AK - Idiotic sizing tell?

BTN is like 8/0 after some really insignificant amount of hands. We'll just assume that's he's like level 0 thinking weak tight passive type player, let's say along the lines of 16/5.

Poker Stars, $0.01/$0.02 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 6 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

SB: $2 (100 bb)
BB: $5.17 (258.5 bb)
Hero (UTG): $2.57 (128.5 bb)
MP: $2.16 (108 bb)
CO: $2.54 (127 bb)
BTN: $1.58 (79 bb)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with K:club: A:heart:
Hero raises to $0.06, 2 folds, BTN raises to $0.18, 2 folds, Hero raises to $0.50, BTN raises to $1.14, Hero raises to $2.57 and is all-in

Is idiotic sizing and leaving a little bit behind a huge sign of strength? Discuss.

don't you have a 3b stat after a good amount of hands

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeldPhaser

don't you have a 3b stat after a good amount of hands

---

Quote:

---

after some really insignificant amount of hands

---

no

If you mean why didn't I put a 3bet stat in for my imaginary person, because he's a weak passive player. It should be fairly obvious he's not 3betting light.

This sizing pre (i.e. leaving a little bit behind) nearly always reflects a hand the villain perceives to be the nuts, but not necessarily KK+. In my experience, inexperienced players that take this line tends to view {JJ+, AK} as the nuts pre but have some bizarre idea that "I don't want to scare this guy away with a jam". It can occasionally be tilt spew with practically ATC, but almost certainly not from a villain with these stats.

my apologies, first read thought it said significant.

Ha, like how we are following the AK AI-pre post w/ some hands.

we're like 60/40 vs. JJ+,AK+, we only have to add a couple combos of spaz maybe 99,77,KJo to flip the script

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeldPhaser

my apologies, first read thought it said significant.

Ha, like how we are following the AK AI-pre post w/ some hands.

we're like 60/40 vs. JJ+,AK+, we only have to add a couple combos of spaz maybe 99,77,KJo to flip the script

---

You're still kind of missing the point.

Look through your database if you have one and look for similar situations, whatever hand it is is irrelevant (I wish I'd have not left my hand in now). It's about looking for little things people do that can be pretty big tells.

note - "can be", I dunno what this means in particular. I assume it's strength a lot of the time, but how strong?

If villain isnt 3bing light and always has nutted hands like lets say JJ+ AK why not fold to the 3b I certainly dont see much point in 4bing this tight a villain. And dont see much in the way of implied odds for a call so fold I guess is the most exploitative play. Out nit the nit.

soooo why did you 4bet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eugmac

soooo why did you 4bet?

---

Because it really is a insignificant amount of hands.

Fold to the 3-bet. Yeah this is an insane sign of strength more often than anything else. Your 4-bet just makes no sense though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImSavy

Because it really is a insignificant amount of hands.

---

Default play UTG vs BU readless at these stakes shouldn't be to 4-bet this spot and that's vs a total unknown. Vs a likely passive, you defo shouldn't do anything but fold.

calling the 3bet cant be bad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

calling the 3bet cant be bad

---

I think it can be. We probably get stacked on Kxx whenever he has KK+, we c/f probably any flop we miss and we likely never win much on Axx or Kxx the times we're good.

you forgot to add:

-you have implied odds when you hit an ace or king (and you actually have an A or K in your range on these boards)
-you get value from hands like KQ or AT that were 3b/folding pre
-you occasionally will check it to showdown and win
-you don't have to win terribly often postflop thanks to dead money in pot
-you're near the top of your range preflop and villain is effectively unknown

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carroters

I think it can be. We probably get stacked on Kxx whenever he has KK+, we c/f probably any flop we miss and we likely never win much on Axx or Kxx the times we're good.

---

What is your calling range pre here?

I don't see how it is idiotic sizing, it's pretty much just a min re-raise.
Fairly standard with a strong hand to induce further action,
(also sometimes trying to show that strength not believing your raise had any genuine legs).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chemist

I don't see how it is idiotic sizing, it's pretty much just a min re-raise.
Fairly standard with a strong hand to induce further action,
(also sometimes trying to show that strength not believing your raise had any genuine legs).

---

The pot would be like $2+ if I called and he'd have about 40c left behind.

And he hasn't just minraised it by clicking the raise button, he's actually done that sizing himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icanhastreebet

What is your calling range pre here?

---

Probably close to 0 hands.

Idk like TT-QQ maybe if he was deeper I'd mine a lot more as I'd expect his range just to be pretty nutted really.

You are contradicting yourself here.

How so?

I'll explain my thoughts: IMO AK isn't +EV to flat here, some better pairs probably are since they can flop the nuts and actually get stacks in good a relevant % of the time (when they flop sets). QQ/JJ is also likely to be +EV to call a flop bet with and fold turns on a decent amount of boards, namely ones without an A or K on them. As for the worse pairs, yeah they have pretty much the same implied odds vs a tight range of QQ+ AK (with some occasional weaker hands) , but I dunno, I don't think implied odds alone is enough oop with these stacks and so I don't want to be purely set mining something like 33. If we're a little deeper I'd snap mine these.

So my thoughts are that If I had to flat a hand here it'd be JJ/QQ and these should be way better than AK, we c/f less often, can flop sets and can beat AA/KK for a stack. AK has a hard time doing any of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

you forgot to add:

-you have implied odds when you hit an ace or king (and you actually have an A or K in your range on these boards)
-you get value from hands like KQ or AT that were 3b/folding pre
-you occasionally will check it to showdown and win
-you don't have to win terribly often postflop thanks to dead money in pot
-you're near the top of your range preflop and villain is effectively unknown

---

Idk whats the sample OP is calling terribly insignificant? If it's a few hands then I don't mind flatting AK. If it's like 35 then I think he's way more likely to be a passive nit with a nutted 3-bet range. The more likely it becomes that his range is just super strong, the less your first second and third factors apply. If he's just unknown then those are obviously valid points.

Sample is probably 12 or 25 hands which is why I think all the assumptions we are making are ridiculous but if you are making these assumptions you shouldn't be folding any pair ever and if you disagree with that then you should be calling AK.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icanhastreebet

Sample is probably 12 or 25 hands which is why I think all the assumptions we are making are ridiculous but if you are making these assumptions you shouldn't be folding any pair ever and if you disagree with that then you should be calling AK.

---

I was trying to think of what the sample size was when I posted as I was sure it was less than 10 but that obviously makes no sense, so it must have been 12 as I don't have 25 hands on him overall and this wasn't my last hand with him.

And

edit: deleted for irrelevance.

Other than people 3bet bluffing a ton and folding a ton to 4b, or capable of 3b/5b ship light here with some Axss, you're not gonna be doing great 4b/calling this off.

I'd rather call OOP and play some poker.