renton555

Thanks for responding.  You're probably right that I'm thinking more exploitatively.  However, I think that there's probably an optimal bet size for OOP on the turn even given your parameters of balanced play vs a clairvoyant opponent.  True, there's gonna be a different equilbrium, at least locally to this street, for every bet size we would choose.  But its obviously incorrect for us to bet 1bb with our range, and obviously incorrect for us to bet 50bb.  Determining what betsize is optimal for Dario given a perfect opponent would seem extremely difficult to impossible to do, but I'm wondering what the steps in approaching that bet size would be.

Well I guess what I'm getting to the core of is why do we choose the sizes we choose in any situation?  For example, preflop we tend to open smaller sizing with a wide range when the BB isn't defending enough, especially when he isn't calling enough.  And when the BB is defending nearer to a correct range when we min-open, we adjust to that by opening for 2.5 or 3x with a tighter range.

Similar, when we cbet the flop, we tend to bet smaller in situations where the opponent is folding too much.   Our smaller size magnifies his mistake of folding too much.  But if he's calling a frequency that makes our weakest semi-bluffs indifferent to betting at all, isn't the proper adjustment to bet a larger amount with a stronger range?  Or is it just that we should bet a stronger range for the same amount?

I guess my point is that I felt Dario's turn bet was kind of "standard 2/3 sizing" on a turn where we really don't expect many folds.  So specifically with a hand like AA or AQ we'd rather bet bigger and get more value, and with a semibluff like AJ we'd rather make a bigger bet to get a little more fold equity and create more dead money in a spot where we'll get quite a few favorable rivers to bluff (and get value).

Great video and format, I have a couple of things to add:

I realize that for brevity's sake you didn't comment on bet sizing, and that bet sizing as a variable makes these game trees infinitely complex.  But can't we deduce that based on how easily IP is able to defend vs flop and turn c-bets here, that we should be going with a larger size on both of them with our range?  As you said, the flop connects surprisingly well with IP's range even though on level one most would see it as a "fairly dry flop."  

I think a lot of people choose their flop and turn bet sizes primarily based on how dry the board is, but it seems like the true consideration is how likely they are to call the bet with their range, or more specifically how likely they are to fold, and as they are folding less and less we are betting a tighter and tighter range for a larger and larger size.

But then again, I look at this river and with our fairly small sizing we've narrowed his range to a point that we can't even value bet AA.  But that's probably just that this is a crappy river regardless of how we manipulated his range up to this point.

Not sure what my question is, I guess I'm just looking to have my thoughts validated.

36:00 I think that K8 fold is just nasty vs him.  He probably thinks you can almost never have an 8, so he might c/r like that with any 8 and more than a few bluffs.  He was just playing too crazy with you in this session to fold that, IMO.

I definitely think a mixed strategy is in order here.  Certain hands, such as A8s and AQo, simply must bet.  So you should probably balance those semibluffs with some of your sets and overpairs, and check with the rest of your range, IMO.

Min-opening emerged like 3-4 years ago with a few really loose aggressive player doing it.  Everyone (self included) thought they were donks until PTR came out and we discovered they were winning like $100k a month.  

So then everyone started doing it from every position and it was a great strategy because people weren't defending their blinds NEARLY often enough.  One full ring reg I know would min-open UTG with like 87o at a full table and profit almost from preflop fold equity alone.  Eventually people started getting a little better at defending vs them, and a little more brazen at 3-betting min-openers IP, so now its shifting back to larger opening, with many players only min or 2.5 opening on the button or cutoff, while opening 3 to 3.5x in MP/EP.

I like getting this in pre vs 20%er.  These types tend to feel compelled to 5bet bluff, and will also often flat with hands that you have trashed.

River is a call for sure, but the J definitely reduces your equity vs his range, since all combos of AJo/AJs were solidly in his range and would have shoved the river unimproved.  

I think otr he's likely to shove down to AT and a few bluffs.  He'll definitely shove AQ which, even though you chop, positively affects your equity a good bit.

you probably have over 60% equity vs his range tbh

Loads of worse aces are in his range.  I'm no HU specialist but it looks like a shove from here.

C/c river is interesting with the flush blocker.

I'd probably c/r the flop since you have draws in such bad shape.  On the river yeah its a fold, but your value bet is too thin. 

His range to check back the turn is a whole lot of nothing that can call our river bet.  He probably would call preflop with QJ and he'd probably bet the turn with KQ, so on the river theres almost no top pairs he can have that you beat.  Meanwhile the board smashes your range with loads of two-pairs and sets you could have. Your best play is to check-decide a hand as relatively weak as AQ, probably folding to most bets to be honest.

So I was curious on your point about calling the KdTc on 3dKsTd4s turn where many regs would shove, so I decided to run some math.

Ok first lets make a simple game where his range is only a single spade draw, and he bets the turn.

ev(jam) = $530 dollars (since he always folds)

Suppose we call and his strategy is to bluff every flush completing river with his range.  The likelihood of a flush completing river is is 20/44, but we must remove 2 cards for his holding and 1 card since it gins our KT boat.  He'll always be somewhat more likely to have the bluffed draw since he removes cards with his hand.

ev(call) = (25/44)(530) + (1/44)(530+635) + (9/44)(530+635) - (9/44)(635)

ev(call) = $436 dollars

This is mega simplified, practically he wouldn't shove 100% as a bluff with his busted hands, and also practically we don't 100% stack AK when we call the turn.  If the river comes a flush completing Q, we nearly always miss the stack vs AK/AA, and on many rivers we miss the stack from KQ.

The big X factor is how does he play his gutters and QJ on draw completing rivers, but the same considerations apply.  I guess I just don't think its wrong to push some hands there on the turn, especially vulnerable one pair type stuff.  I don't see broad benefits to having hands like KQ in your river range, but if it was correct to rip it in vs a semi-bluff dense range then that was probably the the best line for that hand.

I think regarding the actual hand, whether its a call or a shove mainly depends on his propensity or lack thereof for betting through with this broadway hands, and also or bluffing the rivers that brick everything.  Vs a nittish straightforward player, I'd imagine you're losing an awful lot of money by not pushing the turn, vs someone good and balanced with his bluffing frequency, its probably rather close, and you'd prefer to keep your range wide and call.

By the way I think I'd rather bet the river than c/c here.  It's a much less profitable than usual c/c spot because a lot of his draws make pairs on teh turn and river, and because you have the ace of spades in your hand.  Without the ace of spades, c/c, in this hand, bet 1/3 pot as a blocking bet and for thin value.

Pretty clear call.  Loads of busted flush draws and 65/86.  You'll be beat over 50% but I think you'll get back 44 bucks for sure.

You should lean toward getting in AK in marginal spots if you feel like you would be at a disadvantage postflop.  For example, if hijack opens, cutoff calls, and tight player on the button squeeze, you should probably 4-bet get in AKo from the SB, even if you are often behind when the chips go in.  Calling out of position just isn't a great play there.

That said, getting in AKo as a standard is usually wrong.  If you can play it postflop vs their preflop air range, and you'd be getting it in bad by folding that range out with a 4-bet, you should generally call.

I think it is loose.  These wheel suited aces are only good all in preflop vs narrower 4-bet value ranges.  For example, in this hand,

http://weaktight.com/6437801

the guy was repping pretty much KK/AA/AK only for value so the A2s blocks a substantial bit of that and has great equity vs KK.

In your hand though his value range is 99+ AQ, so your best adjustment really is to 3-bet less from the sb and 5-bet jam with a wider range of strong hands.  

A5 suited has 31.14% vs 99+ AQ+, but it also blocks many of the hands that would 4-bet bluff, such as ATo/AJo.

77 has 35.5%, and doesn't block the bluffing hands (nor AK/AQ which it is happy to flip with).

KQs/KJs/QJs/QTs/JTs all have 33-34% as they flip favorably vs 99-JJ and block QQ/KK/AK (and again, don't block the 4-bet bluff hands).

FWIW, AQo only has 35.6% vs that range.

So long story short, just widen your 5-bet "value" range and call it a day.  No need to shove down this far.

Preflop reraise with KJo is a good adjustment to people who open for small amount from the SB with too loose of a range.  I'm assuming this guy is one of those people.  You'll want to 3-bet an insanely wide range vs a player like that so KJo ends up being straight value.  Flop looks fine.  You have a vulnerable hand and no backdoors so I'm happy to make this a big pot right away vs his fishy line.