[25NL] 4-bet AQs BTN vs BB - Getting donked into on K turn
Posted by Shaun Pauwels
Posted by
Shaun Pauwels
posted in
Low Stakes
[25NL] 4-bet AQs BTN vs BB - Getting donked into on K turn
Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 (6 Players)
BN: $27.44 (Hero)
SB: $37.90
BB: $38.84
UTG: $78.26
MP: $31.50
CO: $59.03
SB: $37.90
BB: $38.84
UTG: $78.26
MP: $31.50
CO: $59.03
Preflop
($0.35)
Hero is BN with
A
Q
, , , , ,
I know a 3x opening size isn't standard but my current strategy is opening 3x to see less flops and pay less rake. When I get 3-bet this super small OOP it's a weird spot. AQs feels too strong to just call though and decide to 4-bet a bit below 3x his sizing.
Flop
($10.10)
7
5
2
, ,
Pretty good flop. We still have range advantage and lots of overcards against calling ranges. So small cbet size seems normal.
Turn
($15.90)
7
5
2
K
, ,
And here is a super weird moment, getting donked into on a card that is super good for us. We have AK more often, KK and AA he shouldn't.
Enormously draw heavy board BB could be doing this with. Was doubting between all three options. Given I'm not blocking draws, blocking paired AXs +slowplayed AK + KQ, and have outs against hero calls with 7x or pocket pairs I decided to bluff jam.
I could run this through a solver but all I'm going to see is that BB should not be donking on the turn.
Enormously draw heavy board BB could be doing this with. Was doubting between all three options. Given I'm not blocking draws, blocking paired AXs +slowplayed AK + KQ, and have outs against hero calls with 7x or pocket pairs I decided to bluff jam.
I could run this through a solver but all I'm going to see is that BB should not be donking on the turn.
Loading 6 Comments...
Im not a huge fan of your line tbh.
First of all I dont understand the 4bet IP pre. IMO this is too thin for value vs unknown.
Therefore you get called OOP i would assume a somewhat decent range by villain (99+, KJs+, AQs+, some SCs) Nevertheless we still have a (small i guess) rangeadvantage OTF and Cbet is ok.
As it comes to the turn i can follow your argumentation, that we still have the range advantage on the K. But X/call, donk a twotone-turn in a 4BP looks pretty strong to me. There ist still a lot of KX in villains range that might take this line and he might also B/C some pairs here (or AQhh).
Im pretty sure that you are overbluffing this spot if you add this specific combo into your shove line. remember: we have a lot of potential hands OTT that might take this line and have much more Equity than this AQ-combo.
cheers
I can agree with most what you said.
AQs is normally not in my 4-bet range. Against this small sizing I felt like I had to expand my 4-bet range. I'll elaborate. The BB is normally a rather polarized 3-bet range due to already having invested 1BB and getting great odds on just a call. Which is why you tend to see bigger 3-bet sizes from that position. Which is why on the BTN we also want a more polarized 4-bet range as well. Polar vs polar.
AQ in itself is rather bad as a 4-bet against a polarized range. We isolate ourselves against better when called or are feeling rough when we get 5-bet.
But when BB goes for a smaller raise all that goes out the window. This should no longer be such a polarized BB range. It's very likely containing a lot of broadway combo's, pocket pairs, suited Ax, suited connectors. And against that range AQ seems like a clear 4-bet for value. You yourself indicated "99+, KJs+, AQs+, some SCs" for their range. Isn't AQs still good against that? We have close to 50% equity with this hand vs that range and have the benefit of folding out equity of opponent. Plus we will overrealise equity because we're IP.
Flop we agree, standard.
Does BB really have a lot of Kx though? KQhh, KJhh, KThh floats with the backdoor are gone. KQdd, KJdd and KTdd are the only 3 combo's he could have, assuming he never raises those on the flop.
Then there's the possibility of villain having AKo and floating it which I can get behind but it shouldn't be the full 9 combo's. Most are 5-bet preflop. Some might fold on flop.
So I'm not convinced BB has a lot of Kx at all.
I agree that I am likely overbluffing if I bluff this hand, assuming I want to have a big raising range at all. I would guess BB is out of line and bluffing too much so I would want to call with a lot of strong hands and allow BB to bluff rivers. And when we call with nut draws ourselves then we can bluff if we miss on river or fold when bet into.
I do find that a hand such as this, despite having low equity when called, is a really great bluff hand. We don't block villains bluffing range (diamonds, hearts) and we do block his value range, even if it is thinly, by blocking AK, KQ (might not be relevant given the suit), A7s, A5s, A2s.
I think if I want a bluffing range here I would look at AcQd, AsQd first. Given I might not have those in my preflop 4-bet range all the time I would look at AcQc and AsQs next for sure.
But it could just be that we don't want a raising range at all. Hard to solve tbh.
And maybe this just isn't worth the time to look into? Given it's such an uncommon spot after all.
EDIT: I'm not a huge fan of my line either btw. At least not on the turn. Which is why I posted this here, wondering which line others would take.
You might as well shove any two OTT. It's cool it worked but shouldn't you do that with more equity?
Would having more equity matter more than blocking his folding range and blocking his calling range. It's hard to tell without a decent grasp on his range because the spot is so weird.
I doubt I'll ever find myself in this spot again.
I would call the 3bet pre. I hate your postflop play, AQcc goes into your check folding range on this board.
This is mainly out of curiosity. Why are you creating a checking range here? And which hands would you put in them?
Be the first to add a comment