Zoom 200 - 4bet pot AA weird river spot
Posted by Nick Howard
Posted by
Nick Howard
posted in
Mid Stakes
Zoom 200 - 4bet pot AA weird river spot
BN: $400.84
SB: $212.32
BB: $155.20
UTG: $295.08
HJ: $345.50
CO: $242.96 (Hero)
SB: $212.32
BB: $155.20
UTG: $295.08
HJ: $345.50
CO: $242.96 (Hero)
Preflop
($3.00)
(6 Players)
Hero was dealt
A
A
UTG folds, HJ folds, Hero raises to $6, BN folds, SB raises to $20, BB folds, Hero raises to $40, SB calls $20
UTG folds, HJ folds, Hero raises to $6, BN folds, SB raises to $20, BB folds, Hero raises to $40, SB calls $20
Flop
($89.00)
9
6
4
(2 Players)
SB checks,
Hero checks
Turn
($89.00)
9
6
4
Q
(2 Players)
SB bets $48,
Hero calls $48
River
($185.00)
9
6
4
Q
Q
(2 Players)
SB checks
jam or check?
Loading 19 Comments...
Any exploitative reads on villain that make u want to chk flop? Rvr seems like a pretty clear jam. villains Qx will generally be AQs/o and KQo/s that he decided to 3b then peel a 4b maybe some suited Qx bluffs that decided to peel the 4b when getting such a gd price. We block AQ and villain deciding to chk rvr with Qx+ hands would be weird also.
Also Villain can't assume we have many Qx in our 4b range.
no reads on villain, so in a vaccuum i think the following things would be good assumptions:
-it's very likely that he has most combos of AQ OTT, and that he bets the vast majority of them
-It's unlikely that he v-bets JJ OTT, and even more likely that he didn't 5bet it pre
-It's unlikely that he didn't 5bet KK pre, but postflop his line would make perfect sense with it
-Villain may or may not be aware that it's pretty hard for me to hit the Q OTT in this line. He probably perceives my hand ott as :
AK, potentially some 9x, some drawing hands, some very very small amount of Q-lo suited that was giving up OTF (since it's a spot where the vast majority of my air should likely auto-cbet).
When I jam river he likley perceives that i am polarized to Qx or draw
Why so small pre?
Why check the flop?
Id still jam. I dont think youre ever beat here but that might just be me. Pretty tough (id say almost impossible) to predict the EVs of all your river options in general.
I'd check back river, unlikely villain leads a pair worse than Qx on the turn, so his turn leading range is mostly Qx or air, when he checks river he's obv not x/c'n with the air which leaves his only worse calling hand at KK - which would probably stack off pre. He can definitely check Qx on river if he thinks you could get here with any JT/KT type stuff and he can also quite easily have 44/66/99.
I think you're on to something here, i'd like see more discussion on what you guys think he he could have for value here OTT that i'm dominating.
villain will never have 44/66 (prob just 5b jams/folds) and maybe never 99 3betting from the SB here and flatting a 4b. We need to have some strong expo. reasons about villains 3b and peel a 4b range here to make checking the flop better than betting. Something like he would rarely flat TT-QQ but will always peel b/ws such that we can give free cards so he can improve to a hand we can extract some bets from or bluff later streets when we chk. His range should generally be pretty polarised OTR but its so unlikely were beat its probably best to let heroes be heroes.
If he plays 3b/fold from the sb he can easily have them all. Especially given hero's 4b sizing.
Why so much concern about checking back the flop when we have position in a 2 street SPR spot with the near nuts? It seems like the only argument would be that we lose our market vs hands that are ready to stack off immediately , and i think that this happens pretty rarely and could be offset by the extra $ we pick up when he improves to a worse hand or bluffs a future street
food for thought:
If I never check back here with anything nutted, and i'm completely capped at AK, does villain have strategies he can take that would incentivize some of my AA to shift back over to a flop check?
Assuming we're up against an unknown as there aren't any reads provided, I'm 4betting to a slightly larger size PF since I think the 2x sizing gets called a majority of the time and, a majority of the time we're not going to have AA and will have a bunch of bluffs in our range.
A flop cbet is obviously optimal vs an unknown so I'm not sure what you were going for there.
As played, turn call is standard and I would definitely bet river for value since most players jam the river with trips or better.
Is it not advantageous for us to slowplay a small percentage of our most nutted combos on this flop? Seems like "optimal vs unknown" might as well be phrased "optimal, period", and i'd like to hear your argument as to why.
The one advantage of checking through the flop is that it allows villain to either catch up with the unimproved non-ace high overcard portion of his range. But as the majority of his range should be hands that can atleast call a flop bet in this 4bet pot, I believe more overall value is lost trying to capture the additional value from this range subset. Also, you can't rule out some random spazz from a hand such as KQ when facing a 1/4th or 1/5th pot bet in a 4bet pot so I don't think checking back is the only way to get an opponent to bluff.
Also, I agree that my use of "obviously" was likely too strong of a word since I didn't really prove much with the post.
Here's my argument for AxAd being a check:
If we are 4-betting 5% and we c-bet our whole range, TT becomes a profitable check-shove. When Villain's best bluff-catcher becomes a profitable check-shove in such a highly polarized spot, this seems like a problem. Therefore, we should not c-bet our whole range (though I think this is pretty close).
If we aren't c-betting our whole range, then if we bet all of our AA (and want to be in balance while betting our draws and the best hands to randomize), one of two things must be true.
1) We are checking back either KK, QQ, or some combination of both.
OR
2) The best hand we check back the flop with is AK.
I don't see a good reason for 1 to be done, and here is the problem with 2:
If the best hand we check back is AK, then Villain can start value-betting TT on any non A or K turn. When somebody can start value-betting their best bluff-catcher in an incredibly polarized situation after a flop that favors our range over theirs by quite a lot, then we've probably done wrong. Therefore, 2 isn't that great.
All things considered, this leaves AxAd as our best value to check on the flop.
I like the flop check, but in practice a bet of 35 or so seems reasonable as well.
The interesting thing about this board is his entire range of bluff-catchers are completely the same strength.
The queen seems better for him than for you, so I'm inclined to think he's got SDV here when he checks.
I like the jam.
this was my initial read too. but at the same time, he can almost never put me on a hand that can felt here, unless he expects me to felt Ax. If i have a Qx i'm jamming once he checks. So with all the draw out, it seems like it might make a lot of sense for him to check and hope i unload
also @ UpUpandAway, i'd like to hear your thoughts on the question i posed to Tom Alner earlier:
The reasons why I don't think it's neccessary to "protect" our check back range quite yet is that a) we don't have any reads on villain so it's assumed that there's a fresh dynamic with no notable recent history b) this board is one that can change rather quickly through the turn and river and c) betting our strong hands, even one as strong as AA with nut flush blockers on this board, further protects the times where we choose to barrel off our 4bet bluff range that missed.
If I do choose to create a small nutted checkback range this early in my dynamic with a new player, I think I would choose the times the board is super dry such as 223r, Q62r, ect. or the times I happen to flop a set.
this was my initial read too. but at the same time, he can almost never put me on a hand that can felt here, unless he expects me to felt Ax. If i have a Qx i'm jamming once he checks. So with all the draw out, it seems like it might make a lot of sense for him to check and hope i unload
You're really checking behind this flop with anything that could have missed a draw by the river? The river seems like it comes down to what you think he does with Kings. You could get a little cray-cray and bet/fold 35 haha
thats a really good point. honestly i'm probably not. so it's starting to look like my river range is not polarized enough to create a functional jamming range, which makes it an easy fold for him with any bluffcatcher
That's why I suggested betting really small but actually, it seems like we should bet really small with everything here since it's just not a spot where we have to protect our bluffs.
I don´t mind checking behind the flop - to let him catch up / bluff away, but as played I don´t think we ever have a valuejam on the river. okaygo summarized it pretty well by dividing Villain´s range into Qx / air-type hands.
Be the first to add a comment