,,What value hands do you overbet with? If you can have 77-99 and JTs yourself with this line it makes a bit more sense, but you will often cbet these (not 88).´´ I totally agree .. actually its pretty unbalaced maybe sometimes i ill do with AA or KK ,, but dont know ,,

That was just pretty exploitative play .. normally i use with this combo draws 1/3 on flop then 2/3 turn -(sometimes check ,, also same size with just a pair on flop then if i improve my hand on turn i ill continue 2/3 or check call . What do you think ?

I definitely don't like it as an exploitative play, I think villain is relatively inelastic with his calling range here, so a normal bet sizing would get the job done. Personally I only bluff in situations where I take the same line with some good value bets.

We do stop him raising as much, but this hand can continue against a raise.

If the turn was a 3 rather than 8 then opponent has less strong value, and we could maybe try this with eg A4hh A5hh balanced with some strong hands, but I still don't like it much.

I don't like this line. 2 barrel is reasonable but 3rd barrel is dodgy, we block loads of his missed draws and we don't block his calling hands. I much prefer giving up river.

Mixing bet and check on the flop is fine with this hand.

i cheated and looked into ai/solver and they agree with you: bet 2 streets check and checking on most if not all rivers if missed. So I guess im a spewtard then.

That's not cheating! That's what you're supposed to do.

OOP Strategy OTF. With standard bet sizes PIO chooses to c-bet 30% pot 93% of the time

OOP Strategy OTT when IP called our bet. Strategy here is to CHECK 100%. Bet sizes provided were 30, 50, 70, 100, 120 and 150% pot

This is IP's assumed raise/call range against SB 3bet

I wonder how your solver come up with 2nd barrel OTT here. Were the ranges you used very different from mine? Very interesting deviation.

Thanks for this analysis. What this demonstrates is how the 8 is a better card for villain than us, to the point where the solver only checks. The IP calling range used gives him a lot of strength on this board, in reality random villain's calling range is not exactly like this (eg full weightings of lower SCs), but it seems reasonable. It also confirms that the overbet is a big deviation from optimal.

Yeah, the ranges are adapted from a 100BB 6-max monker solution (with slightly differnt sizings and also differnt weighting). Average villain's range will be different! :D

...Yeah 8 is a horrible card for us

IP EV on different turns

OOP EV on different turns

Wow that is an extreme difference, I was not expecting it to be that much worse than a 9,T,J. This may be because we have discounted suited gappers entirely, but it still gets the point across that an 8 is a horrible card for us.

I gave it

30, 50, 65% OTF
30, 50, 70, 100, 120, 150% OTT and
30, 50, 80, 100, 120, 150% OTR
for both players

and also 50% raises for each, so they have a raising range as well...

OOP Range:
AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,99,88:0.5,77:0.5,AK,AQ,AJs,ATs:0.5,A9s:0.5,A8s:0.5,A5s:0.5,A4s:0.5,A3s:0.5,KQs,KJs,KTs,QJs:0.5,QTs:0.5,JTs:0.5

IP Range:
TT,99,88:0.5,77:0.5,33:0.5,22:0.5,AKs,AQs,AQo:0.5,AJs,AJo:0.5,ATs,A9s,A8s:0.35,A7s:0.35,A6s:0.35,A5s:0.8,A4s:0.8,A3s:0.35,A2s:0.35,KQs,KQo:0.5,KJs,KTs,QJs,QTs,JTs,T9s,98s:0.5,76s,65s,54s

It chose the 30% raise OTF 93% of the time and check OTT almost 100%

Solutions were calculated to very high accuracy.

Maybe I made a mistake.... Would be very interesting to find out why we come up with different strategies in the same scenario!

I ran the solver again with no raising ranges and now it continues betting the turn 75% of our range while making a 150% overbet with AhTh.

When it goes check check OTF it c-bets the turn 100% of our range while choosing only a 50% bet... On the flop though it still never chooses a large sizing!

The strategies change drastically, depending on whether villain has hands that he will raise to our c-bet. When I think about it, it might have been better not to give villain a raising range...