$5 NLHE 6-max: QQ squeeze vs NIT + Fish, bad run out...

This would be a flat vs a NIT HJ (here listed as UTG by PT4, but we are 5 handed) open, but HJ folds to so many 3bets and fish will call so wide, I thought this would be a good spot. Also I'm OOP, I'd rather take the initiative.

Let me know about sizing etc. I typically 1/2 pot all by 3! cbets, I know people like either a 1/3 or 2/3 sizing depending on the flop, but vs a fish who could have JT here, why not?

Fish is a 32/19 AF: 1, 3bet 15%, F3B 0% but only one opportunity there. only 60 hands total.


Yatahay Network - $0.05 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 100 BB
Hero (SB): 143.8 BB
BB: 100 BB
UTG: 100 BB
CO: 120.8 BB

Hero posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has Q:spade: Q:club:

UTG raises to 2.4 BB, CO calls 2.4 BB, fold, Hero raises to 10.6 BB, fold, fold, CO calls 8.2 BB

Flop: (24.6 BB, 2 players) 9:diamond: 5:club: T:spade:
Hero bets 12.2 BB, CO calls 12.2 BB

Turn: (49 BB, 2 players) 7:diamond:
Hero bets 21.2 BB, CO calls 21.2 BB

River: (91.4 BB, 2 players) 6:club:
Hero checks, CO bets 76.8 BB and is all-in, fold

CO wins 87 BB

Pre-flop is fine. I might go just a tad bit larger w / the fish in there. Against most opponents I'm checking the turn, but betting is fine considering the opponent. I think your sizing is ok, but my plan would be to size up the turn a little more to shove most rivers against this kind of opponent. As played, since you blog QJ I think this is an easy c/f on the river. NH

Hello, I think that we should bet on the river on this board. As played - pre flop squeeze looks good. On the flop and on the turn I prefer bigger bets, at least 50% of the pot to protect our pocket QQ. Decision on the river - I prefer also bet for at least 50% of the pot. It isn't possible too much that opponent has a straight on this board. I would be a risky move from the opponent to call the flop with 8x and complete runner runner straight. I think that it is worth to risk playing bet on the river for hero. If opponent has sometimes something better than one pair, it is hurt, but I think that more times we have the best hand. When you check on the river opponent can think that you have two over cards like AQ or AK and you give up your hand, it is good situation to bet for value for him.

teh_colonel_saigon said:

This would be a flat vs a NIT HJ (here listed as UTG by PT4, but we are 5 handed) open, but HJ folds to so many 3bets and fish will call so wide, I thought this would be a good spot. Also I'm OOP, I'd rather take the initiative.

Let me know about sizing etc. I typically 1/2 pot all by 3! cbets, I know people like either a 1/3 or 2/3 sizing depending on the flop, but vs a fish who could have JT here, why not?

Fish is a 32/19 AF: 1, 3bet 15%, F3B 0% but only one opportunity there. only 60 hands total.


Yatahay Network - $0.05 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 100 BB
Hero (SB): 143.8 BB
BB: 100 BB
UTG: 100 BB
CO: 120.8 BB

Hero posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has Q♠ Q♣

UTG raises to 2.4 BB, CO calls 2.4 BB, fold, Hero raises to 10.6 BB, fold, fold, CO calls 8.2 BB

Flop: (24.6 BB, 2 players) 9♦ 5♣ T♠
Hero bets 12.2 BB, CO calls 12.2 BB

Turn: (49 BB, 2 players) 7♦
Hero bets 21.2 BB, CO calls 21.2 BB

River: (91.4 BB, 2 players) 6♣
Hero checks, CO bets 76.8 BB and is all-in, fold

CO wins 87 BB

Click to expand...

Yeah, with QQ we can never be calling from the SB, we are either folding or Squeezing 100% of times.
Our greatest concern was the open raisor, but when we do Squeeze and open raisor EP folds and only CO calls we are in a very good shape.

The only thing I would change in this hand would be the sizing of the c-bet flop: if I c-bet this flop oop I would go for 1/3 pot at maximum, not 1/2 pot as used by Hero.
The reason is easy, because the flop is way too dry, if CO raises us on the flop, we are in a very disgusting spot, right? After investing 1/2 pot for a Squeezed pot it would be kindda harder for us to be leaving OTF if CO raises on our facess .

The Turn, as always I like the polarization if I am going to bet and going for 1/2 pot you give such a good price for weak players to continue with a lot of non-sense draws and they can also float you on many rivers (it is obvious that Hero has a strong hand, because 1. Squeeze preflop OOP, 2. C-bet 1/2 pot on a dry flop and 3, c-bet 1/2 pot again OTT = strong hands do that.

If we do check either OTF or OTT, perhaps Villain would not have the initiative to be jamming OTR. Nonetheless, we must ask ourselves which types of hands c-bet flop and turn and check river: hands that lost value, so we give quite a fair chunk of information to Villains to overplay us.

Mind your sizings and who you are facing!

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Aballinamion said:

Yeah, with QQ we can never be calling from the SB, we are either folding or Squeezing 100% of times.
Our greatest concern was the open raisor, but when we do Squeeze and open raisor EP folds and only CO calls we are in a very good shape.

The only thing I would change in this hand would be the sizing of the c-bet flop: if I c-bet this flop oop I would go for 1/3 pot at maximum, not 1/2 pot as used by Hero.
The reason is easy, because the flop is way too dry, if CO raises us on the flop, we are in a very disgusting spot, right? After investing 1/2 pot for a Squeezed pot it would be kindda harder for us to be leaving OTF if CO raises on our facess .

The Turn, as always I like the polarization if I am going to bet and going for 1/2 pot you give such a good price for weak players to continue with a lot of non-sense draws and they can also float you on many rivers (it is obvious that Hero has a strong hand, because 1. Squeeze preflop OOP, 2. C-bet 1/2 pot on a dry flop and 3, c-bet 1/2 pot again OTT = strong hands do that.

If we do check either OTF or OTT, perhaps Villain would not have the initiative to be jamming OTR. Nonetheless, we must ask ourselves which types of hands c-bet flop and turn and check river: hands that lost value, so we give quite a fair chunk of information to Villains to overplay us.

Mind your sizings and who you are facing!

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Click to expand...

Thank you all for your replies.

I have a few basic questions, and some comments for clarification.

1. What is our range here? It's a "bluff-value" spot, so I have JJ+, AQ+, KQs, AJs. The worse cards in there offer good removal which would aid us in getting the reg to fold to we can play vs the fish. TT-99 can play multiway and I don't want to waste them vs a HJ 4bet. Even JJ I'm unwilling to 3! too much in this spot.

Thoughts?

2. Sizing flop:It's a dry board, so perhaps we could stick with the 1/3 sizing flop, which would let us bet our whole range and get calls from V's whole range.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
---Fish's Continuing Range---
-----The hands that Fish calls pre with are all good looking speculative hands. -----
----- Estimated Range: [[ 55-88, 76s - JTs, QJs, KJs, KTs, QTs, maybe some -----
----- suited aces?]] -----
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

VS this type of a range, he has a lot of draws in this board and some top pairs. I think we can get away with a 1/2 sizing for value, though maybe we could 2/3s it the whole way through.

Let's say though the standard line is 1/3 pot vs a reg. Are we really betting 100% of our range for that size here?

3. Sizing turn: This comment if more for Aballinamion... you said you prefer a polarizing size here? like 2/3 to 3/4? (we can jam rivers comfortably with either size)

John A mentioned checking the turn... why is that? It seems like a good play, especially if we do it with the 1/3 flop sizing since most of V's range would be there and would have the opportunity to bluff.

If we did 1/3 pot sizing on the flop, pot would be 40bb and effective stacks were 120 to start, so with~80 behind we could bet (check-call) a 2/3 pot bet of ~26 which would put us in shoving range for the river. so...

4. River:So there's two ways we got here. We'll assume the 1/3 flop to 2/3 turn sizing so pot will be ~92 with about 76bb effective behind.

a. Having check-called turn
Do we donk jam? on what run outs?

John mentioned jamming most rivers... Maybe a 9, 7, 5 or lower... Not too scared of an ace but V might be so I can't see jamming for value there, T may not be too good a card as most of the hands calling the jam would have a T in them... We can even jam on a J if V was floating turn with QJ KJ in the turn check call scenario

I'm struggling to see how this is for value overall though. Are we supposed to be bluffing this river often? Like going 3 streets with AK?
Or is the turn check to protect our AK here?

b. Having bet turn:
Jam? ITH I checked bc I figured there were a lot of sets + one straight in his range (he could have 88). Most of his weak hands would check behind river.

Against a good player this is very clearly exploitable. Maybe if we xc turn we could x-decide river, but if we bet turn then this is a bet...call? It'd be crazy to fold to a raise given remaining stack sizes so we just go with it?

---------

TLDR: :bebored:I'm having trouble understanding y'alls big brained strategies.
-How did you arrive at your bet sizing conclusions (vs fish? vs reg?)
-What is our range and how should we be playing it? (any bluffs here vs reg?)

Thanks again for all the input, you guys are beasts.

teh_colonel_saigon said:

Thank you all for your replies.

I have a few basic questions, and some comments for clarification.

1. What is our range here? It's a "bluff-value" spot, so I have JJ+, AQ+, KQs, AJs. The worse cards in there offer good removal which would aid us in getting the reg to fold to we can play vs the fish. TT-99 can play multiway and I don't want to waste them vs a HJ 4bet. Even JJ I'm unwilling to 3! too much in this spot.
Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Is this a rethorical question, mate? This is not a 'bluff-value' spot, we aren't 3-betting many bluffs SB x EP, only very good 'semi-bluffs', with a lot of potential/playability postflop, as you mentioned AJ, AQ, AK, KQ etc. We also have the removal for monsters preflop such as JJ+, so overall we have more values than bluffs when we do elect to 3-bet SB versus EP.

teh_colonel_saigon said:

2. Sizing flop:It's a dry board, so perhaps we could stick with the 1/3 sizing flop, which would let us bet our whole range and get calls from V's whole range.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
---Fish's Continuing Range---
-----The hands that Fish calls pre with are all good looking speculative hands. -----
----- Estimated Range: [[ 55-88, 76s - JTs, QJs, KJs, KTs, QTs, maybe some -----
----- suited aces?]] -----
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

VS this type of a range, he has a lot of draws in this board and some top pairs. I think we can get away with a 1/2 sizing for value, though maybe we could 2/3s it the whole way through.

Let's say though the standard line is 1/3 pot vs a reg. Are we really betting 100% of our range for that size here?

Click to expand...

We aren't using 1/3 pot to c-bet 100% range: we utilized 1/3 pot with our values and bluffs OTF, and we don't c-bet 1/3 pot a 100% of times, sometimes we must check values/bluffs, but it seems that this notion doesn't exist at lower limits where players believe they must be betting redargless of the long run.

Second, we don't know if fish is going to continue paying more or less for 1/3, 1/2 or 2/3 pot, so I don't like to play dices with the devil so I always utilize a sizing that is good for any type of non-sense fish reaction:
For example, we do 3-bet AQo SB x EP and fish calls IP. We miss the flop but we have BDF and a Gutshot. We do c-bet 1/2 pot and fish raises 4x, what are you going to do? All-in?
So, for the times I c-bet 1/3 pot and fish does crazy sizings I simply fold, because I use the pot odds concepts and I realize that out of position, versus a sticky player, my range that contains back doors and gutshots is not enough, I am going to be losing a lot of fish.
So, we don't use 1/3 pot because we want to bluff a 100% of flops, but because we COULD be bluffing a lot of flops, not all of them, otherwise we are easy preys even for 2 NLHE fishes, who love to check-raise OTF in weird scenarios, who love to go all-in OTF with OESD+SD, you name it.
I like to utilize smaller sizings because I am always prepared to fold hands like JJ+ and AQs+, for instance.

teh_colonel_saigon said:

3. Sizing turn: This comment if more for Aballinamion... you said you prefer a polarizing size here? like 2/3 to 3/4? (we can jam rivers comfortably with either size)

John A mentioned checking the turn... why is that? It seems like a good play, especially if we do it with the 1/3 flop sizing since most of V's range would be there and would have the opportunity to bluff.

If we did 1/3 pot sizing on the flop, pot would be 40bb and effective stacks were 120 to start, so with~80 behind we could bet (check-call) a 2/3 pot bet of ~26 which would put us in shoving range for the river. so...

Click to expand...

I don't know, you better ask professor's Anhalt himself. I dare to say that Polished Poker Vol I can give you very bright insights in situations like this, a very good book by the way.
We are checking this turn for pot control most of times, so we avoid Villain to push on the river, it is a good alternative versus non-sense players. Plus, recs love to bet vs missed c-bet, they are going to understand our check OTT as a weak move as if we had missed and want to give up on the hand, and they are going to level more by c-betting with dominated hands, giving us sweet value without too much effort.
Well, I said something similar to professor Anhalt's, IF we are going to c-bet the turn we must go for a larger sizing for when we got favorable rivers we simply jam upon Villain's ranges, but in this case it is not very good because QQ has a lot of showndown value, for this reason I would not be bluffing so often, but in some cases that I know the opponent is passive enough, I am betting 100% pot or 150% pot OTT to irritate the type of player who loves to chase flushes and straights and put it all-in ASAP, and in this case Fish has only 18% equity versus our Pocket Pairs, TPTK, Sets, Trips, Straights, etc.
Man your question is way too long for a proper answer, and I will jump some part of it.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Aballinamion said:

Man your question is way too long for a proper answer, and I will jump some part of it.

Regards;

Carlos 'Aballinamion' Barbosa

Click to expand...

Haha, thanks so much homie! You've given me a lot to think about. I'm still trying to wrap my mind around ranges and betting w/ frequency. So this was helpful.

FYI the "bluff-value" was from the Grinder's Manual, which identified types of squeeze spots by player type. But yea, since we have a merged range it is kind of redundant to label it at all.