I agree with you, still there's some hesitancy within me if they are neccessarily underfolding value (Kx) in a spot like this where I don't have any obvious blufs,. Probably they still are on average.

I guess what it boils down to is that whenever it's good, it's marginally profitable, but potentially it can be quite disastrous in events like you describe (when he ships AK f.e.)

If we are going to have a raising range OTT I assume it would be very thin, the only hands I would include for value would be 33, 99 and 96s (not 100% though), therefore we don´t need many bluffs. The problem with picking QJcc, QTcc and JTcc is that we heavily block villain´s bluffing (and folding) range, so I think I would chose a hand like A3 without clubs, blocking AK, AA and 33 and call with 9Xcc and the other gutshot+Fd´s. Not sure if this logic is correct though, let me know what you think!

hey elbabbelino, just wanted to say that i ran a quick sim on SimplePostflop of the turn spot with some aproximated ranges after the flop and you were right about using hands like T9cc as bluffs here. the program recomends check raising a good percentage of two pairs + that we still have, along with a a decent portion of 9xcc. Hands such as QJcc or JTcc like I suggest always go as calls here. I think that´s because we block so much of villain´s bluffs with those hands that we rather use 9xcc. GL on the gring

Cool explanation, makes sense! Thanks for doing the sim

oh, and it also prefers a pot size raise way more than the 2/3 pot (close to what u did). with the pot option it almost always picks this sizing, and when I turned it off, the raising frequency got a lot lower, prob because with a 2/3 sizing we are giving too good odds for NFD´s or gutshots + fd´s to peel IP

I know man, I was just exploring the GTO theory behind this spot vs a competent oponent. Though I think a bigger sizing is good in this spot, otherwise we give his draws and Kx hands too good of a price.

Yeah but if we want to charge draws we aren't bluffing, but at the same time our "made hand" doesn't do well enough against his calling range to be value either.

Very insightful!

In-game I expected (for a not objectively solid reason) to have a lot of immediate FE, this was the main reason for me to XR, plus I didn't expect to have much SDV at all unimproved.

I realize the contradictory nature of these statements (which probably is why one of them must be wrong for the other to be right), but in-game I reasoned I could get a high % of Kx to fold (which is also contradictory to my 'std' observation of them under-folding that part of their ranges vs aggression).

Still I figured in-game that on this kind of texture it was more likely for villains to fold vs XR OTT, since it is tough to find blufs for me. In hindsight, I would have liked to first have some objective data on population tendencies (like a high fold vs XR OTT vs B/B on a dry flop) before executing on that insight. Now, it lacked both a logical, as well as an empirical, basis to follow through with this play. Your points 4&5 only strengthen this conclusion (turn FE must be really high for XR to become better than XC). No good enough reason for me to believe this was the case.

I wouldn't say your decision to X/R is bad, as yet again it is probably +EV considering your equity. If you are against a good 10 NL reg, he will know that turn X/Rs are very strong from the population and will overfold accordingly. When I was moving through the microstakes, I exploited this tendency very often.

This play becomes a lot better if you're trying to exploit overfolding but points 4&5 still stand. I'd choose a much weaker draw to X/R that you are very comfortable folding to a 3B and also if we believe a reg is overfolding turn then his river range becomes very strong and we should be rarely bluffing!

Pretty good to point out what +ev is. It's become a norm in poker to say anything better than folding is "+ev". As you rightly point out, if something is truely +ev or not depends on what you compare it to, given that in most of these situations of raise or call - folding is not something anyone would seriously consider anyway so it's a kind of silly comparison we all fall back on.