He snap pot ott and otr.Which stats do you see about postflop aggression and float?

Should I cf with his pot bet ott?

Like you said,snap bet pot ott and snap ship otr can be nuts or nothing,it is really tough decision.

What about cbet small ott and otr?For value and block bet. 

I was thinking about the small token bet on the river but problem is that if villain is capable of bluffing he can pretty well still just bomb the whole range that he was planning on betting in the first place.  It's a gross spot as played but think it's the way to play, and really as much as we have AA and a flush this is about in the middle of our range (and why it feels so gross).  Rest of the range is full houses or trip twos which we have pretty clear decisions on at the river.  His PF stats seam aggressive so it that aggression transitions to post flop play I just let him hang him self with his air and weaker hands and pay the man off when he has KK.

yes,you are right,we don't have to 3bet bad aa this situation,but I think aa49ss is not that bad,maybe it is close to 3bet or flat.

nerevar23

Looks like a spot he would fuck around in this manner, gotta call river since you call turn, otherwise why would you call turn when it's pretty clear he plans to pot river?

Zenfish, please tell me how will poker juice estimate river EV if villain might be taking this line, with this sizing only with the nuts? 

Range assumptions + math = solution

I am not sure I understand exactly what you are asking, but I'll ramble a bit, and hopefully the answer you're looking for will come out in the wash. 

Villain has ranges for:

- Calling the flop
- Betting the turn
- Betting the river

If we can estimate those, we can estimate the EV of bluffcatching the river. We might have to guess about the ranges, but once those assumptions are made, calculating the EV is an exact process, no guessing. If we can estimate the flop/turn ranges accurately, our river problem will be so much easier to handle.

Once Villain has arrived at the river via our flop/turn assumptions, he has a river betting range made up of valuebets and bluffs, and he has a check-back range (which may or may not be empty). Our job now is to judge whether or not we can exploit him, either by folding (if he underbluffs) or calling (if he overbluffs). 

Range breakdown in the PokerJuice Bluff Catching Module

We can break down Villain's total river range into:

- Valuebets
- Checking hands
- Air (some of which is Blockers = hands we expect Villain to bluff)

Then we just pick reasonable ranges for valuebets and bluffs and calculate the EV. But we can do more.

By looking at the relative sizes of the Value and Air ranges, we can get an idea about how likely Villain is to be over- or underbluffing. If he has plenty of Air to use (e.g. in spots where has called flops with tons of draws, and the board bricks out), he might be prone to overbluffing, by simply not realizing how weak his range is.

Whereas on boards where he starts out with a strong flop continuation range, he will arrive at the river with little Air (maybe not even enough to bluff balanced). So he might be prone to underbluffing, maybe even forced to underbluff by the shape of his range.

An example of the shape of a river range

For example, it could look like this (taken from another hand, but just to give you an idea):

That's a spot where Villain has only 15% value hands in his total river range. Giving the sizing he used, he is allowed to bluff an additional 6%. Since 43% of his range is Air, he can only bluff 0.06 x 0.43 = 14% of his Air. Now we can ask: Is he disciplined enough to check and give up 86% of all his nothing-hands? We don't know, but such a river range shape certainly makes us optimistic about the possibilities of him overbluffing.

Making informed decisions by studying the shape of the river range

Of course, a strong player will be aware of his own range, and not bluff in an easily exploitable fashion. But many players get carried away, one way or the other. They might "decide to bluff" on the turn with a wide bluffing range (which may very well be correct), and not realize that by continuing with all bluffs on the river, they become exploitable. 

Villani is allowed, GTO-wise, to bluff more on earlier streets than on later streets, but that means he has to give up some bluffs on later streets). Still, he can't always shut down either, even if he is 100% confident that you have a strong bluffcatcher. Sometimes he needs to follow through.

At any rate, our first step is to look at the shape of Villain's total river range. Then we can make an informed decision about whether or not to bluffcatch. Once we have assigned Villain reasonable ranges for getting to the river, it will be much clearer what to do. 

Further reading about the PokerJuice Bluff Catching Module

Two case studies that uses the BC module:

- Case study 1: Di Dang River Bluffcatching - Feb 9 2014
- Case study 2: Ph33roX River Bluffcathing - Feb 10 2014

I don't understand this thinking at all. ;-) 

Villain isn't God, and even God would need to select ranges well, otherwise, God would be exploitable.

Sure, we can use his sizing to make good estimates of his ranges. Obviously a polarized range, once he bets the turn big. But that doesn't mean his flop calling range is random. He had a reason for calling the flop, and our job is to estimate that range, then the turn betting range, then the river betting range.

The river range is the end-product of previous range-choices. Once we know what Villain arrives at the river with, it will be much easier for us to make good decisions. Maybe we find that Villain doesn't have enough Air to bluff unbalanced? Then we can just snap fold. Or maybe we conclude he is very likely to have a lot more Air than he is allowed to bluff? Then bluffcathing looks good (at least better).

We still have to estimate his actual range for making that last, big bet, but we don't have to assume we know nothing and are forced to guess blindly. He arrived at the river with some range, and it was for a reason. If we can reproduce Villain's thought processes accurately, we can come up with a decent response to his line.

If we aren't able to come up with assumptions, we can always throw our hands in the air and flip a coin at the river. But we can do better, and we lose nothing by trying.

Decision making based on ranges is what poker analysis is all about. If you think it's ridiculous, you can always try to do better by flipping coins. But I don't think you will be able to. ;-)

Agreed that we have more information available at the table, than we do here. We also have less time. But now we're here, and Hero has posted the hand. Then we can try to solve it, because we have all the time in the world. :-)

PokerJuice handles the calculations, we handle the assumptions. So it's not a "black box" that performs magic, it relies on good input from us. The "magic" in the program is the ease with which we can set up simulations and do useful work.

We choose the continuation ranges we deem most realistic. If we know nothing about Villain, and we have some idea about what a GTO approach looks like, we can use that. Or we can use player pool tendencies.  GTO ranges don't have to enter the picture at all.

Then after Villain has arrived at the river via the continuation ranges we gave him on the flop and turn,  the Bluff Catching Module can break down Villain's river range for us. We learn how much Air he has, and how much of it he is allowed to bluff, if he wants to stay balanced.

Then we can use that information as a baseline, and think about whether Villain is likely to be unbalanced. PokerJuice can't tell us that, but now we have information that makes the decision easier. Add reads to this, and we will often be able to make strong conclusions.

Exploiting Villain is the same as having an idea (and it can be rough) about what unexploitable play looks like. If you don't, how can you exploit him?  :-)

nerevar23

Doesn't exploiting mean you use his unbalanced play and tendencies against him by playing GTO? 

Formally, exploiting someone means we deviate from GTO to attack his deviation from GTO. For example, if we know he bluffs a tad too little (relative to pot odds he's offering us), we exploit him maximally by always folding our bluffcatchers. If he bluffs a tad too much, we always call.

By exploiting someone, we are (per definition) making ourselves exploitable in the process. if we are wrong about our read, we might get punished. If we don't want to risk that, we simply need to fall back on our best approximation to GTO (= whatever you deem to be a sound default).

____________________________

How can you do that if you sample size is 50 hands? 

When we don't know how he plays, we have all the more reason to find a good default line, i.e. some type of approximation to GTO (see previous comment). If you think it's better to assume he plays like the average player at your stakes, you can do that (= you're trying to exploit player pool tendencies),

_________________________________

I just don't get why he has to have a range for doing stuff on 224r in 3bet pot in position. 

Not sure I understand this statement. Every time a player makes a play, he has a range for that play, whether it be nuts only, nuts + balanced amount of bluffs, or nuts + tons of bluffs.

If by this statement you are saying that you put him on only the nuts, you can simply fold bluffcatchers. Note that by doing so, you are still putting him on a range. Then you are concluding that his range is far from GTO (because you assume zero bluffs), and you make an exploitative fold. 

And this is the exact same process as I have suggested in earlier posts. It's just that you are suggesting different assumptions.  ;-)

In case it was unclear, my suggestion is to try to put him on accurate continuation ranges for getting from PF --> Flop --> Turn --> River, including hands he can bluff, and then explore the consequences of those assumptions for our river Bluff Catching EV. And I think it's well worth doing.

When he bets, we know (from the pot odds he is offering us) what his value : bluff ratio should be, if he wants to be unexploitable. This is not what we're after, though. We would very much like to know if he's unbalanced, because that allows us to exploit him.

When we have estimated his range for arriving at the river, we can study the shape of his range, and gain some insight into the likelihood of him over- or underbluffing. We can use PokerJuice for that, or we can use OO, or you can try to think more intuitively about it. But you need to do something if you want to learn from this hand.

We can't do math-y analysis very effectively at the table, which is why we are doing it here. As a learning exercise to train our intuition for future hands. This is always why we do analysis of tricky spots. Defending a bluffcatcher against a polarized pot-pot betting line is common, so this should be study time well spent.