Solid, keep them coming!
Pokerjuice seems like a good piece of software, will give it a try.

On the turn, you got rid of Villains AA calling combos by saying QQ-KK instead of QQ-AA. Any reason for this or just an oversight?

Yes just an typo in terms of consistency but as ibo said it won't change anything given the AA is being 4bet.

I like the video concept, but i am little bit disappointed how we constructed villains range. We forgot villains flop raise bluff range which leads villain to be folding more in flop and turn than in reality. I think its safe to assume villain is raising some J+pp under 7,low double pairs and some backdoor stuff. How much villain should be bluff raising on the flop? After flop bet-call, should villain have turn shoving range?

I'm not 100% convinced that c-betting flop is even best. +1 to villain should be raise bluffing us on the flop some times. In 3 bet pots on paired boards I like to cbet higher pairs as we can represent those more credibly(88-AA) and check low boards(22-77). 7 being right in the middle, I think we should probably bet it some times, and check it some times. It's a spot where if I am villain and I think the 3bettor is auto-cbetting too much will look to raise bluff with hands that dont have much showdown value but can get there like gutters with a backdoor flush draw.

If we do elect to cbet, which is probably fine as we do have a lot of raw fold equity and our hand does need protection, I think our sizing should go down a touch. This is a pretty big lockdown board, and the more lockdowny the board, the less we need to bet me thinks. 2/5 pot sounds about right.

Out of town still and will respond in a few days

Hi Zach,

Interesting video, and cool format! I have a few comments:

a) Preflop, do I understand it correctly that you implied that we can have more JJ than him? I don't think that is true, because we won't 3bet all JJxx, whereas he will raise/call with most of them.

b) On the river, 55+ contains 66 as well because that got counterfeited. A minor difference, but thought I'd point out :)

c) While it is true that we shouldn't be value betting if our equity against his calling range is less than 50%, there are certain exceptions. An example would be folding out his air that can put us into a tricky spot by bluffing when checked to. This is probably not directly applicable to this specific scenario, though.

Back home now and am going to attempt to add some content to the video and respond to comments.

First comment by Sro238,

I'm not 100% convinced that c-betting flop is even best. +1 to villain should be raise bluffing us on the flop some times. In 3 bet pots on paired boards I like to cbet higher pairs as we can represent those more credibly(88-AA) and check low boards(22-77). 7 being right in the middle, I think we should probably bet it some times, and check it some times. It's a spot where if I am villain and I think the 3bettor is auto-cbetting too much will look to raise bluff with hands that dont have much showdown value but can get there like gutters with a backdoor flush draw.
If we do elect to cbet, which is probably fine as we do have a lot of raw fold equity and our hand does need protection, I think our sizing should go down a touch. This is a pretty big lockdown board, and the more lockdowny the board, the less we need to bet me thinks. 2/5 pot sounds about right.

Upon my further investigation which I am about to do and provide below we will see if betting flop still looks best. I agree that we should have a mixed strategy of betting and checking this particular flop. What I explain in the video is why this particular hand does best betting due to its vulnerability and lack of blockers of draws. It would be incorrect to interpret me saying that I bet this hand on this flop as saying that I bet my range on this flop. Regarding sizing, first off the ev of betting vs checking is so complex in this spot that and so dependent on villains aggression and stickiness on this flop that I think adjusting the sizing from 50% pot to 40% pot will have a negligible effect. with the presence of a FD and str8 draws I prefer not betting smaller than 50% pot. I would size down on a 772r flop for example.

Hi Zach,
Interesting video, and cool format! I have a few comments:
a) Preflop, do I understand it correctly that you implied that we can have more JJ than him? I don't think that is true, because we won't 3bet all JJxx, whereas he will raise/call with most of them.
b) On the river, 55+ contains 66 as well because that got counterfeited. A minor difference, but thought I'd point out :)
c) While it is true that we shouldn't be value betting if our equity against his calling range is less than 50%, there are certain exceptions. An example would be folding out his air that can put us into a tricky spot by bluffing when checked to. This is probably not directly applicable to this specific scenario, though.

Now to respond to Midori,
1) No, I wasn't implying that we have more JJ than he does. I was instead saying that the JJ combos arent a landslide in his favor. Like on a 733 flop we have far fewer 77 combos. Whereas on J77 he has more JJ combos but we still have a considerable amount.

2)Yes.

3) Makes sense. I haven't explored these scenarios but more importantly for a exercise such as this where we are already having to make many assumptions to arrive at conclusions a outlier scenario such as the one you bring up here wont be significant enough to consider.

In general when we have a range advantage we should be doing more of the betting and when villain has a range advantage we should be doing more checking. But quantifying range advantage is tricky. Becuase its not just whose range has higher equity although thats part of it; its also who has more top end strength combos and by how much. And the importance ratio of top end strength vs equity is a on sliding scale dependent mostly on stack depth. With 1PSB equity reigns supreme but as you get deeper nuttiness is more important.
What I stated in the video and you guys seem to agree is that we should have a mixed strategy of betting and checking on this flop. What I believe is that if we are to have a betting range then this hand should be in it.
Who has the range advantage here? My guess in the video was villain but not by much. Lets look into it some more. My assumption is that our range has an equity advantage but he has more top end combos. We are in a 3b pot so stack depth isn't very high but SPR still is far over 1.

Lets look at some sim data below where we use hero's 3b range as 12%vr,$0g$ss,$1g$ss,$2g$ds,4456+$ds,4556+$ds,4566+$ds,rroo!rrr
and villains pf range as 90%vr!3%vr:

Lets notice that hero's range has a very significant equity advantage so as stacks get shallower this implies hero has a range advantage.

(Not listed in data above) KTT9 is the best 5card hand on flop 55% frequency. Yet, it only wins at SD 54% so that means that more often than not it gets outdrawn and loses. ie this hand benefits greatly from protection betting.

Our range flops best current 5card hand 72.9%

Villain flops trips 12.7% while hero flops trips 8.5%. This race goes to villain but not by much. Interestingly though if you look at boat+ on flop you will see that hero actually flops a boat+ more often than villain. This could be due to the fact that hero's range has more connectivity and the flop is somewhat connected as J77 and/or because hero's range is more PP heavy. Overall though, if you look at top end strength its basically a tie.

Lastly if you look at the winning hand type if we just ran out turn and river you can see that the most often winning hand type is just 2-pr which hero has many more better combos of.

These sims imply hero has the range advantage and by a significant margin. Accordingly we should not only be betting this hand but betting more often than I originally anticipated.

Lex smartly pointed out my mistake of not including a bluff raising range for villain and certainly doing so will lower flop FE and EV. That said, many of the weaker combos that I included for villain peeling flop with would be probable candidates for his bluff raising range, namely naked JX combos, and pair+GS.
The parameters used in the video hero had 52% FE. Flop sizing was 50% so hero shows an immediate profit betting even if he never won when called if his FE is 33.3%+. For hero's FE to be under 33.3% villain would have to be bluff raising flop 19%+ frequency with hands not already listed in the original flop calling range.
Hero is going ot have a x/f range which means his betting range is already stronger than his pf 3b range. His full pf range is going to flop trips+ 18.4%, and he won't be folding (QQ-AA):ss, etc. I wont model the specifics but it looks clear to me that betting flop will still be the best option by far.

Zach,

I have Odds Oracle with the Poker Juice macros and when I plug in Villain's preflop range, 90%!$4b3, I get a ton more combos than you did. (like 50,000 more)

Any ideas as to why this is?

Also, why do i get a different number of combos if I write 90%!$4b3, as opposed to 90%!($4b3)

"Are you looking at absolute combos or reduced combos given the flop?"

Yes, this was it. Thank you.

As far as the ranges, just follow the link Midori posted above. Click on the download all ranges and follow the instructions. You can then use the Poker Juice syntax in Odds Oracle to get the Poker Juice cleaned up ranges. ($FI40, $3b6i, $4b3, etc.)

It may be fine to bet 1010 occasionally from a GTO perspective.
When you are OOP, mixed strategies come into play. It's false that you should have a hard line between value hands and checking hands. That is only true in position. I did the full GT analysis of betting after the third draw at deuce to seven when both players draw one, and it's impossible to be unexploitable unless you employ a mixed strategy with made 9--> Q OOP, for example; you can calculate exactly the correct frequencies for each hand for betting and checking if the ranges of both players are perfect information (which is why 2-7 is a good toy game for this - ranges are clear after early heavy action and both sides taking 1 card on second and third draws)

Love the quality of your videos and I think the format is excellent. Would love to see more of those.

Nice video,
about the flop bluff raising range. I think you forgot to put in his value raising range as well when you calculated how often he is folding. Maybe you did on paper, but if you put in the combos like that you get the combos he is continuing with, with a call. And that does not mean that he is folding the rest of it. So folding = preflop range - calling rang - value raising range - bluffing range

I think the implications of the flop and turn analysis you do in the video are a bit murkier than you made them out to be initially (although the subsequent discussion has led to a lot of really good points). Basically you break down his range into a few groups and find that if he plays more or less honest-straightforward, you have a profitable bet. But on a paired board it's not surprising that you can get away with a bet if he plays honest. If we turned the tables and did a similar analysis from his perspective against your putative strategy, I suspect we'd find that he has a profitable raise against your cbet with a4c. So it seems to me that this type of analysis is just the beginning of the story for developing a gameplan against a tough opponent.

I got we have trips 19% from the Sim above on Odds Oracle. It shows boat+ 8.83% and trips 10%. Vs a random opponent with no read I'd probably over fold a bit and b/f naked KK, maybe AA.

Thank you Zach for your efforts.
Even if you made some mistakes, you did over compensated those with your responses here in the forum.
If you are continuing this as a series than I would like to see how a GTO strategy would roughly look like for cbetting and defending vs cbets and making some analysis about how to change the strategy (which hands to put in which range) based on villain defending too often (a-calls too often b-raises too often) or defending not enough.
It might be also cool to use another approach and some how go from river backwards:
How often villain has to defend => which hands he should call with, than analyzing how his turn calling range should look like etc...