the3shells

This is way higher than I play, but I'll take a shot.  I think the right way to think about the flop play is to do exactly what you would do if you actually did hold the nut flush draw. 

So I guess my answer is that your play is good ONLY if you would be check-calling with the nut flush draw and check-raising the heart on the turn.  And I think this makes turn and river play easier too--if you're committed to bluffing with nutblockers (which I guess depends on whether you think cantbeat is able to fold smaller flushes or sets), you'd play paired or bricked turns or rivers exactly as you'd play them if you were holding nut hearts.

I think I probably would prefer to call the 3-bet pre-flop rather than 4-bet.  With no real read on the villain, I expect that we are not going to be happy getting it in if he shoves.  We have a strong hand and I think we'd like to see a flop rather than see him fold junk or shove aces.  He seems to be c-betting everything, so the flop should be pretty easy to play--we're pretty happy to shove any flop except with an A, I think.

As played, I think b/c the flop is good.  You rep aces more credibly than he does (because you 4-bet, and because he called) and it's tough for him to continue with anything other than aces (unlikely), spades, or low rundowns (2345, 3456, etc.).

Maybe I'm missing something obvious--but why are we (nutinsider and flipacoin) talking about check-calling on the river?  We have the third nuts and we block Q9 boats.

I would be trying to set up a check-raise on the river--so I'm thinking we want to represent AA or KK.  So the half-pot lead on the flop is great (it's prob how we'd c-bet with AA or KK in a 3-bet pot with a paired board) and a check-call on the turn is great (it's what we'd do if we were trying to get to showdown with AA or KK).  We're pretty much praying for K, J, T, 9, 8, 7, 6, or any heart to show up so we can check-raise when villain bets a straight or a flush or a smaller boat for value.

I'm going to feel dumb if I'm missing something obvious...

I agree it's a pretty clear fold on the flop, but is really so bad to call pre-flop with Ad7d if you expect a bunch of callers and no 3-betting?  I mean, it's only one had, but this is almost like a play money table... why not call pre-flop, shove if you see two diamonds or trips, and fold everything else?  If all players at the table are "playing to get lucky"--which I read to mean everyone sees the flop--then aren't hands that can draw to the nuts pretty much the only ones you don't fold preflop?

I have two thoughts.  First, I don't think a 1/3-pot bet in a 4-bet pot is likely to best-accomplish what you want (which I think is inducing a shove from KKxx or folding out weird 5678ds hands and weaker hands that would've folded to any size bet).  The only hands that shove are ones that are pretty bad or scary for you (JJxx, Ad with or without a second diamond), and the only hands that flat are ones that would happily call a 1/3-pot bet to see the turn (stuff like KK with diamonds or rundowns above or below the J and maybe with the J).

Also, if I'm villian and I think you're a good player, a teeny-tiny c-bet sets off red flags in my head, and you're going to have a tough time getting me to put money in bad.  I expect a c-bet of 75-100% pot with almost your entire range, mostly because that makes my decision more expensive.  And because I expect a large c-bet, you're probably *more* likely to get me to shove/continue with dominated hands with a large bet than you are with a tiny one.

Not sure if that makes sense.

Yeah--I kind of think that the math is maybe being overused here.  I think making these kinds of calculations isn't all that useful when the opponent isn't making decisions on a similar basis.  After 2k hands with villain, I have to think that you had some sense that the guy is calling that flop raise super-light.  I think that's a bad play on his part, but it's a worse play on your part if you're shoving double-gutter/blockers/backdoor flush draw (I'm not a math whiz, but I'm thinking you were probably something like ~40% against his hand, and way worse against any two clubs and a pair or an overpair like KKxx) knowing that villain can't find the fold button in most cases. 

I am obviously making a gross generalization based on one hand, but based on my experience with these kinds of villians, expecting a fold 58% of the time here seems optimistic.  I am a nit, but I probably would've just called the c-bet and played the turn in position with the villian's PSB left.  But I'm a nit...

Out of curiousity, why do folks think villain stops betting on the river?  Iofigr thinks that it's to "trap" a PSB--but that doesn't seem consistent with my experience with this kind of LAG player.  I wouldn't expect that kind of player to check this river with a strong hand unless we were much deeper-stacked. 

So--is the villain planning to check/fold?  Check-call with an overpair?  I know it doesn't really matter--checking behind is almost certainly the right river play for us--but I'm curious as to how you guys think villain thinks...

I am kind of inclined to fold.  I think you're ahead of his range on the turn, but there are so many river cards that would be difficult to make a decision on.  I wouldn't know what to do if the river brought a spade, or any of A, K, Q, J, T, 9, 8, or 3.  There are going to be much better spots to push an edge against this villain than calling three big bets with aces up and no draws.

I can't resist mentioning that I dislike leading the river--I would almost always check-call.  As played, I fold the river just because I don't think many villains bluff-shove the river--bad players are jamming good hands earlier, and better players (who are floating or pressuring a 3-better on a low-card board) know that you're calling a lot with the board paired.

On the questions re the flop, I would be likely to call a small flop raise.  This is because I think lots of villians see a flop like this as a really good place to put pressure on a 3-better, since the hits a 3-bet calling range way better than it hits most reasonable 3-betting ranges.  So in that sense, the flat call is almost scarier than a raise to me. 

On the river, I think villain is representing 54, 74, 55, with some other stuff in his range like TT, JJ, or QQ with blockers like 88 or 66 in his hand along side.  A hand like a suited TT86 or TT88 could make a crafty shove here, I think.  Maybe I'm way off here--but if I were villain, I would be shoving here quite a bit with blockers, knowing that it's a crappy board for you and knowing that you know that I know the 2-pairs are counterfeit, and I would expect you to fold a lot.

I think this could be a fun topic--especially for a relative beginner like me.  I play HU almost exclusively, so my answers describe HU play.

I don't always open 3BB, but I don't have very sophisticated thinking here.  Against a player that I perceive to be weak because he bets too aggressively (a lot of barreling and re-raising), I might open 2BB or limp to try and manage pot sizes--especially if I think the guy is going to pay me off when I start check-raising and re-raising made hands on later streets (I play lower stakes, so there are a few of these types of players).  Against a player that I think folds too much--either to flop c-bets or to certain kinds of bets on later streets, I'm usually opening 3BB with almost every hand.  I will also cut back to 2BB or 2.5BB if I'm playing against a short-stacker (say, less than 50 BB stacks). 

My standard flop bet OOP after 3-betting pre is 2/3 to 3/4 pot.  I do this with almost 100% of my hands when the flop isn't paired or three-cards-to-a-flush (with the rare exceptions being Axx or Kxx flops against players who I know aren't calling 3-bets without AAxx or KKxx).  I play paired flops and three-flush flops a little bit differently.  Here I will sometimes c-bet with 1/3 pot--my thinking is that if I do this frequently with flopped trips/boats as well as with nothing, it's just a good play because aggressive players will re-raise and I can get it all in, sometimes villain will fold, and, in any case, I can get a lot of information without risking a lot of money.

I realize that my turn-then-river play is pretty binary, so I won't try to answer the question.  Pretty much if I'm calling your turn bet of any size OOP, I know exactly what I'm doing for any card that might come on the river.  Which isn't very good--I'm probably giving up a ton of value--but I'm nitty and trying to figure out ways to play differently.

I'm pretty nitty, and my opponents usually pick up on this.  So I actually can get away with checking the nuts OOP for a check-raise quite often--I do this a lot when I pick up in the flow of the game that the villain has decided that a turn bet and a river check mean I've given up on the hand (he is often right).  When I feel that leading the river is right, I vary my bet sizing, but mostly based on how I think the opponent will view my bet.  If I think he will view a half-pot bet as a "feeler" bet to be raised, if he has caught me making a 3/4-to-full PSB on a bluffed draw, etc., all affect what I decide to bet.  But again, I think most players view me as nitty and as someone who very often will shut down the river, so I get the chance to check-raise very strong hands quite a lot.

 

For whatever my inexperienced opinion is worth (and with no knowledge of how the game has been going), I would probably tend to call the turn and see what happens on the river.  This is because I think that if I'm the BB, I am thinking that a pretty decent percentage of the time, SB might just be trying to take my BB--and the very standard-looking c-bet would simply reinforce that suspicion.  So, given that, and given the extremely dry board, if I'm the BB, my plan is to raise that flop c-bet and lead the turn (which villain did, with an instabet on the turn). 

Switching back to hero's side of the hand, if I flat the flop raise and call the turn, I'm feeling pretty comfortable--flatting the flop (as opposed to 3-betting) and calling the turn tells the villain I'm pretty strong, I think, and the river is really easy to play--I'm calling almost anything, putting in a 1/2-pot bet if checked to me, and folding if he check-raises.

Strange--the first time I checked this thread I didn't see your hand posted either.

As it is, I think my conclusion is the same as yours (though I am a relative novice to PLO), though more information about how the match has gone up to this point would be helpful (how much have you been 3-betting, what has he seen you 3-bet with and how have you played the 3-bet pots where the board didn't hit your hand, what has he been subsequently calling your 3-bets with, etc.).

Absent that history, I think the 3-bet is probably fine, and the c-bets on the flop and turn are probably fine as well (on the thinking that villains holding a 9 or broadway cards similar to yours will fold on the turn).  I think you do have to shift to c/c on the river though, because I think almost all villains that make it to the river are trouble for you--everyone except unpaired broadway with diamonds is calling that 1/3rd pot bet and some are raising it. 

There are some interesting longer-term possibilities here.  The guy flat calls with the nuts, probably just because he wanted to see what kind of hand you made this play with.  Which I think is pretty cool--you get a chance to have some fun sizing your river bets with him later in the match...

I run into these kinds of players a lot and would appreciate views on the right strategy to take against a villain who is 3-betting very frequently and then barreling three streets. 

What I've been doing is one of two things--either (a) opening a tighter range 2bb preflop, hoping to hit a big flop and get the money in, and folding all other hands to c-bets, or (b) opening a "normal" range versus the villain's theoretically wider range and calling down with a big pair, two pair, or anything better, hoping that over a large enough sample size I will win money because he is probably firing three barrels with junk a pretty decent percentage of the time.

This is frustrating, though.  Under the first approach, I find myself folding a lot of 3-bet pots on the flop waiting for strong hands and eventually getting tilted and quitting on some hand where I call a huge river bet with a worse full house or something.  Under the second approach, I feel like I might as well be flipping.

There must be a good general approach to playing these kinds of players--they can't possibly have 3-bet-worthy hands all the time, and they can't all hit the flop and become 3-barrel-worthy hands.  It's a dumb question now that I'm asking it--and maybe the answer is just to suck it up and gamble--but what's the correct approach to a hypothetical villian who is 3-betting 75+% of hands and betting 75-100% of pot down three streets?

I liked that you pressed for more explanation!  I am a beginner too, and I have been spending time thinking about when it is or isn't right to slowplay big hands.  This ended up I think being a play that more experienced players had a strong understanding of--and the explanation you got helped me too!

Like Tom, I would've bet a little bigger--probably 75% or more of pot on turn and river. It's possible that AAxx and probably 99xx call from the SB pre-flop, but I would expect a raise from either of those hands on the flop and certainly by the turn (unless Villain thinks you're the kind of player to barrel three streets light). I have a difficult time imagining that JTxx gets to the river, so I would expect you to be up against A9/AQ/AJ/AT most of the time. Which is great, because if the guy follows you all the way to the river on those hands, he's probably going to pay you off. And if he folds on the river, you're still happy because he's probably gonig to begin to call you down lighter in later hands.

Bumping this because I don't really know how to play this either. I'm pretty new to PLO, but I would probably fold this hand and look for a better hand to stack off with. Someone 3-betting this much obviously won't have AAxx in this spot as much as someone with a more typical 3-bet frequency, but I think pot-sized bets on three streets (where he hasn't been c-betting very frequently or as large thus far) means he's likely got aces full or middle set turned into a boat when the turn pairs.

I don't know what I'd do differently on other streets either--I suppose it probably makes more sense to 4-bet pre-flop this deep and in position than to raise the flop with just aces, but I still wouldn't know how to play a flop that came out with an A or K. I guess shoving the turn is the least bad option--on the one hand, we feel like idiots if he calls, but on the other hand, we don't have to make that awful river decision...

I'm pretty new to range construction--out of curiousity, what do you think his range is on the turn? Do you think he was flat calling pre-flop with big pairs or multiple broadway cards? I would've expected those hands to be 3-bet most of the time--although maybe that's wrong?

In the first hand, I call--but only because we think everyone is passive. My plan is to fold if one of somebody 4-bets--if not, I'll be expecting a CO 3-bet to have big pairs most of the time. And since Villain will only have pretty much one more PSB on the flop, I'll call or shove on low cards or if I hit 2-pair, fold if A or K comes out and he shoves, and sweat (and probably fold, ultimately) if the flop is stuff cards in the 9-to-Q range.

The second hand is, for me, a pretty easy fold. Because, as Jonna points out, I am not in good shape against an UTG open, I'm not going to be happy if somebody 3-bets behind me, and even in the best case--where nobody 3-bets and I flop a set--I'm going to be nervous anyway in the pretty frequent cases where the flop has a broadway card or two.

I'm relatively new to PLO and this is my first post, so go easy on me, but...

...I would probably shut down and check/fold once we got to the river. I think that at this stakes and with the flop and turn action, we can almost entirely rule out sets (and you are holding an 8). The action and your holdings also make it unlikely that he is on a draw with no backup.

I think his range by the turn probably consists mostly of top pair and two-pair kinds of hands--ATxx, KTxx, T875 kinds of hands. I think A8xx and A532ss/ds and A543ss/ds probably also make it to the river (especially if you have been c-betting a lot).

And, in my limited experience, players at these stakes don't like folding 2-pair, and they tend to view medium-sized bets follwed by a shove as suspect--plus I don't think the CO called off half his stack to fold for 30 big blinds. So I think the hands you fold out with a river shove are paired 8s or the less likely paired 2s or weird low pocket pairs. Just about everyone else who made it to the river calls for 30 big blinds, I think.