NL10 3bet pot AA on KQT vs Aggro Fish

Posted by

Posted by posted in Low Stakes

NL10 3bet pot AA on KQT vs Aggro Fish

Blinds: $0.05/$0.10 (9 Players) BN: $21.08
SB: $10.00 (Hero)
BB: $45.06
UTG: $14.62
UTG+1: $10.00
MP: $10.10
MP+1: $12.32
MP+2: $18.39
CO: $7.94
Preflop ($0.15) Hero is SB with A A
UTG raises to $0.30, 6 folds, Hero raises to $1.20, BB folds, UTG calls $0.90
Flop ($2.50) K Q T
Hero bets $1.20, UTG calls $1.20
Turn ($4.90) K Q T 2
Hero bets $2.50, UTG folds

Hi guys, my first post here. So this hand was against a pretty aggressive fish 47/25 over 200+ hands. His fold to 3bet was pretty low 10%. What do you think about my bet ott? I guess it's fine but I could go for a check/shove also, given his tendency to call cbets otf and fold ott. Also he floated the turn before 2 out of 2 times in normal pots.

7 Comments

Loading 7 Comments...

Kalichakra 9 years, 11 months ago

xC OTF and xF OTT are my standards as well but vs such opponents i might find myself xC'ing down sometimes.

As an OOP betting strategy in general you want to have a hand with some sort of robust equity ( mostly good draws, 2p+ ). By betting AA you turn this hand effectively into a bluff since your one pair hand won't be good OTR and you're basically hoping to catch a J.

Theo 9 years, 11 months ago

I had a completely different perspective but yeah makes sense guys, thanks. Looking over it again, I would be calling this hand down since villain is very spewy and aggressive.

Samu Patronen 9 years, 11 months ago

Your hand is not that strong on this flop, villain has a lot of hands that beat you on this board. I would start by checking and start potcontrolling right away, usually calling 1-2 bets and folding the river. Betting twice is not that attractive since villain can have KK/QQ/TT/AJ/KQ, a lot of hands that we're in bad shape againts.

If villain checks back the flop, we can pretty comfortably bet turn and river for value on most turns and rivers.

Limp Limpson 9 years, 11 months ago

I obv agree, but I wanna be a nit and pinpoint a semantics issue.

Pot control is a concept that works IP and IP only. We cannot pot control OOP, its quite the opposite, we giveup our control over the size of the pot and let the villain decide how big the pot gets. We just manipulate a range that we are facing.

Samu Patronen 9 years, 11 months ago

Yeah that's true, I might have used the term wrong. But we are potcontrolling in a sense that villain can't raise us. Therefore we don't allow villain to make a pot huge by raising if we check, whereas if we bet and villain raises, pot becomes huge.

But yeah, "potcontrol" is probably not a right term to use when we're OOP. :P

Be the first to add a comment

Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy