low flush gets shoved on in 3bet pot
Posted by zinom1
Posted by
zinom1
posted in
Low Stakes
low flush gets shoved on in 3bet pot
Blinds: $0.50/$1.00 (6 Players)
BN: $103.72
SB: $81.53
BB: $100.00
UTG: $106.63
MP: $37.33
CO: $102.28 (Hero)
SB: $81.53
BB: $100.00
UTG: $106.63
MP: $37.33
CO: $102.28 (Hero)
V is reg with 12% 3bet over 235 hands
Preflop
($1.50)
Hero is CO with
5
4
, , , ,
Mix between call and fold vs 3bet
Flop
($15.50)
2
9
A
, , ,
Decied to XR as flush draw+gutshot tend to be high/pure frequency XRaises
Turn
($52.22)
2
9
A
7
, ,
Dont see any bluffs as any hand thats could be used as bluff is very natural to call (stuff like AXd or KKd)
Loading 14 Comments...
You are raising his his small cbet with a hand that can also naturally call and you can't see him doing the same with pair+diamond? Fold pre, call flop and easy call vs turn shove.
Both pre and flop are standard. Turn is the difficult spot because my hand seems too strong to fold but its difficult to put V on a bluff
HI zinom1, are you sure pre is standard? i see it like JamesYang : i can imagine better spots than playing 54s OOP in a 3bet pot. Also you wouldnt have ended in domination hell ;) but just imho
my hand is too strong to fold but its difficult to put villain on a bluff = my hand is actually pretty weak because everyone is a nit at my stake and i cant even feel good getting in all in with a 5 high flush in a 3 flush board in a 3bet pot
in this case, you need to fold pre
i personally think this is not a standard call pre and an easy fold, so i dont get into this spot often, but isn't this what you wanted with a hand like 54s? if this is a standard call pre shouldn't u feel really happy in this spot and call it off with hesitation? sorry if it feels like im interrogating you but im just looking for logical continuity.
Isn't pre just opening 54s like 25% of the time but when getting 3bet always calling? Guess if always opening 54s then a mix, like zinom said.
Didn't comment on the hand because I'm not comfortable enough on BTN vs CO 3bet pots to give advice, but on that board the flop raise is standard for sure.
The turn from villain is unexpected, zinom does present a good point of being hard for a human to find bluffs there. The A of diamonds being on the board is encouraging but we can expect someone with a 12% 3bet stat to be 3 betting all the higher suited stuff than ours at 100% frequency so he will have a very considerable amount of higher flushes than ours there.`
Think it might be a great spot for an exploitative fold yeah, we get crushed by his value and are not crushing his bluffs, if we think he is under bluffing probably saving a ton of money folding and aren't losing that much if wrong as this is our lowest possible flush
Preflop is super standard. Solver ranges have 54s opening like 25% but always calling 3bet. A 12% 3bettor is going to be playing something approaching solver ranges so it is important to call hands like this to avoid him being able expand his range even wider and to have board coverage.
Your other posts in thread show a misunderstanding of ranges and how total EV comes together from ALL branches of the game tree. We don't need to be fist pumping when all the money goes in in order to keep a hand in our range. Getting all in on the turn this way is just one small branch of the game tree. Considering removing a hand from our range because it isn't the stone cold nuts even in favorable situations is missing the forest for the trees.
Typically when the money goes in, both ranges are very strong and it's natural to question the weakest parts of our range.
At equilibrium villain should never raise flushes here. Basically winning another bet from all your AQ type hands and some additional bluffs is worth more than protecting against a 4th diamond or board pair killing his action. And even when I node lock you still have to defend all your flushes here otherwise you won't ever meet MDF.
The equilibrium has villain doing a lot of 3betting flop with AxKd type hands. I expect most players to call these much more often than they should. So villain is going to get to the turn with a lot more bluff candidates than equilibrium. I also expect most players to jam AA and 99 more than they should on turn. So I think even in the real world we're not getting away from flushes on the turn against someone that appears to be an aggro reg.
it might be weak and im not a solver guy, but for me 54s is a steal from CO and if i get a resteal i fold and move on to the next hand xD
joeeey JamesYang preflop is pretty standard. If Hero has a decent opening range the range will look range something from 30-38%. My standard would be opening ~400combos in CO. Villain's 3bet gives us an MDF of 39% so we should defend 156 combos not including the 4bet/call and 4bet/fold range.
If Villain has a 3bet% of ~11% and we plan on 4betting to 16/17bb then Villain's 5bet/fold range would look something like (TT+, AKo, AKs) vs that range we should be able to 4b/call (QQ+) [18combos] profitably and bluff (AQo, KQo/AJo 50% of the time)[16combos]. The 4bet ranges are assuming Villain's F4B is 50%. BU should be incentivized to 3bet wider here because CO's range is normally wide and BU wouldn't want SB or BB to gain EV from squeezing if BU + position post flop.
As you see, we still have to defend 156 combos to the 3bet excluding the hands we are 4bet calling and bluffing in order to make Villain's 3bet 0EV. 54s may or may not fall into the 3bet call range because of it's postflop playability as I would rather call with lower suited hands rather than with lower pocket pairs because of their inability to improve. It really depends on how Villain plays postflop in 3bet pots on whether I'm substituting the lower pocket pairs with other suited gappers etc.
Also, calling with lower suited connectors/gappers gives us the probability of having 2 live cards. It is sometimes tough calling with JTs-T9s because we're going to face domination issues in specific 3bet scenarios.
zinom1 The shove on the Turn is very interesting. If Villain's 3bet range is ~10-11% the hands we would be able to get value from are: AA, 99 (let's keep those in since he can slowplay top and middle set), A9s, A7s, AxKd and [maybe] AxQd (16 combos). The hands we lose to are KQdd, KJdd, QJdd, JTdd, T9dd, 98dd, 76dd (7 combos).
Hero risks $60 to win $196 and should be good ~30%. Hero's equity against those ranges is 1 - (7/16) = ~56% so it should be a +EV shove.
Definitely an interesting spot here and I think Villain should've played more cautiously if he called the raise with hands that don't block flushes. With the low SPR it's tough folding a flush since Villain might be shoving with hands that require a lot of protection -- a lot would vary on player tendencies
Just a note that MDF applies best in river situations where you either win or lose when you defend. We may actually have to defend more than MDF with cards to come because villain has equity with bluffs.
Will take note! I've been using the MDF to formulate preflop ranges in accordance to 3b% and F4B% against different types of Villains. Will have to look into river situations when I get there
I think 4betting to defend also has some interesting implications that mean we actually have to defend less often. It I don’t fully understand this and can’t recall what video I heard it in a while back.
I think this is a fold preflop and a 100% open pre, unless maybe both blinds were tough/button was hyper aggro. Game dynamic>solver range; we are playing against varying degrees of skill, so that takes precedence, and only use fallback range of optimal when unknown imo. An important thing to remember when looking at solves is the stake. Pretty sure the high rake at 100nl makes this a fold. Also, people tend to not be that aggressive w their 3bets at 100nl. Since you only have a hand sample, guessing you may be on bovada/ignition. I wouldn’t look that deep into it to start defending this wide until I knew he was really getting out there, and even then we have a high rake structure to
consider
Honestly I'm a bit shocked that some people are saying this is not pure open from CO. I would never fold it unless I'm facing only tough regs in BU-BB positions.
Flop both raise and call are fine, on turn easy call. He can be doing it with AxKd, KxKd or even sets. Not folding on 100bb.
Well, that's what solver ranges are - everyone playing "optimally".
But even in circumstances where you have worse players left to act, the EV of the hand isn't going to skyrocket. These bottom of range hands are still going to be very close to zero EV except maybe at a really weak tight table.
In a normal cash game sure whatever open it every time at a weak table. In zoom, probably just mix because mostly you can move on to the next hand and maximize hourly rather than fight out that 0.001BB edge
Be the first to add a comment