I don't really like KJo much as a 4bet hand. It's definitely going to be a profitable call (KTo I think can be called too vs most but is much closer) and while it has decent blockers it does very poorly when your 4bet is called. I think you're better off calling and keeping in some dominated stuff/weak 3bets, and 4betting a hand like K5s or whatever.

Can you give me a timestamp? I quickly skipped through but didn't see a T8s hand, it's been weeks since I made the video so hard to remember where in the video it might be

Second hand in video steve, @ 00:37

Generally the minraise will be a wider range so there is more value in a 3bet. Vs a 3.5x open (from a good player) I would pretty much never 3bet TT 100bb deep.

its 78s, sqz, why do u even think its profitable squeez? whats your plan postflop if someone calls and u r OOP post? but more importantly, why u squeeze even 78s especially vs tight EP , who dont even open 78s? whats ur whole sqz range there? arent u overdoing it there? isnt calling better?

Im not going to lie Steve I was thinking same thing, but than when I thought about calling and playing a mW pot oop. That didn't seem to appeal to me either, banking on hitting a pair+draw+, or FD
So if any thing I think three bet>Call, because we capitalize on FE?
Interested to see your response to Gau question.

Certainly a profitable call and if you squeeze all your 87s and equivalent hands you are way overdoing it. But still a reasonable squeeze candidate imo. In terms of what my squeeze range is, it's going to be value hands plus some small % of a bunch of stuff. All the hands I would consider squeezing here are also profitable calls: Axs, lower suited connectors/gappers, maybe a few blocker type hands. The problem with the blocker type hands is that when UTG calls you are frequently going 4way to the flop and AJo or whatever is just a terrible hand in that situation. 87s (and similar hands) also allow us to hit a larger variety of flops and have some bluffs on boards where our range looks extremely strong.

Again, not something I think is mandatory or anything but as a low frequency play I think it's a fine squeeze.

when UTG calls, you are frequently going 4way to the flop

exactly, so why would UTG have a need to ever have any calling range there? UTG being not in absolute position, and giving MP/SB better odds to call behind with any PP. So isn't that better to have blocker to his 4bet range which is possibly AA/KK/AK so then lets do it with some A2-A5s instead?

but as a low frequency play I think it's a fine squeeze.

how u gonna regulate ur low frequency?

I think there are some hands for UTG that are going to be higher EV calls than 4bets. Thus I expect UTG to have a calling range.

Regulating the low frequency can be done in a bunch of ways. In the past I've used a random number generator or the minute number on my clock (eg 3bet if the last number of the time is a 1 or a 2). I often also just do it based on how I feel which is obviously far from optimal. However, if you look at solutions to simpler games, 3bet "bluff" ranges are always made up of small %s of a variety of hands as opposed to 100% of a small # of hands. Using the small # of hands is easier to implement and probably fine in practice but it's important (imo) to realize that it's suboptimal.

the minute number on my clock

Old school :D

y dat KJ looks to me like show or fold vs short , as played imo river is more likely a call imo than a fold

ATo - Fold is my standard, but with weak players in blinds I agree that I should open.

KJo not really sure why I called so quickly, seems pretty close and with a population read it can be a clear fold. Absent any reads I probably go with something like TT+/AQs.

gaucan, why do you want to call river with KJo? It's very close to the bottom of my range and he's bet a little over pot. Think if you're calling KJo you're just calling way too often. KJo also a very poor hand to shove pre, the decision is between call and fold imo.

cuz he doesnt rep much that beats u and u have nice blockers

think he pretty credibly reps AK, KK, AA, AQ, AT, TT, though he will cbet many of those sometimes. Seems to me pretty much all my potential calling hands will have equal (K) or better(A) blockers than KJ does so if you call KJ you're calling pretty much all of your bluffcatchers?

Also, you need to be careful making the jump from "doesn't rep a lot" to "is bluffing enough that I can profitably call". I've used the "he doesn't rep much" line of thought to make a LOT of terrible river calls.

Think TT is definitely too wide to get in, JJ questionable. I expect to sometimes get called but not super often. Whether TT or A3s is a better 4b/fold is very difficult to answer, I would lean towards A3s but don't really have much to back that up.

Seems like a reasonable adjustment to me.

KQ - my value range is extremely narrow (88 only maybe?) and he'll be getting 2:1 so I should be bluffing extremely rarely. Any non-diamond hand that blocks some of his bet/calling region seems a reasonable choice but they'll all be super low frequency.

QJ - think this is an interesting spot and one where multiple sizings probably make sense. If I go big on turn+river I risk narrowing his range too much (not that the bets won't be profitable but potentially less than a smaller size.)

99 - yeah I think having a 2x pot jam range here is almost certainly best looking back at it, and 99 seems the ideal value hand to do it with.

yeah 99 R shove looks best

ha, could be very good as long as you're confident in your assumptions. Looking back at the hand I kind of like checking vs most regs as they're probably vbetting Kx quite often vs a check and you'll get some bluffs as well.