Boomer

This is great! Insights like these are why I subscribe to RIO.

Surprised to see that 10% equity can have such a drastic effect on bet size.

Why not 4bet? lol

I open about 9% UTG in some full ring live games I play. Seems too tight 6 handed though.

Despite her abilities as a writer, Rand's philosophies are, at best, questionable.

So b/f is the obvious play. I don't bet those boards in that spot. Maybe I'm missing value.

Why are we betting that board?

The BB calling range smashes that flop, the MP range is linear, and our range doesn't necessarily connect. When we do bet, we don't get called by much less and we get x/r by better hands. If our read on the BB is correct then we probably have to give up, but we also shouldn't be betting. I like checking behind and trying to get to a cheap showdown.

Now if he is some super-tight nit and gives up non-nut hands (like either Vegas bum hunter who doesn't have a read on you or a weak, broke, recreational player), we can make a case for peeling off a card to see how he reacts. We're going to find ourselves in some tricky spots, though, with only about a pot-sized bet left.

What is he repping? A10, right? Is he so weak that he doesn't 3bet KK, QQ and JJ? We block two of those combos. Depending on the dynamics, we can maybe defend w/ a call then rep flushes and improve to full houses. I'm having a hard time selling myself on this line, but against a certain player it might be ok.

...over 14 hands...no read on him. No kidding? Why are you even mentioning these numbers?

Is KQs part of your 3bet range in the CU against an UTG raise w/ no read? Probably.

Is it ok to check back a wet board in position in a soft game? Probably not.

Can you float his defend w/ top pair and back door nut draws? Probably.

Do you have enough knowledge to understand what this all means? Doubtful.

Do I even know what I'm talking about? Questionable.

What's your thoughts on Game Theory Optimal Play vs Exploitative Play?

What sites are you on?

You didn't explain your thoughts. It's ridiculous to say you x/f any size bet because you're never folding to 1/3 or 1/2 pot bet, and I think you're wrong if you do. Besides that, I still think there's an argument for b/f the river.

When I asked about it, someone else had to explain, then you started cussing. If you really want to play then let's meet up in Vegas. We can play $10/$20 deep stacks.

Makes mason barrell sound like a cunt who didn't explain his thoughts at all.

Makes sense. Thanks, man!

Why is this an easy check/fold to any size bet otr? So he bets $30 and you fold? You're trolling, right?

This was great to hear. I can relate to the ups and downs at the table, the fear of bluffing/confrontation and it just occurred to me that I've been over confident in many situations in the past. I've had a lot of success throughout the years in most of the live games I play, with mixed results online and in Vegas.

In the past month or so though, I have committed to studying GTO for the first time. Mathew Janda's book has been such an eye opener. Some of the errors in my thinking are really embarrassing, but it's helped me see where other players are making mistakes too. Besides Janda's book and watching videos here, are there any other books or exercises you would recommend?

Appreciate the work you're doing, man! Keep grinding.

Bye Felecia.

We have to be raising that turn with AA, 88, AQo, AQs, AKo, A8s, maybe even Q8s and 22 if we open that wide. Then for balance we need to raise w/ some percentage of J10s and K10s or KJs.

All of this seems theoretically sound, but I'm bum a hunter looking for more pragmatic reasons to raise the pot.

Don't we like that board more if we're in the SB? We get to 3 barrel with a variety of bet sizes. We can check-raise and take the pot down OTF fairly frequently. We can check-call the flop, which means the turn will go check-check very often, and we win the pot with a river bet.
If we don't think we have the skill edge, why are we opening 50%?

Which also requires that you defend like 60-70% of flops. If he's betting 1/2 pot though, doesn't that imply he has more value oriented hands? The bet sizing doesn't imply a nuts vs. air scenario. If we raise the turn though, isn't that what we are creating?

If you're opening 50% then you have to defend that loosely.

No one wins every pot. Without some highly reliable tell (that's probably just not available online), it seems terrible to even consider folding.

If you're opening 50% then you're flatting a relatively large range, right? Like, AA, TT-55, all of your suited broadways (less AKs), KQo, and a bunch of suited connectors. (According to Janda, you'll have to defend 14.5% of all hands in this spot)

So raising the flop seems wrong because the SB has way more Ax in his range and you'd be defining your hand. But raising the turn seems correct because he has air at least as much as you do (if not more) and you find value from all his straight and flush draws. Plus if you're bluffing some percentage then you're finding folds from all his Qx and pairs that beat you (if not immediately then a bet on the river does the job). Add in all the other value situations and a raise seems balanced.

I'd be curious what Sauce thinks though.

Would you feel better if you bet 2/3 pot and folded to a raise? He could get there with like AQ or AJ of clubs, right? Can we rule out AK and sets though? Since he's raising AKs pre-flop and raising all sets on the turn or flop. Does he have A10 very often? So it seems like he has a lot of bluffs, all of his open enders and gutters, middling pairs, 8x. It's so gross to call and see AQ though.

I'm playing in similar live games. I just started reading Matthew Janda's 'Applications of NLHE.' I'd be curious how you think the theories would apply to your games.