River : (70 BB, 2 players) Ac
SB checks, Hero bets 47.5 BB, SB calls 47.5 BB
V's a nit so hardly any bluffs here. Considering his range is sets mostly do we try to GII on Turn? This is basically because of a bad river that'd kill the action like it did on this river
River : (70 BB, 2 players) Ac
SB checks, Hero bets 47.5 BB, SB calls 47.5 BB
V's a nit so hardly any bluffs here. Considering his range is sets mostly do we try to GII on Turn? This is basically because of a bad river that'd kill the action like it did on this river
However, we are not opening 100% of these combos in a high frequency, such as 22-66, T9s, A5s-A2s, etc.
I don't love opening A5s-A2s from EP, because when players in position 3-bet (MP, CO and BTN), we need to 4-bet or fold, almost always. We know that the range players use to 3-bet UTG uses to be very strong, we barely are going to find some ATs, even in the BTN's 3-bet range versus UTG.
I like to opening A5s-A2s starting from the CO: I open A2s from the CO, BTN 3-bets, now this range is very wide and allows a lot to make a 4-bet "semi-bluff": if BTN folds to our 4-bets awesome because we are more in the side of the bluffing range and if BTN calls we are good.
Even when BTN 5-bets we must put up a shove from time to time CO x BTN, given how dynamic these ranges can be, to put a lot of pressure in BTN's range and to protect our value range that could do the same here: AA, KK and AKs.
Preflop:
You opens 3x and SB calls with a capped range. Very easy situation: SB will have a lot of pocket pairs such as 22-99 that are not good to 3-bet versus UTG and some strong broadways, nothing more.
Flop:
You bet nearly 1/2 pot, which is good with our entire range and SB calls. Having a capped range, SB will never have T2, T4, 42, etc. What SB can have here to call your 1/2 pot c-bet is Tx, such as AT or KT, and the sets with 22, TT and 44: the sets have no reason to check-raise a flop like this versus UTG, because it is not so connected and UTG will keep bluffing a lot of overcards and pocket pairs here.
Turn:
Lol, the turn is a very good card for Villain's range because know SB will almost never see some A5 on our range. We could be betting here the same ammount, 2/3 pot or even a little bit more with AA, KK, AT, JJ, QQ, TT, and also calling a check-raise, since the board is not connected to flushes.
When SB check raises here, in a dry turn like this, knowing that you have some strong value hands here, such as AA, KK, that will never fold to a check raise, SB goes for 3x the size of your c-bet.
Here, we strongly believe that SB also doesn't have a lot of hands right now, either it has some 55, which decided to bluff here given board, or AT that still has equity for a lot of rivers and 22, TT, 44 and 33.
We can never fold here, but I believe that jamming is also nasty because we would be unbalancing our range quite a bit.
River:
It is a bad card now, because now we have all the AA, TT and SB could exploitatively fold some bottom set or two pair with AT. We can never be checking here, I guess, even when we have AK, AQ, AT, AA, because SB will not have many straights here, unless it has 55, as mentioned before. But these are few combos. The hand was played very well.
I guess that if you raise turn or shove river, Villain would never fold a Set here, because the ammout of strong value hands that you have and could be doing it. I say, a weak NIT, because a smart one will notice that when you bet a fair price in the river you want so much to be re-raised or called and will exploitatively fold dominated sets, considering that we almost never get in a river like this with straight type hands but with flushes, two pairs, TPTKs and Sets.
I agree; considering that he called in the small blind and you hold a 5 blocking the nuts, that leaves only 3 65s combos he could have. And even these we should discount since a tight player is somewhat unlikely to call pre from the small blind with 65s.
Take advantage of your read that he's tight and jam now to commit him.
In the river you came to a situation in which the villain will continue or fold directly. I think he would have made a pot bet to induce OP bluffs. Now any set could become bluff. And you partially block a main straight.
Greetings.
I check this flop back vs a good nit who will almost always be strong enough to continue here with their entire PF calling range and can make our lives miserable with a x/r where we have to fold a ton of equity with only a gut shot and one over card. If they are a weak or passive nit then I like the bet more.
AP I definitively 3 bet turn when we think V is too tight to have one of the 3 remaining 65s combos. I think a 3 bet is even warranted if V can have only 3 combos that beat us along with tons of sets and two pair and pair plus open ender draws. River seems standard.
I check this flop back vs a good nit who will almost always be strong enough to continue here with their entire PF calling range and can make our lives miserable with a x/r where we have to fold a ton of equity with only a gut shot and one over card. If they are a weak or passive nit then I like the bet more.
Nits are usually passive careful players.
I'm cbetting almost 100% vs nits except for perhaps WAWB situations
Holding 65s is quite irrelevant cause we are paying it out anyway
Nits are usually passive careful players.
I'm cbetting almost 100% vs nits except for perhaps WAWB situations
Holding 65s is quite irrelevant cause we are paying it out anyway
You are right. I don't know why Fundiver199 and Collin Moshman assigned 65s to for a NITs calling range from the SB.
If the NIT was in the BB okay, because the odds are much better for floating you in many flops and turns since your UTG's range is usually capped (15% of hands) and BB's is usually dynamic when it calls (50% of hands).
It is possible that a NIT called down versus UTG from SB with 65s but it is a very weak and dominated combo, and many times when SB hits two pair or even sets it would be dominated by UTG's range.
A simple thing that I believe is that if this player called with 65s from the SB it is never a NIT but a very exploitative FISH.
I agree. A nit almost certainly does not have 65o, when he call out of SB, and even 65s is unlikely. But if he has it anyway, we are going broke. I am never folding here except maybe on a paired river, where the nit open jam.
Nits are usually passive careful players.
I'm cbetting almost 100% vs nits except for perhaps WAWB situations
Holding 65s is quite irrelevant cause we are paying it out anyway
Agreed that nits are generally more passive and careful but that doesn't mean we can c-bet 100% in my opinion. It can't be profitable to bet into stronger ranges on all board textures unless these nits are also fish who aren't paying attention to frequencies and are over folding. When we are near the bottom of our range and miss on a dry board we are often just bloating the pot. This IS often a WAWB situation, that's my point. A very large portion of a nits range here is AT+, 55+, and suited broadways. We don't have to count combos to see what kind of shape we are in. We are only folding out the suited broadways here and drawing to 6 or 7 outs against the rest of his range.
Also agree about the 65s, I thought my comment implied that but perhaps it was not clear.
You are right. I don't know why Fundiver199 and Collin Moshman assigned 65s to for a NITs calling range from the SB.
If the NIT was in the BB okay, because the odds are much better for floating you in many flops and turns since your UTG's range is usually capped (15% of hands) and BB's is usually dynamic when it calls (50% of hands).
It is possible that a NIT called down versus UTG from SB with 65s but it is a very weak and dominated combo, and many times when SB hits two pair or even sets it would be dominated by UTG's range.
A simple thing that I believe is that if this player called with 65s from the SB it is never a NIT but a very exploitative FISH.
Sorry everyone, but I made a real mess here with my comment. Actually neither Fundiver199 nor Collin Moshman gave such combo for a NIT, they pointed exactly the contrary.
Real sorry
