Interesting scenario, threebet pot 200bb deep

I have super lagg image, though i haven't shown down complete crap yet. It is clear though that i am threebetting light and bluffing though. I'm probably running 24/20. Opp is running 22/18 and is typical tagg, but willing to play back and is calling my threebets light. I doubt he's very good, this is 1/2nl on Stars, we both have a 400 stack.

I have AJs in the SB, opp raises on the BU to 8, I threebet to 26 (this seems bad but lets just ignore this for now). He quickly calls. HU.

Flop comes 933 two hearts. I bet out 36 into about a 50 he raises to 78. What's your move and how do you play the rest of the hand if necessary? Yes, fold is an option. Another questions is how does this change if we have.

1. 44
2. A3
3. 98s

k googogogogo

wow I think I call flop and CRai almost every turn with all of these hands except 44 which I probably just pitch to the minraise

such a spew monkey

i think 44 i'd basically always fold, and i don't knwo if i would have bet the flop in the first place.

98s i would always call, but again i'd v often not bet the flop to begin with (def much more often than 44 though). After that i'd probably just c/f a lot of turns if i don't improve.

A3, i would 3bet sometimes and call and lead/tarp turns sometimes, i def would not call and check turn.

AJ i would often fold, and often call to chase six outs, with plans of leading a fair amount of turns.


Also as you've mentioned i don't really like the 3bet pre, really at all with any of these hands given our image, although the A3 seems the most ok to 3bet out of all of them.

ISF theorem ftw

I'm I insane and can't read hands or something because i think its stupid to fold any hand given opps line

call and crai seems bad with these stacks genitruc, no?

Stacks are too deep to be playing past the flop after being raised. Once he calls the 3 bet and raises the flop bet most Taggs have a little more than air here. I think I only continue with A3 here, since it's probably the toughest hand for him to put you on in a 3 bet pot.

44 can't continue here, there is nothing you beat except a bluff, and he has shown willingness to continue. 89s is maybe able to stand a call and see how he reacts on the next street, but without having the FD, i don't like getting too much more in the pot with this hand.

all these new SPR thoughts have me a little gun shy about 200BB deep with Pairs and two pair hands.

Trainer,
I recommend if you want to take your hand reading to another level look at this hand long and hard.

hmm Rent pot is 200ish and if he bets 100-150ish on turn seems like CRai isn't all that bad to me

also it's not all that bad if the turn checks through with any of these hands

just seems to me that if our range here includes the 3 hands ISF laid out (excluding 44 which seems like I mentioned I'd just pitch) it makes us very very tough to play against and we are rarely in a terrible spot equity-wise

I could probably think up a reasonable plan for each one of our hands but this deep it seems like there may be a lot of merit to merging our range quite a bit if we want ppl to just stop messing with us.

Originally Posted by Genitruc

hmm Rent pot is 200ish and if he bets 100-150ish on turn seems like CRai isn't all that bad to me

also it's not all that bad if the turn checks through with any of these hands

pot is 200 ish with 300 behind. If we check to him on the turn he bets/calls or checks behind, pot is too big for him to b/f. So any folding equity we have against lukewarm (but better depending on our scenario) hands is going to be minimal.

also if he checks behind the turn its a disaster for us, because that means he won't be in a position to fold the river if we bet and he has a little something that he pc'd, also its bad for if we have the nuts because we won't be able to shove and get max value.

ya I could be ranting horseshit right now I'm pretty high what you said makes sense

but I think part of the range-merging things is making bluffs that "can't be bluffs" and, also, what's so bad about turn going check-check when we have AJ or 98?

It makes me think that a huge part of "figuring out" this situation is estimating villain's turn bet frequency.

Depending on our FOS image village can be making this play with a wide range on flop and figure that we have a mid-strength hand that will fold to a turn bet, in which case we have tons of fold equity even when he "commits" on turn.

Originally Posted by Genitruc

what's so bad about turn going check-check when we have AJ

he has like AQ or 66 a lot

or 98?

its totally fine in that case i would think

I don't want to destroy the good convo going but what is so bad with 3betting PF here? Surely you're not suggesting fold, so it's just a flat in the SB with AJs? Is it the stack-sizes that make 3betting this poor?

As for the hand, it's just going to be a pissing contest on flops like these. I remember a hand way back ISF where you dictated a b/3bet AI line by cbetting small with air and then bombed over the flop raise. Anyways, I'd like that better if the stacks weren't this deep.

Gen's lines are sick as always but I wouldn't have the gusto to pull them off. I wouldn't have 3bet any of those hands PF except maybe the 89s a fraction of the time (if I'm bored and only 4tbling...) and probably just fold the A3 maybe even the 44 (gasp nit) PF.

If I have 89s in a 3bet pot on this flop I b/c flop and lead/call turn.

This hand is interesting b/c I don't see anything like this at 100nl and we're talking just one level away...

The problem with c/r the turn is he's going to be checking behind a fair amount too also, so are we comfortable leading the river?

AJ is a bad threebet because i value town myself way too much with it and i often feel committed with the worst hand playing for stacks. plus were OOP, we're going to get position raped.

Since you already have established your image, I also think this 3bet is bad. He is clearly tired of your shit, I think you should be 3betting for value while maintaining your balance. As played I think he has shit or can be pushed off his hand with a commiting type 3bet. Other than winning this pot is there any reason to do this?

I think 3betting the flop, unless he just has complete air, is never getting him to fold a better hand (66/AQ/9Ts)

u guys r all crazy!

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Flop comes 933 two hearts. I bet out 36 into about a 50 he raises to 78.

This might be odd, but the only thing that worries me about this hand is his SMALLLL raise.

I feel like I do this a fair bit with very strong overpairs to give hero the impression of fold equity, and induce a shove over my raise. I could just be levelling here though... and thinking too much about what I would do.

But villain could also be raising small in position to check through the turn, as a way of pot control/free card. Because of this I think I like the line of call and lead turn with all the hands. I don't get why ppl would take a diff line between 44->89. They are essentially the same hand. Do we think if he has 55-88 he's gonna go crazy felting here 200bb's deep?

In any case, it seems odd that villain has a very strong here as played. I think 200bb's deep villain would/should actually 4-bet any/most strong hands here PF (does 200nl make this any diff? hmm not sure)

every hand in this thread (except A3s) is a bluffcatcher so any line that turns our hand into a bluff doesnt make that much sense.

Originally Posted by sauce123

every hand in this thread (except A3s) is a bluffcatcher so any line that turns our hand into a bluff doesnt make that much sense.

ok yes i agree with this to some extent. My post was by no means saying that we were ahead with our 44/AJ... I was simply saying that villain isn't that strong and I think we can maybe take him off his hand since we have a stronger range.

Do you agree that he would 4-bet PF this deep most strong hands?

sauce don't you think there s merit to pushing villain off of slightly stronger hands that he's turning into value-bluffs?

Originally Posted by griffey24

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Flop comes 933 two hearts. I bet out 36 into about a 50 he raises to 78.

This might be odd, but the only thing that worries me about this hand is his SMALLLL raise.

Guys when someone is repping a very thin range that means their bluffing frequency is through the roof.

Guys when someone is repping a very thin range that means their bluffing frequency is through the roof.

Am I still at $200nl because I cannot understand what this means at all?

Anyway, as played I would

Fold 44
call with 89
call with A3

depending on turn I would c/fold 89 and lead A3 as most likely we beating his range here a lot.

btw, is this a HU hand or 6-max? 3-bet pre fine HU but 6-max I might just call.

Originally Posted by silu73

Guys when someone is repping a very thin range that means their bluffing frequency is through the roof.

Am I still at $200nl because I cannot understand what this means at all?

it means that there arent many big hands he can have here. so his range is going to be more weighted towards a bluff.

Silu73

You think opp raises 30% of hands pre from the BU. You have a light threebetting image, he calls lets say 15% (a lot of hands). On the flop he reps pretty much 99 or a 3, which i cant expect him to play like this all the time, or he's repping a hand that wants to fold (9x, TT?), which again he doesn't always play this way (I mean i doubt he has those hands). In other words, he doesn't do this move all that frequently with any made hand. Therefore, since there is so much air in his calling range, we can expect that this is a bluff a lot. That is called repping a thin range. Another way of spotting a bluff is seeing if your range is bad and therefore makes it a good spot for opp.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

I'm I insane and can't read hands or something because i think its stupid to fold any hand given opps line

yea its one of those

Originally Posted by gabe

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

I'm insane and can't read hands or something because i think its stupid to fold any hand given opps line

yea its one of those

lol

I have to agree. There's a reason it's called ISF theory and not ISF law of nature.

The problem here probably is the fact that we're both so deep and OOP. It may seem nitty but i'd probably just fold this and wp him. He seems rather convinced to show us he can't be bullied around here, and though i agree a 3bets on the flop (or a c/r turn) might take it often, in my (i admit limited) 200NL experience this is just a quicksand situation where i get a lot of chips in without really knowing where i stand. I'd rather just muck this and wait for a better spot.

If we had 98s or A3 i'd 3bet the flop, get the money in while his four-flush is still a four-flush or his 88-44 feels it's good.

Just feel pushing on with AJs is very close to 0 EV and just adds a lot of variance...

Originally Posted by biondino

There's a reason it's called ISF theory and not ISF law of nature.

lol

so I of course threebet and called a shove. Ship my AJ against 56o.

lol bestcasescenarioment

That was a joke btw, but i did actually call the flop, turn went check check and then fired the river and he folded.

just make sure you know what level villians are on at all times and u cant lose

Originally Posted by gabe

just make sure you know what level villians are on at all times and u cant lose

Thats true. hmmmmmmmmmmm

I love ISF, because he makes me think. That is all.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

That was a joke btw, but i did actually call the flop, turn went check check and then fired the river and he folded.

What was your thoughts on his raise on the flop?

My thoughts on his flop raise was its a bluff a lot. Just think about it, what hands would you raise here?

meh, I fail. I meant to ask about his raise size.

Originally Posted by 2_Thumbs_Up

meh, I fail. I meant to ask about his raise size.

I don't think it makes a gigantic difference here but i think his size is more bluffy than 3x i guess.

Originally Posted by biondino

I have to agree. There's a reason it's called ISF theory and not ISF law of nature.

this post needs like 100 times more love.

Originally Posted by biondino

I have to agree. There's a reason it's called ISF theory and not ISF law of nature.

this post needs like 100 times more love.

Originally Posted by biondino

There's a reason it's called ISF theory and not ISF law of nature.

97 more and you get your wish

Originally Posted by Massimo

Originally Posted by biondino

I have to agree. There's a reason it's called ISF theory and not ISF law of nature.

this post needs like 96 times more love.

what suits do we have? at first I was thinking since you specified that we had AJs instead of AJ or AJo that we had 2 hearts. others seem to disagree and I don't blame them.

also, might not apply to this hand or any of the 2-3 hands listed below it, but it's sometimes ok to turn a bluffcatcher into a bluff. or a hand with value into a bluff. there's nothing inherently wrong with it and it can -sometimes- be the best option.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Originally Posted by Massimo

Originally Posted by biondino

I have to agree. There's a reason it's called ISF theory and not ISF law of nature.

this post needs like 95 times more love.

post-whoring 101, trying to get that straight-flush yo!

This deserves more love imo:

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Guys when someone is repping a very thin range that means their bluffing frequency is through the roof.

Problems arise when their bluffing range includes a decent amount of hands that are better than ours, though. In this spot we're behind flushdraws, behind some A highs, behind small pairs that are turning into bluffs, etc.

I don't really get your river lead (assuming you didn't improve). I don't really see him folding many made hands after checking the turn behind. Care to enlighten me?

Idk i thought he could have AQ/AK/AJ/44-88 or something and i could get him off it. (river was a T i think?)