Rem. Stack: 54.06), UTG Calls $0.30 (Rem. Stack: 25.07)
Turn ($1.80): 7h Js Jc 3c
HERO Checks, UTG Bets $0.85 (Rem. Stack: 24.22), HERO Calls $0.85 (Rem. Stack: 53.21)
River ($3.50): 7h Js Jc 3c 3h
HERO Checks, UTG Bets $1.66 (Rem. Stack: 22.56), HERO Calls $1.66 (Rem. Stack: 51.55)
Loading 9 Comments...
I would not size down any pf my bests here just because we are deep.
PF i would go at least 3x, flop around half pot. Somewhat smaller on turn... and probably block bet/fold riv.
I don't think he'll bluff raise often enough... we're blocking AJ and A3s from his oppening range. It would be nice to have some stats on him, but overall I think he'll sometimes show up with 77, AJ, KJ, QJ maybe TJs and when we beat him 88,99,TT, slowplayed QQ,KK... ATcc, AQcc,AKcc
Maybe the above line is not good at all... it is just how I would have played it. I'm pretty unsure, I have been away from poker for more than a couple of years. I just got back :)
1st 3betting OOP with small sizing (deep or not) doesn't seems to me like a good strategy. You just invite more hands to play vs you and generally most parts of villain calls gets more EV( because need to call smaller 3bet).
2nd. I like your postflop line (1/4 or 1/3 or 1/2 flop cbet is possible strategy too).
Yeah, even as shallow as 30bb deep the preflop solvers seems to prefer a 3bet size like 100% pot.
I haven't made strong models to test the difference a remaining player that can cold 4bet has on 3bet size yet (i.e. difference between 3bet from SB and BB). The linear nature of a SB 3bet range in games with high rake also seems to make a slightly smaller 3bet appropriate in SB compared to in BB. Regardless of those effects you should not 3bet to less than 3.5x the open size.
I had a student a couple of years ago that kept making the small 3bets OOP until he understood how pot odds, EV and being OOP affects things. When I explained that allowing villain to make +EV calls with almost all hands that is opened has to get that extra EV from somewhere he started to get it and size more appropriately. That extra EV villains marginal hands gets, when you use a small size instead of a bigger one, comes from a reduction in the EV of hands in your 3bet range.
I ran some sims and 5x 3bet against 2.5x BTN open is a little better than 4x 3bet from SB regardless if you have a CC range or not. The CC range doesn't add any win rate with 500z rake and it was like 0.1bb/10 lower than no CC range for 3bb cap rake (solver calls some slightly -EV hands because it's not 100% converged).
Range composition is different when you 3bet 5x open compared to smaller. Blocker effects are more important with the large 3bet size.
Think this played really poorly. Assuming we have no reads, UTG is most likely a fish min raising, so 3betting this small is especially bad. Versus a reg with no history, probably go like $1.20 for value and vs a fish I'd go at least $1.50 probably a bit more sometimes. (You're never increasing their 4bet range, basically ever. They just called with insanely good odds IP deep, and get a great opportunity to try and win a huge pots vs you postflop)
The flop sizing is far too small. He's gonna call so often with trash. 7x, PP's, ace hi floats etc so betting this tiny is a big mistake in my opinion. I'd bet at least hpsb, maybe a touch more.
Turn, again, too small. I'd be barreling the turn around hp for value since people hate folding these paired boards. I wouldn't be surprised to see less than 7x call. Hands like 1 pair less than 7x, lots of 7x (A7, 67, 97, 87 etc) plus maybe AK or something from time to time. Also, they are likely to raise Jx here a fair amount on flop or turn (especially since we're deep and everybody thinks a raise on a dry board is a bluff) so we can be happier with our equity the vast majority of the time going to the river.
And because of the above reason, I'd also be barreling river for value. I'd bet a touch over half pot since the hpsb looks too value orientated and a slight increase in sizing won't narrow their range too much. I'd expect our river equity to be pretty high when called.
Thanks, everyone. I definitely agree with everyone's thoughts on not lowering the 3-bet size pre. All together, I think sizing up pre and c-betting just a tad larger feels pretty good here. I checked the flop situation out on Flopzilla, and it looks like villain has around 30% continues with hands we beat. Given the strength of our hand and the unlikelihood of hands we beat drawing out on us, I believe I'll stand by my turn and river x/c's, because even when villain continues with hands we beat, he's never happy to see a lot of aggression, so I think we get the most money in ahead when villain is given the chance to barrel into us.
With regards to your logic for checking turn and river, if villain might barrel into us and we can bluff catch, then why can't villain think we are barreling into him?
Also, checking just allows so many cheap SD's since when you check/call you always have SDV and villain will play really well with the middle of their range, like 88, 99, TT etc. In other words, they'll just check back river. By barreling he might call which is of course wrong because he can put us on air. What if we have AK in his eyes? He can be making a sizeable mistake folding. What about river? Is he going to fold in what would be a $12 pot for like $6 with TT or QQ or something when you can be completely bluffing? People hate folding, especially at 10nl. I think by checking it's too weak tight and easy for villain and we miss out on so much value immediately and the implied value based on our aggression levels/image.
Swifffft, I think you make a really good point here, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond again. I like the idea of barreling a value-heavy range in a spot like this, especially when taking into account the number of call-down hands villain has in his range, as opposed to floats that would likely fire into us after a check.
In this hand as it actually played out, villain, if he was strong enough, would likely have raised me on the turn and bombed the river - he showed up Ac6c, having turned the nut flush draw. Even with villain taking that line, I'm fairly certain I still win this hand, though with a much bigger pot, as I've got villain coolered, in a sense, by having the exact hand that leaves only 1 combo of AJ suited - and I'm never giving him credit for any other Jx here, given the action.
Be the first to add a comment