Sightblinder

solid!

The ADD HH seems to only work for stars. Would be nice if some of the big dogs could look into that (maybe also make it useable for HEM's "plain text" format)

*edit*

I agree, just shit to keep in the back of your head as you progress upward through the septic slum that is PLO!

Also, very good points regarding what his check-back OTF means, and when I think about it more, I think I prefer check/calling.

On further thought, if we believe that villain is weighted towards draws and other kinds of Lindsay Lohan hands, does that warrent the lack of a valuebetting range OTR in this spot? 

I actually feel that preflop is super-standard. 

The hand is ranked 11% in Oracle (6Way), and has 40% versus a top 7% range. "Obviously" looking at those numbers in a vacuum is an easy and somewhat stupid approach, but when you have ~7% more equity than needed to break even on the call, I think that you should be able to earn more than 0bb on the call, even if you have to manouver OOP for the rest of the pot.

Flop and turn are reasonably standard. I'm betting river here, since I feel my bluffs get called "to much" by regulars (Which probably means I'm bluffing to much). Nothing wrong with going for a check/call if you think reads warrant that. 

Diamonds miss, and you should not have alot of 75, 53 in your range, so it really looks like ~"4xxx or nothing", which I think will make him call with QQ+. Not sure if he valuebets those hands though. Actually an interesting spot. 

If you decide to not bet this hand, you have to consider what that does to the range you'll be able to bluff river with (like missed diamonds, if you would bet turn with flushdraw)

No, you absolutely do not need to construct your game as to be un-exploitable. You ~can't be exploiting others, while at the same time playing un-exploitable. And exploitative play is where the money will come from in poker. This is like the ~definition of exploitative play (or close to it). You are making several points which I think should be adressed, so I'll just try and work my way through them, not necessarily in any particular order.

Your job at the poker table, is figuring out which exploitative line which will yield the most EV. 
Can also be written as:
How can you distribute different hands, into different ranges over the different streets, as to make as much money as possible.

Now, this might seem like stating the obvious, but the obvious needs to be stated every now and then. Also; as a low stakes player myself, I often find myself realizing I (probably) went for the lesser +EV line, because that line was "easier" to play. Now let me give you an (extreme) example, and you'll probably understand:

Villain plays 30/20 over a large sample.
Cbets flop 100%.
Cbets turn 100%.
Note:
-Folds alot to raises

So I call with some hand **** in posistion, and raise a flop where his range is weak, like maybe 654r after he is raising from UTG, where he is tight. This is surely a +EV bluffraise. But would it not be more +EV to call flop, and raise turn instead? Or even maybe river? It's psychologicaly harder to do, since you loose more when he has some hand that actually connected, like AA87, but if our reads are good, that will yield more money in the long run.

"But, what I what to point out here - do we always have to follow unexploitable range lines here? (especially vs bad\more like loose-passive player)"

No, but knowing how to divide your ranges in an somewhat unexploitable manner will always help you to better exploit.

And last; be careful to classify other regulars as bad, unless you have some pretty rocksolid reaons. We all make mistakes, or we would be playing alot higher. Its easy to see and say things like: "this regular is cbetting so little on my stats". But then consider he might be playing in games where alot of cbetting is not warrented, because of multiway pots, and/or many fishes at the tables.

In general, arguments like "he can't call with worse" are always easy to counter with; "well just raise air then, and let him fold his way to hell". (I don't actually mean that, but if you find yourself never ever getting value with turn check/raises, your game would probably benefit from some bluffing).

If hero is worried about balance / not getting value, which I don't think he is, but which I think he should be, he should check/raise/fold hands like KK, QQ, and check/raise/call (as a semibluff) hands like good flushdraws(straightdraws) + picked up ace-pair on the turn. This could eg. be AK98, or A998ss. 

Now this might be total spew, all depending on the situation, games and villains he is playing. But what I do feel pretty strongly is that if hero is folding this hand, as played, he is making some pretty terrible range-lines, and should stop what he is doing, and think over what hands he is calling river with here (as played) if he is folding this hand. 

Then he should proceed to think about what hands he is calling turn with (as played). 

Then look at the odds villain is giving himself with his betsizing, and what percentage of hands hero needs to call (or raise) on the river, to not be exploitable. Then hero would realize that he is utterly fucked (as played).

I remember back in the day, when I got coaching from a far better player than me. I kept slowplaying unsafe nuthands (eg 67 no redraw on 589tt), and I always used the argument: "but they never call me when I raise". and he just kept hammering: "well just raise 66, 77 and random 6's or 7's then till they start calling you".

On the flop I'm betting bigger than $5.50 before I have a reason too do anything else. (And I'm bet/folding very comfortably with only 6 (unclean) outs to T2P.

Not sure about turnplay, checking back seems like a line which can't be bad. Bet/folding also strikes me as an OK play. When checking back I'm probably calling a bet on
2, 3 and 8 rivers
Any river which gives us trips or two pair (but doesn't complete the flushdraw)

How come you want to check flop when they check and represent weaknes, but shove turn when they bet and are showing strength? Not sure I agree or disagree.

I like the way Hero played it.

I'm calling river for one simple reason:
You're at the absolute top of your range.

- ~No TT-77 comes to river as played.

- I would expect regulars to raise almost all their AT hands (which calls from the SB), because of the drawy texture, and the fact that many AT hands will have alot of backup since you called from the SB. It's not like you are calling AT52 here (I'd suppose).  So if I'm villain, and I'm thinking about your ranges, I'd come to the conclussion that you're not super strong.

-Villain is making it extremely profitabel for him to bluff, given betsizing, and if you end up folding as strong a hand as T2P in this spot, when KQJx misses, turned flushdraws misses, you are setting yourself up for major super duper exploitation in just about any game above $10PLO.

It's not like I'm super happy about it, since I do feel many players will check back instead of going for light value with hands like A7, A6 in this spot, even though that might/might not be warrented. But still getting 16:28 folding just seem like range-spew on your part.

With regars to turn being a standard raise; There are regulars (whom I feel barrel to in-frequent) where I'd rather call and play river, rather than raise and GII 145bb deep with ~no redraws.

25:09

You have KQQx on some K88tt - x - 8 board, and he checks back TTxx pretty quickly. Would you like a valuebet here? Don't you think thats too light (in general), or is it a balance-thing, where him valuebetting (say TT+) will allow him to also bluff non-paired hands more often. 

Would you call with 66-99 (that you somehow had gotten to the river with, there? (lets say maybe with a nutflushdraw)

Yes, automatic shove situation "this shallow". 

After 4betting AAxx versus any range (100bb deep), you can shove 100% of flops and the line as a whole will yield a profit. (This can be showed mathematicly, and have been many times). Instead of frettering over the fact that he will have clubs a certain percent of the time, keep in mind that he might to things like folding T98x!*c*c** on this board, thus making a huge mistake.

Let him be the one to figure out what hands he can call with, not the other way around.

When does this become -EV? Good question, and dependant on a million factors. I have a rule that I'm almost always comitting after 4betting aces. I balance this out slightly by not 4betting shitty aces as we get deeper, and around 180+bb stacks I'm down to 4betting hands like AA98ns+, AAxx ds, AKQJds, AKKBds, and still comitting on most flops.

And all this is not even taking into account that its retarded to not shove this hand, since you would want to shove AAxx:Ac*c** for value, and still have a balance shoving range (even though its almost only consisting of aces)

Hilarious way to make bacon. If people can't figure out what you just figured out by themselfs, let him have their money.

Oracle tells me that PLAYER_1 will have 87xx 10% of the time, giving him a range of 40%. This will obviously be higher, since he'll fold a big part of that range given how the flop-action went.

Another half-likely scenario

All-in Equity

(T***:*d*d**):40%

50,5593% 

AcQhTh4s

49,4407%

EV Graf?
Number of tables played?
How much do you tableselect?
Do you play with rakeback, if so; rakeback graph?

Also, pretty sick sessionlengths. The percentage of people who can keep their concentration very high for that long is small. 

Edit: I see you have "Sessions by day" so I might have misunderstood what that means

I also valuebett 100% of the time OTR. I expect to get called alot by worse flushes, and  ~never bluff-raised

I like it as you played, but betting harder with my whole range on the turn.

Preflop is OK. Its not a manditory 3bet at lowstakes, but a decent hand to help balancing the rest and stronger part of your 3betting range. 

Flop 3way I'm torn between bet/folding and checking, and its hardt to say which has more merit. I think this should hit BBs range often enough for it to be ok to slow down, but at the same time you nail it as well (uour range that is), and I do not expect to get blown off by a bluff 3way. 

If you check, and someone bets, i might lay it down. Too few nutouts, OOP and a problem getting payed off when hitting, since your outs are "obvious scarecards".

Harder betsizing OTT as I don't often bluff here after checking flop. If someone raises, it comes down to gutfeel i think

I would say it becomes very important for 3betting ranges as well, and maybe also for tight openingranges like UTG, and SB/BB, but truth be told, I'm not so sure how much PPT/Oracles ranges varies from those I deem "10%". Thus maybe its less important for opening-ranges, but as I said, I don't really have a good grasp on how much they vary.

For 3betting ranges it would matter for sure though.

KdKh8d3c is ranged in the 9-percentile, but not a hand I would 3bet alot myself, and not a hand I would expect other regulars to 3bet that much either. 

I also want to point out to you how lucky you should feel having such players at your table, and how fucking wonderfull it is to be able to never 3bet light OOP becasue you never have to worry the slightest bit about balance. You should relish this, and then when you climb to 100 and 200PLO and start having to battle decent regulars all the time from OOP, you can think back and sigh.

Hero's hand looks well disguised yes. But does hero has the sort of image to get called >50% by (QQ, KK)? Thats the only thing that matters on the river. Is hero capable of calling flop with Axxx, and QQxx, then turn into a barrelbluff enough for villain to call with KKxx OTR?

I was honestly waiting for someone other than me to answer this hand, but since no-one has, I'll take a bullet for you. I'm a lowstakes player like yourself, so keep that in mind, and if Tom, or any other good posters come and tell otherwise, discard my comments.

The preflop play in this hand is utterly spewtastic, cringeworthy and so far from any possible standard it can be. You are superdeep OOP, with

-no concievable fold-equity preflop
-players behind you postflop who don't like to fold
-one of them being aggressive (which makes postflop harder to play, as you might actually get bluffed off something)
-completely readless (as far as I am concerned 3 numbers and a passive/aggressive label is not nearly enough ever to start getting involved light, 250bb deep+ OOP)
-a total shitty, non-nutty hand, ranked top 20% by PPT for 6max, and you are actually flipping vs a 60% openraising range

You flop no nutouts, deep 3way OOP, and a 9card FD which might and might not be good when you hit. How to play it from flop out, I can't say, since I can't imagine myself being in a spot like this.

Surely he might, but that woukd be bad unleess you bluff alot and plus probably bt qq and jj. Which i suspect would be bad 3way oop

What will call river? Do you have an image to valuebet this river? Do you think about these thibgs or are you just clicking buttons? Are you betting QQ here 3 streets?

With poker it comes down to ranges, yes, in my opinion. And especially percieved versus actual range. There must be some game between chess and poker (with regards to % of information open), which is a "mind game" which I am not aware of, or which I'm currently forgetting, where my logic also holds water (?).

Perhaps the card-game casino, where my mom used to outplay me when I was young, and I only understood what mistakes I had made, after I had made them, thereby observing myself being outplayed.

This is a silly, albeit interesting question. I'll stand my ground and say that it is obviously possible to observe yourself being outplayed. If I play football versus Ronaldo, and get raped, figuratively speaking, I obviously understand I have been outplayed. This is a physical sport, you might say.

Well, if I play Chess versus Magnus Karlsen, and he has me mated after 15 moves, or whatever number is an appropriate one, I will again obviously understand that I have been outplayed. No matter how hard I "played as best I could". 

It will be the same with poker, unless you are a stubborn 2+2-mongering fool. If villain makes a move you would not suspect him to make (thereby making his actual range differ from his percieved range) and thereby earning him a +EV move, and you a -EV move, you have been outplayed.

With poker even, there is more information to hold after the hand is done, and it should therefore be even more easy to understand what you did wrong, or what he did better. 

Another hand history example:

UTG opens, and I'm on the BTN with A876ds. We are 450bb deep, and I (for some reason) decide to 3bet. He timebanks, and then calls.

Flop A66r. He checks, I cbet and he puts in a small raise. 

Now; I know villain, and he opens tight from UTG, so A66r should not really hit his "calling a 3bet-range" at all. I figure he might do this with some rundowns with a 6 in them, maybe a hand similar to mine, but I also figure he might actually fold some of those hands to my 3bet, since we are so deep, and he has to worry about negative implied odds. And I know he is capable of bluffing, and that this might not be such a bad spot to make a small bluff.

Further, I figure that the best way to make money in this spot is making another min-raise, since I figure calling will look so rediculously strong.

He then pot-raises/or shoves or whatever the potsize will be in this spot, and I figure "well, potsize + my handstrength it can't be a bad call versus the range I have given him".

He then shoves AA45ss, which he preferred to call with preflop, rather then bloating the pot OOP with "marginal" aces, and probably giving his hand away. I did not put AAxx in his range on the flop, no matter how fucking hard or good I tried. His range is therefore totally different than what I thought it was. I can obviously SEE that, since I have eyes, and the cards are right there in front of me. And since I'm not a 2+2-mongering fool, my brain is able to comprehend that he did, in fact, outplay me.

What you describe Aleks is by no means a given "outplayed spot". If villain only bluffs there 1% of the time, and hero does not have enough equity to call versus villains range on average, hero played it perfectly.

Yes, it obviously is. 

Here is one example of a spot where I was outplayed a while ago by another regular. This is from 6 max PLO cash game, but the concept should transfer well enough to a tournament.

I was on the river with to weak pairs, some draws had missed, and I checked to opponent who then bet.

Now I could call, fold or raise. 

I thought about it for at least 15 seconds, and came to the conclusion that villain might valuebet two good pairs, some weirdly slowplayed sets (which was basicly nuts), and then probably would bluff a certain % of the times, with his missed draws and other stuff. I figured the range of hands who he would legitimately valuebet was not big enough to counter the times I would expect a regular of his caliber to bluff, so I called.

He showed to (bad) pairs, something like K4xx on AK943, and won the pot. I did not expect him to valuebet that light, and therefore the range that I put him on was wrong, and he probably outplayed me.

I played the hand to my best knowledge, but after the hand was done, I saw that I had flaws in my "best knowledge" of this regular.

Post of the year, for so many reasons :D 
+1 Mr Holt's line though, for serious!