Thanks all for the input. I'll give it a full 24 hours before results. My thinking on flop had a few factors. First, I'm playing 8 tables so I dont always slide to the exact amount I want. I probably would have gone for about 45 BB so I thought 53.4 was close enough. My thought was that I'd like to charge UTG the size of the pot and he already has 12 BB in so 42 BB to go. I guess this has it's roots in more exploitative live play. But I also think often of the fundamental theorem of poker. If you could see he cards and he had a naked flush draw how would you size the flop 3 bet? I thought if we made it 42 BB it would set up a trivial turn jam provided we fade a diamond one time. So the other side of the same coin, where "if we had bet less we could fold turn" sounds to me like we are trading flop equity to make it easier to fold turn and I'm not sure I'm on board with that. If we can get stacks in on the flop I'm ok with that as we are only behind 5 combos and there are some draws we are in good shape against.
@Carlos
Agree pre was marginal. I didn't include stats. UTG was 31/23/27 over a tiny sample of 26 hands so his range isn't the normal UTG range. I don't want to bloat the pot with A7hh with so much action behind me but I'd like to get to a cheap flop against a wide range with a hand that can make the nuts. We could fold here but I think over calling and folding to the squeeze is fine. Only SB seemed solid at this table so I'm fine with mixing it up a bit against this bunch. Just plugged Ah7h vs 23% into the sim and we have 46% equity and position on his range.
Flop, see above. Why aren't we piling in as many chips as possible here? This is exactly the type of flop we want with A7hh. If we aren't willing to shovel chips in then I would fold pre. We have the best hand so often here as we block AA and 77 heavily.
Turn, obviously I know we are supposed to be calling off here. I simply asked the question can we deviate from that standard line and fold as an exploit here since Vs range is so heavily weighted towards flushes (against which our equity is not great enough to call). Surely we can still ask simple questions about alternative lines on a poker forum right? If your position is that we can never deviate form the standard line that's fine but suggesting we shouldn't even ask the question seems a bit much.
Thanks for your answer. I believe that earlier we put more chips on the pot, higher the variance. The later we invest blinds on the pot, lower the variance, because it is obvious that we have more range information and the streets progresses. Preflop we have absolutely no safe information, but OTR, we can make decisions close to perfection.
OTF we are (almost) never winning too much or losing too much, do you agree?
Meaningless to quote you a trivial example, for example we hit top set with AA and we go all-in OTF versus a certain flush draw. Are we destroying here? I don't think so.
Second, if you have faith that one of Villains can pay this huge sizing why don't you go all-in right off the bad OTF?
Considering UTG was 31/23/27, you should be 3-betting more, because if you believe your suited aces are ahead of UTG's opening/3-bet calling range, so you would/could isolate the player in the blinds, thus you will have much more odds and playability.
But calling is good for balacing, your are right, but it is good when you do have NITs ahead, that don't cold call preflop too much. Perhaps you weren't seeing the whole picture because you were playing 8 tables at once.
I also don't like the ideia of getting "cheap flops" at the micro-mid stakes because the rake is out of proportion.
A7s has good equity here, as you stated, but our equity drops down when there are many players involved on the hand. When you calculate equity, you gotta calculate with the rake included, which means that we always need 3%, 4%, 5% more equity than usual to be calling at the micros-mid stakes. (as lower the stakes, we will require more equity than usual higher limits such as 1000 NLHE for example, where it is always correct to be defending 50% from the blinds or even more).
It is easy for all of us to picture that the player sitting in the Big Blind, is one of fundiver199's clients/opponents: very weak and no-brainer.
Which hands could be calling such a preposterous sizing that you/Hero made OTF, specially when we are blocking a lot of A7, resting only 66 as the best hand and the flush draws.
IF this player called with the flush draw, BB is an idiot, and if BB called with 66, the Villain in the Big Blind is even more idiot, with all due respect to your opponent, if that's possible after the words I used.
Overall I tend to classify the BB as a very weak player, because most of times it will have sticky dominated hands and if it had sets, omg, why not jam the flop?
I wasn't saying that you should not look towards alternative lines, I was trying to tell you that you should've shoved the flop, once you know BB is weak enough to be calling with a flush draw when, indeed, BB has no equity at all.
Well, first of all, I would never be donking a flush draw versus two players IP, unless I had a very specific reason for so doing (BB's shoes).
I cannot understand how can you picture a fold OTT after you invested more than 50% of your stack and you have a very strong value hand.
I believe the alternative line is OTF, if you raise a size that does not compromisse your stack, than you could be looking towards a fold here, even so, if you've had raised the size of the pot (30 blinds) and BB called with a flush draw, BB still has no odds. And unless both are deep you are already in, so I don't see to much difference, between shipping all-in and going for 53 blinds check-raise. But considering that the BB is weak enough to be calling down here with flush draws 53 blinds, BB would also have called an all-in, and there would be no difference.
I don't love guessing hands, "oh because BB has the flush", if BB has the flush we already lose for it, let's think now about other hands/range BB is going in here. So, in a spot like this, BB will have as bluffs FDs and SDs, sometimes both combined which is terrible for our equity, and value hands no AA, and much more 66 than 77, because we are blocking (A7hh). Besides, BB can have inferior two pair, TPTK, you name it, we must think how can we extract value of its entire range.
Summarizing: anything BB appears on the showdown is preposterous.
I tried to be short here but it was not possible.
Regards;
Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa
