50NLz --> Line check
Posted by SPrince
Posted by
SPrince
posted in
Low Stakes
50NLz --> Line check
Co is a weakish reg, his stats are 22/18/4 with 8% cc from the Co.
Loading 9 Comments...
Looks fine. I think he shoves good trips here enough for us to call off.
i think this man got Q on hand too. So that your AQ could beat JQ,KQ,TQ etc... Good trap on river
I dunno, this is one of those spots where trips isn't actually much stronger than top pair was on the turn. I think it's a cuspy spot and we are maybe meant to be x/r'ing this one sometimes and x/c'ing it others. It seems fine though.
Think i should`v left out his stats as well (left out explo reads), but this is second nuts vs this villain so without a doubt a must raise.
I posted the hand because i`m interested about how wide of a range we arrive/should arrive to the river with GT wise {vs wider cc range}, and which part of that range do we x/r for value/bluff, assuming villain is completely incompetent of folding Qx.
I don't think villain can even valuebet QT on the river using the betsizes he's used, let alone call a x/r with it. QT-QJ is about the cusp for his valuebetting imo. When he faces a raise of the size we chose he has to call with <50% of his river range, so he'll continue with (in his eyes) 10 combos which beat us, 8 combos which tie with us, and probably the point where he starts thinking about folding is KQ-QJish.
So, after looking at the spot more in depth I think yeah, this is almost certainly not a good raise OTR. It certainly doesn't help that with our exact hand villain only has 2 combos AQ, 4 combos KQ, 1 combo QJ, 1 combo QT, vs. 9 combos 22-77, so even if he really is calling with every Q we're actually still valuecutting ourselves by getting called by 9 better combos and 8 worse ones.
@JoL, explo wise its a very easy raise vs this villain {doesnt have 22,44 in his range, will b/c 100% Qx combos otr}, but lets disregard that.
If he was unknown 50NL weak reg we don`t have larger sample on, with card removal his b/c range otr looks like 77,44,22,AQs,KQs,QTs+,AQo,{98ss,T9ss,JTss,KJss,KTss 50%}.
The problem with your logic is that our x/r range otr is gonna be 100% nutted when we take this line and that can`t be correct range vs range.
You are saying that villain will never fold a Q, which would mean that vs a x/r this guy would call 23 combos and fold 3, so I'm not sure why our x/r range otr wouldn't be nutty. If we somehow know that someone is folding 11.5% of the time to a bet he's meant to fold over 50% of the time to for it to be a breakeven bluff we should not ever ever ever ever ever ever ever be bluffing that person.
If villain actually does fold the right amount to our x/r with that range he needs to fold around his worst 13 combos, which would leave him calling with 9 combos of sets and half of his AQ combos, which would make this a very very bad x/r with AQ.
The villain you are describing who is bet/calling 100% of Qx combos otr is fucking terrible at poker, like that is a very very large mistake. I would be careful assuming something like that about an opponent because I don't think you can actually confidently say that it is true and if villain is in fact playing moderately reasonably we are going to end up being the ones making a large mistake with this play.
No i meant range-range vs stronger player that is gonna call more correctly, ofc agree readless flatting is better.
I think it is really close between raising and calling the river. He has all sets (on the flop) & some Qx & some bluffs. But I don't believe he's calling a raise with all Qx, maybe KQ or better. I think that if your raise is called you're beat too often so I like x/c more.
Be the first to add a comment