$2 NLHE Full Ring: What do you think of this lead-out..?

[Mdf1992]

Hi! Hey I was wondering if I could have some of yall's input on whether or not you like this lead-out here. I think I got somewhat lucky to get it through. My thinking is that maybe I should do a lead-out like this 33% of the time, and just check it somewhere around 66% of the time? My thinking was--my re-raise was quite large and then with the bet after the flop, I was basically saying I have AK AQ or Aces...try me. I think that at least one of those guys had an Ace but I was able to get them off of it because of how strong I looked...Opinions? Thanks!


Yatahay Network - $0.02 NL - Holdem - 8 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

MP+1: 100 BB
CO: 273 BB
BTN: 98.5 BB
SB: 91 BB
Hero (BB): 85 BB
UTG: 232.5 BB
UTG+1: 116 BB
MP: 97.5 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, Hero posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has K♣ K♠

fold, fold, fold, fold, fold, BTN raises to 3 BB, SB calls 2.5 BB, Hero raises to 9 BB, BTN calls 6 BB, SB calls 6 BB

Flop: (27 BB, 3 players) A♣ 5♦ 6♥
SB checks, Hero bets 13.5 BB, fold, fold

Hero wins 26 BB

 

[c0rnBr34d]

I don't think your pre flop 3B was large at all. You made a 3x raise which should be the minimum sizing you use in position with no dead money in the pot. When you're out of position and have a caller in between this 3x raise is just too small. You're giving the initial raiser a great price which in tern gives the caller a great price. If you have a "pot" button I would start there for 3B sizing and you can adjust up from there based on the situation (position, V ranges, stats / reads, etc). A pot sized bet here would be about 13 BB (3 x raise plus the 4BB of dead money from your BB and the SB call). And being OOP is a good reason to round it up to 14-15BB. If V has a very low fold to 3B stat I may go even larger.

The flop is not ideal but another common leak in the micros is over folding to cbets in 3B pots. I actually prefer the lead here since we can get credit for big Aces and our 3B size should have priced in a wider range. I seriously doubt we will move anyone off an Ace with a single 1/2 pot cbet though. Since there aren't any flush draws and we don't expect many straight draws I would rather bet flop then give up unless we improve because it's entirely possible they are calling with suited broadways or smaller pocket pairs. Most of the time one of them will have an Ace but the times we take it down makes up for the times they call a cbet and we give up in my opinion. In 3B pots you don't even have to cbet as large as 1/2 pot. You can shave a few BBs off and even go down to 1/3 pot on dry textures like this with no flush draw depending on how Vs react. Realistically if we did have AQ+ we would want to bet small as well to keep them in. So balancing that with our KK helps us win more when we have it and lose less when we are weaker. Then on the turn we can continue with our sets strong aces and draws while pot controlling with checks with our big pairs with showdown value.

 

[fundiver199]

Preflop
As explained your 3-bet needs to be much larger.

Flop
I prefer to check here. In the micros a lot of players are very straight forward, especially in multiway pots. So what will happen a lot of the time is, if nobody have a top pair or better, it will check through, and then you can put out a small turn bet for value/protection. If however someone bet, and its not a silly amount like 2BB into the 27BB pot, then you are almost always beat, and its perfectly fine to just fold and get out cheap.

So I feel, you get a lot of valuable information by checking and letting them act, before you start putting money in the pot. And your hand dont need any protection on a board like this. Maybe someone can have 87s for the OESD, but apart from that you are either way behind drawing to 2 outs, or you are way ahead.

Your C-bet is not terrible though and might even be, what solvers would do. But I think, its more appropriate for higher stakes games, where people are more able to find bluffs in a spot like this. In that situation you can kind of say, you are betting "to keep their head down", or in a sense bluffing with the best hand. I dont really want to go into a check-call mode with this hand multiway in a 3-bet pot. So if I bet, and anyone gives me action, then I am not putting any more money in, unless I spike a set.

 

[Mdf1992]

I don't think your pre flop 3B was large at all. You made a 3x raise which should be the minimum sizing you use in position with no dead money in the pot. When you're out of position and have a caller in between this 3x raise is just too small. You're giving the initial raiser a great price which in tern gives the caller a great price. If you have a "pot" button I would start there for 3B sizing and you can adjust up from there based on the situation (position, V ranges, stats / reads, etc). A pot sized bet here would be about 13 BB (3 x raise plus the 4BB of dead money from your BB and the SB call). And being OOP is a good reason to round it up to 14-15BB. If V has a very low fold to 3B stat I may go even larger.

The flop is not ideal but another common leak in the micros is over folding to cbets in 3B pots. I actually prefer the lead here since we can get credit for big Aces and our 3B size should have priced in a wider range. I seriously doubt we will move anyone off an Ace with a single 1/2 pot cbet though. Since there aren't any flush draws and we don't expect many straight draws I would rather bet flop then give up unless we improve because it's entirely possible they are calling with suited broadways or smaller pocket pairs. Most of the time one of them will have an Ace but the times we take it down makes up for the times they call a cbet and we give up in my opinion. In 3B pots you don't even have to cbet as large as 1/2 pot. You can shave a few BBs off and even go down to 1/3 pot on dry textures like this with no flush draw depending on how Vs react. Realistically if we did have AQ+ we would want to bet small as well to keep them in. So balancing that with our KK helps us win more when we have it and lose less when we are weaker. Then on the turn we can continue with our sets strong aces and draws while pot controlling with checks with our big pairs with showdown value.

Thanks so much for your time and insight.

So you're saying that I give the initial raiser a "great price" and that is because (now that I calculate it out), it looks like I give him about 28% pot odds. And this would be considered a great price because in this situation, even with the wider rfi range that comes with being on the button, even that has over 30% equity vs my 3-bet range coming from the blind. Is this about right?

And ahh okay so a pot-sized 3-bet is about the lowest that I would want to go if I am out of position? Or if I am out of position with some dead money in the middle too. So basically I want to make it larger so that I can extract as much value as possible because I am most likely quite a ways ahead pre-flop, especially sitting with Kings? And especially because I'm out of position so I want to further increase the chances of them folding preflop and just taking it down right there?

And ah wow haha good to know about that common leak in micros (overfolding to c-bets in 3-bet pots). And ahhh I see what you mean about saying that you like the leading out here because our smaller 3-bet priced in a wider range of hands. Very cool/helpful thought/insight.
And ah okay so I could have gone smaller with the c-bet. That makes sense.

Thanks for the loads of insight man.

Cheers,
Mark

 

[Mdf1992]

Preflop
As explained your 3-bet needs to be much larger.

Flop
I prefer to check here. In the micros a lot of players are very straight forward, especially in multiway pots. So what will happen a lot of the time is, if nobody have a top pair or better, it will check through, and then you can put out a small turn bet for value/protection. If however someone bet, and its not a silly amount like 2BB into the 27BB pot, then you are almost always beat, and its perfectly fine to just fold and get out cheap.

So I feel, you get a lot of valuable information by checking and letting them act, before you start putting money in the pot. And your hand dont need any protection on a board like this. Maybe someone can have 87s for the OESD, but apart from that you are either way behind drawing to 2 outs, or you are way ahead.

Your C-bet is not terrible though and might even be, what solvers would do. But I think, its more appropriate for higher stakes games, where people are more able to find bluffs in a spot like this. In that situation you can kind of say, you are betting "to keep their head down", or in a sense bluffing with the best hand. I dont really want to go into a check-call mode with this hand multiway in a 3-bet pot. So if I bet, and anyone gives me action, then I am not putting any more money in, unless I spike a set.

Ahh, I see why you say that you prefer the check here...like you said, I'm getting a lot of valuable information by checking and letting them act *before I start putting money in the pot...Yeah...that makes sense. That could have been pricey for me, whereas if I just checked, I could have just let my hand go because now that you say it like that, that I am way behind, I see why. Like you said, I only have 2 outs, so unless it is a super small silly bet, then I have a definite fold. Very helpful insight, thank you. I can see why my move probably would be better at higher stakes rather than micros. Thanks again!
Cheers,
Mark

 

[c0rnBr34d]

Thanks so much for your time and insight.

So you're saying that I give the initial raiser a "great price" and that is because (now that I calculate it out), it looks like I give him about 28% pot odds. And this would be considered a great price because in this situation, even with the wider rfi range that comes with being on the button, even that has over 30% equity vs my 3-bet range coming from the blind. Is this about right?

And ahh okay so a pot-sized 3-bet is about the lowest that I would want to go if I am out of position? Or if I am out of position with some dead money in the middle too. So basically I want to make it larger so that I can extract as much value as possible because I am most likely quite a ways ahead pre-flop, especially sitting with Kings? And especially because I'm out of position so I want to further increase the chances of them folding preflop and just taking it down right there?

And ah wow haha good to know about that common leak in micros (overfolding to c-bets in 3-bet pots). And ahhh I see what you mean about saying that you like the leading out here because our smaller 3-bet priced in a wider range of hands. Very cool/helpful thought/insight.
And ah okay so I could have gone smaller with the c-bet. That makes sense.

Thanks for the loads of insight man.

Cheers,
Mark

Yes, exactly. Theoretically he would only need about 28% equity to continue, guess how much equity he has against our AK vs AJ about 27% + position! It is easier to realize equity for him because he is in position. Even against a hand as strong as KK something like 98s has almost 22% equity plus position. So if we are thinking range vs range he should not be folding very often unless he was stealing light.

I pretty much always at least pot 3Bs in or out of position. Potting it already accounts for the dead money. Sizing up should depend on stats of players in the hand and position. Yes, it's a win / win. With our strongest hands we want to get the fattest value and with our bluffs if we have any we want to get the most folds. Taking it down pre flop is always a great result. You would have made 6 BB with no rake in about 5 seconds. Do the math on that win rate. If that happened every hand you would be playing 10 tables and printing money. Big pots will come when they come. Lots of small rake free fast easy pots are just as good.

Really I think the majority of players overfold to cbets in 3B pots in general unless you have a loose or weak image. Stronger players may float or raise in position but in general I think most players play more straight forward. Most of my experience comes from live poker where this was true in most of my games up to and including $2/$5. Fundiver has much more experience than I do online but in my experience at least up to 100NL this is still true for most players.

Your cbet frequency should increase from single raised pots to 3B pots to 4B pots and so on when you are the aggressor. As Fundiver suggests it's probably more game theory optimal to cbet small and often here but at 2NL sometimes GTO isn't the best play. It's fine to have some checks on a flop like this but I personally would be betting more often than checking. Of course this all can change based on who is in the hand. In my opinion it is much easier for BTN to stab at the pot in position after we check flop than to continue without an Ace, or better if we bet. Likewise it is much easier for SB to lean turn after it checks through. In either of these cases the first person to bet is likely to win the pot unless someone else has and Ace or better. If we are playing against very passive (low aggression factor) or very sticky (don't like to fold) opponents then I may check way more often here. Against straight forward ABC players we can have them fold their equity for a small bet often and get bluffed or outdraw less often as well. As Fundiver says, once we check and they put in a bet we are now the ones in a tough spot and we will have to do a lot of folding whether they had the Ace or not. And if we bet and get raised we can insta-fold. It may be a neat experiment to query your PT4 database and see how both of these options work. How often do you get folds, vs how often you get called or raised. And yes, I would expect their ranges to narrow as the size of our 3B increases so even though it's 3 ways they don't have to have an Ace in this spot as much as they would if we made it 15 BB to go pre.

 

[fundiver199]

Just to add a little more to the "GTO vs. exploitative" theme, I do feel, that we are going to be against AX a higher percentage of the time in this hand because of both the stakes and Heros sizing mistake preflop. If SB is playing well, then his cold calling range should be a lot of small to medium pocket pairs and not a lot of AX. The best AX should look to 3-bet, and the rest should look to fold. Maybe once in a while you can throw in a call with AQ or AJ, but thats pretty much about it.

However because its 2NL, SB can press "call" with any AX facing the initial open, and because of Heros sizing mistake both players can press "call" with a ton of crappy aces facing the 3-bet. A4s, A7o, you get the drill. All of which now beat Hero on the flop. Apparently this time noone had it, but that was pretty lucky in my opinion. The main thing to take away from this hand is really to go much larger with that 3-bet, and then maybe postflop wont even happen.

 

[c0rnBr34d]

Just to add a little more to the "GTO vs. exploitative" theme, I do feel, that we are going to be against AX a higher percentage of the time in this hand because of both the stakes and Heros sizing mistake preflop. If SB is playing well, then his cold calling range should be a lot of small to medium pocket pairs and not a lot of AX. The best AX should look to 3-bet, and the rest should look to fold. Maybe once in a while you can throw in a call with AQ or AJ, but thats pretty much about it.

However because its 2NL, SB can press "call" with any AX facing the initial open, and because of Heros sizing mistake both players can press "call" with a ton of crappy aces facing the 3-bet. A4s, A7o, you get the drill. All of which now beat Hero on the flop. Apparently this time noone had it, but that was pretty lucky in my opinion. The main thing to take away from this hand is really to go much larger with that 3-bet, and then maybe postflop wont even happen.

Define higher percentage, how often do we expect to see Ax here? If we look at range charts and assume BTN is opening 25% of hands for example then 126/372 of those combos contain an Ace, that's 38% of the time. If we narrow it to top 20% hands then the number goes up slightly to 40%. I think it's fairly safe to remove some of the strongest hands from both ranges because SB flatted twice and BTN did not 4B. So if we just remove 14 combos of AA and half of the AK combos (we block the other half) those numbers decline to 31% and 36% respectively.

Another mistake that occurs often at 2NL is players donk leading top pair hands into the PFR. This somewhat discounts a portion of SBs Ax. I realize you could be making the argument that range construction for these fish are Ace heavy so they have more Ax than they should. If they are fishy enough to overcall with too much Ax they are also probably fishy enough to lead with a good portion of it. So if we just go with about 33% for each player and pretend the ranges dont effect each other for estimation then 1/3 of the time neither of them have an Ace. If we were first to act I think it's much closer but given all the circumstances if we can scoop a 27 BB pot for a 10 BB cbet before shutting down even 33% of the time that's a huge win. I guess it comes down to how often if we check flop will either V bet into us. Are you calling a 1/2 pot bet from either BTN on the flop or SB on the turn with action behind after the flop checks through? I just feel like we under realize our equity often once we check flop because along with all the Ax we now end up laying down the best hand against 87s, 99, 88, 77, or air ball hands with tiny equity against aggressive players like T9s that realize they have to bet to win and missed but no one seems interested in the pot. So this part again goes back to the reads and stats. But in general it takes a better player to continue on the flop without an Ace than to stab at it once the PFR checks the flop.

Again, super over simplification but let's look at expected value when we cbet 10 BB.
EV = (+37 BB * 33% when we win) - (10 BB * 67% when we lose) = 12.2 - 6.7 = +5.5 BB

 

[c0rnBr34d]

Mistake in formula, it should be 27 instead of 37 so it's only +2.2 BB.

 

[c0rnBr34d]

Mistake in formula, it should be 27 instead of 37 so it's only +2.2 BB.

Another glaring error in estimation and down the rabbit hole I go. So from the logic above correcting for probabilities. If each V has a 33% chance of having an Ace based on the range combo counts above the probability of neither of them having an Ace is about 44% instead of the 67% I used above. Similarly to how if you have two coin flips the percentage chance that neither of them will be heads is not 100% but 25% instead (1-1/2)*(1-1/2)=(1/2)(1/2)=1/4=25%. So even if we think 45% of each of their ranges are Ax which is much higher than reality in my opinion then the probability of neither of them having an Ace is (1-.45)*(1-.45)=(.55)(.55)=30.25%.

Going back to our EV calculation even if we only get our bet through 30% of the time we are profitable here: (27BB * .30) - (10 BB * .70) = 8.1675 - 7 = +1.1675 BB on average.

And that's when 45% of both players continuing ranges contain and Ace and they never fold to the cbet. The more I think about it the more I like the cbet against standard ranges. The more narrow the ranges get the more I like checking. For example if BTN 4B and somehow we just called then I like the check. The top of ranges are Ace heavy and ranges like QQ+, AK (83% Ax) or JJ+, KQs+, AQ+ (64% Ax) and when we block the high pairs we want them to have it makes it even more likely that they have an Ace. I do not think this is the case here though with a small out of position 3 bet.

 

[Mdf1992]

Just to add a little more to the "GTO vs. exploitative" theme, I do feel, that we are going to be against AX a higher percentage of the time in this hand because of both the stakes and Heros sizing mistake preflop. If SB is playing well, then his cold calling range should be a lot of small to medium pocket pairs and not a lot of AX. The best AX should look to 3-bet, and the rest should look to fold. Maybe once in a while you can throw in a call with AQ or AJ, but thats pretty much about it.

However because its 2NL, SB can press "call" with any AX facing the initial open, and because of Heros sizing mistake both players can press "call" with a ton of crappy aces facing the 3-bet. A4s, A7o, you get the drill. All of which now beat Hero on the flop. Apparently this time noone had it, but that was pretty lucky in my opinion. The main thing to take away from this hand is really to go much larger with that 3-bet, and then maybe postflop wont even happen.

You don't think they fold an Ace with a low kicker seeing as how strong I seem in this situation? They know their Ace is bad and so why waste any more money because clearly I probably have Aj/q+, right? I just feel like if I have an ace in this situation and I was one of them, I might have folded the ace, not wanting to lose more money to someone with a higher ace? Idk...

 

[Mdf1992]

Define higher percentage, how often do we expect to see Ax here? If we look at range charts and assume BTN is opening 25% of hands for example then 126/372 of those combos contain an Ace, that's 38% of the time. If we narrow it to top 20% hands then the number goes up slightly to 40%. I think it's fairly safe to remove some of the strongest hands from both ranges because SB flatted twice and BTN did not 4B. So if we just remove 14 combos of AA and half of the AK combos (we block the other half) those numbers decline to 31% and 36% respectively.

Another mistake that occurs often at 2NL is players donk leading top pair hands into the PFR. This somewhat discounts a portion of SBs Ax. I realize you could be making the argument that range construction for these fish are Ace heavy so they have more Ax than they should. If they are fishy enough to overcall with too much Ax they are also probably fishy enough to lead with a good portion of it. So if we just go with about 33% for each player and pretend the ranges dont effect each other for estimation then 1/3 of the time neither of them have an Ace. If we were first to act I think it's much closer but given all the circumstances if we can scoop a 27 BB pot for a 10 BB cbet before shutting down even 33% of the time that's a huge win. I guess it comes down to how often if we check flop will either V bet into us. Are you calling a 1/2 pot bet from either BTN on the flop or SB on the turn with action behind after the flop checks through? I just feel like we under realize our equity often once we check flop because along with all the Ax we now end up laying down the best hand against 87s, 99, 88, 77, or air ball hands with tiny equity against aggressive players like T9s that realize they have to bet to win and missed but no one seems interested in the pot. So this part again goes back to the reads and stats. But in general it takes a better player to continue on the flop without an Ace than to stab at it once the PFR checks the flop.

Again, super over simplification but let's look at expected value when we cbet 10 BB.
EV = (+37 BB * 33% when we win) - (10 BB * 67% when we lose) = 12.2 - 6.7 = +5.5 BB

Tbh, kind of over my head with all of this, although I know you're talking to fundiver

 

[c0rnBr34d]

You don't think they fold an Ace with a low kicker seeing as how strong I seem in this situation? They know their Ace is bad and so why waste any more money because clearly I probably have Aj/q+, right? I just feel like if I have an ace in this situation and I was one of them, I might have folded the ace, not wanting to lose more money to someone with a higher ace? Idk...

It's possible they may fold Ax to a cbet. But the smaller Ax should have already folded pre flop to the initial raise or the 3 bet. So whatever Ax they have left may or may not fold to a cbet on the flop. Depends on the player and probably your cbet sizing. Some players will over value top pair hands with no kicker.

Tbh, kind of over my head with all of this, although I know you're talking to fundiver

It's on the internet so I guess I'm talking to everyone lol. Let me know if there's an area or two where I can explain in more detail.

 

[fundiver199]

It's possible they may fold Ax to a cbet. But the smaller Ax should have already folded pre flop to the initial raise or the 3 bet. So whatever Ax they have left may or may not fold to a cbet on the flop.

I completely agree with this. If they are bad enough to call a 3-bet with rag aces, then they are also bad enough to never fold them postflop, when they hit that top pair. This is why, we can print so much value against fish, if we have AK or AQ in a situation like this, but we should certainly not attempt to turn KK into a bluff. If we bet, it must be for value and protection, and I am not going to go deeper into that part of the discussion