99 in 3-bet pot on paired board with flush OTR
Posted by HinduReal
Posted by
HinduReal
posted in
Low Stakes
99 in 3-bet pot on paired board with flush OTR
MP: $5.68 (Hero)
CO: $10.24
BN: $3.51
SB: $5.00
BB: $11.70
I already had a fair bit of discussion about this hand over on 2+2. But I'd like to get some more feedback. I'm wondering about one alternative line in particular.
First a few thoughts on how I judge villain. While the sample size is too small to read much into the 3bet stat, the overall picture (3bet + VP/PFR gap) makes it likely that villain uses a rather value-oriented, linear 3-betting range. Even from the SB. Say JJ+, AK, and maybe AQs. Also, he's pretty straight-forward post-flop (CB, FCB).
The line I wonder about is overbetting the river. Once villain checks OTR, I think his range is very SDV-heavy but never nutted, say JJ+ w/o QQ. I assume that most AK turn give-ups - especially those with a heart - would bet OTR. So, once villain checks I think we are pretty much always beat with our nines. Also, we are at the bottom of our range OTR and have more flushes (and maybe queens!) in our range. While I don't know if that villain type folds an overpair on that board, betting big/shoving should make for a rather tough call. Also, we can rep flushes pretty well (and since villain never has a queen/FH, I'd comfortably play them in the same way).
I kinda like this line as I don't assume our SDV to ever be good here against that villain type. Any takes?
(In-game I didn't take that line and expected to see AK quite often but after thinking about it more, I'd actually eliminate at least 7 combos from his checking-range OTR)
Loading 5 Comments...
As nitty as it may sound I'd just fold 99 against the flop cbet.
I assign villain preflop range of AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,AK,AQs,AJs,A5s,KQs so he probably has way better equity on this board than you and 99,88,66 are bottom of your range imo - even JJ and TT suck but they make slightly better calls against above range cbet.
TT with a heart is probably my lowest threshold for calling this 2/3pot cbet with that SPR.
Anything else that doesn't hit a queen or a flush draw on this flop I just fold.
As played checking down and hoping to win against his give ups has to be best since he's never folding a better hand than yours imo.
And especially at 5nl you can just wait for much better spot to gamble your stack away.
The reason I called OTF is basically that I expected his range to be much narrower. I might be wrong though (#samplesize). When your estimation is correct, it's certainly a fold. Vs a narrower range containing relatively more AK and fewer combos with a Q it's still close but I don't mind it IP.
I did some playing around with my range on the turn and river. My conclusion is that I would range check the turn (even if balance wasn't a concern b/c villain doesn't have too many hands I could get 3 streets from on that board). I'd arrive at the river with 10 combos I'd value bet, 12 combos I'd check behind and 6 combos of 99, literally at the bottom of my range.
Now, the question is, basically, if I do want to have a bluffing range on that river vs that villain type on 5NL. Most people tend to think no. In that case - and to come full circle - it's probably the case that calling OTF is actually not worth it.
I feel like if your goal is to bluff out JJ and TT you should be betting the turn, as it's much harder for them to call there. As a bonus you get protection against AK's six outs.
You're not folding anyone at 5nl off of AA/KK on this board.
Seems ambitious to run a big bluffs in this pool until u get some kind of idea of his calling/folding range
Not referring to the hand in question but as a general remark:
I just recently took up poker again after not playing for like 5 years. So I'm by no means an expert on the micros pool (I played 20-something k hands so far). That said, at least when it comes to Stars - where you probably have the toughest micros pool - I wouldn't use the above as my basic assumption.
At least in 5NL, you have a rather heterogeneous reg pool with a few archetypes, e.g.:
a) nitty, passive, pretty straight-forward
b) surprisingly decent players (i.e. solid ranges in many spots)
c) overly aggressive 2007-style players
My database is by no means large enough to give valid estimates of the distribution. So I go with a guesstimate based on the tables I'm usually sitting at. You'll usually have 1, sometimes 2 fish at the (6max) table. The other players are usually randomly distributed on the competency scale and, thus, often capable of folding decent hands.
Therefore, I think it's a critical skill to put the regs in the correct subgroup quickly. Whereas you might find more homogeneous reg pool (i.e. a common foundational competency level), I wouldn't advise coming up with broad population reads in the micros pool. Villains there are literally all over the place
Be the first to add a comment