$200 NLHE Full Ring: Does bingo player ever do this with worse ace?

[mbrenneman0]

For learning purposes, effective stacks are 100bb

Hero has A9o on the btn


6 limpers


I raise to 10 (yes i know this is small, i should have made it 15 with so many limpers)


Blinds fold and 5 of the 6 limpers call.


Flop is AKTr with $65 in the pot


Checks to the CO and CO, a bingo player raises to 50


Hero folds, all players fold. CO does not show.


The question is, is top pair 9 kicker good enough to call here?


My definition of a bingo player is a player who plays to see a flop with a wide range and plays fit or fold postflop. When they have a strong hand they will often donk bet with a large sizing because they are afraid of being drawn out on.


I suspect he has top pair with Q or J kicker, two pair, a flush or a set of TT. Is it possible he has QQ or JJ here or A with a worse kicker? I definitely dont think he does this with 2nd or 3rd pair

 

[Gildog89]

I would say you are rarely ahead here. I am guessing 2 pair or set here, but as always, things are more villain specific. I think its a good fold. Are you going to c-bet that board if villain doesn't donk into you?...also for learning purposes.

 

[mbrenneman0]

I would say you are rarely ahead here. I am guessing 2 pair or set here, but as always, things are more villain specific. I think its a good fold. Are you going to c-bet that board if villain doesn't donk into you?...also for learning purposes.

great question! i think i would be burning money if i didnt cbet here when checked to. I think i would go for a smallish sizing to encourage calls from marginal gutshots and second/third pair+gutshot type hands like KQ or JT

 

[mbrenneman0]

I was playing with the GTO+ solver this morning and plugged in this spot. I really love the updates that allow multiple bet sizing trees. of course its still limited to headsup, but in this hand thats okay because the other players ranges will be weak enough to be virtually irrelevant, like maybe 15% of the time they effect the play of the hand, but for the most part it doesnt matter.

I gave villain this range and assigned these bets and checks to his range:

and left the rest up to the solver.


if my range is 22+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,A9o+,KJo+,QJo,JTo
the solver says i should respond to his $50 bet this way:

i think the interesting thing is how if i give villain that initial betting range, and leave the rest up to the solver, his response to my jam is pretty close to what i would expect this player to do, villains response to my jam should be something like:

what do you guys think? by plugging in a highly exploitable donking range, do you think you can use a solver to create an optimal exploitative line?

either way, i think playing with the solver is a lot of fun haha

EDIT: FYI, the closer to black a square is the lower the weight is in the range, so if its 50% black, that means its weighted at 50% but if its completely bright it means 100% weight, if its totally black its 0% weight. makes sense right?

 

[Ahoy]

Hey man I cant see the ranges from your last post (might be an issue on my side).

Anyways, I am folding there. Its a freakin joke that all the limpers call... You are rarely ahead with A9 when you are going so many to the flop. There are better hands where you can make money, not this one.




GL

 

[WabiSabi]

I wouldn't even bother to iso with A9o when there is a big chance of the hand going multi way even ip. ATo would be an iso and any suited ace and id probably look to iso something around 15% of hands and over limp some suited connectors and perhaps some of the smaller pairs. For me A9o just falls a little short.

 

[mbrenneman0]

Hey man I cant see the ranges from your last post (might be an issue on my side).

Anyways, I am folding there. Its a freakin joke that all the limpers call... You are rarely ahead with A9 when you are going so many to the flop. There are better hands where you can make money, not this one.




GL

for me, i checked on mobile and desktop and it works on the desktop version of the cardschat site but not the mobile version of the site. i think it has something to do with the way cardschat usually shows a scaled down version of images on mobile. maybe an error on their end

 

[Ahoy]

for me, i check on mobile and desktop and it works on the desktop version of the cardschat site but not the mobile version of the site. i think it has something to do with the way cardschat usually shows a scaled down version of images on mobile. maybe an error on their end

Hey man, Im on desktop version and cant see the pictures. I tried reloading the page but it didnt help, its the same as first time.

GL

 

[mbrenneman0]

I was playing with the GTO+ solver this morning and plugged in this spot. I really love the updates that allow multiple bet sizing trees. of course its still limited to headsup, but in this hand thats okay because the other players ranges will be weak enough to be virtually irrelevant, like maybe 15% of the time they effect the play of the hand, but for the most part it doesnt matter.

I gave villain this range and assigned these bets and checks to his range:

https://i.gyazo.com/49bd09ac28e78e38118da89e359a4972.png



and left the rest up to the solver.


if my range is 22+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,A9o+,KJo+,QJo,JTo
the solver says i should respond to his $50 bet this way:

https://i.gyazo.com/cc7e479f26d1e0743ead1bb470f2036a.png








i think the interesting thing is how if i give villain that initial betting range, and leave the rest up to the solver, his response to my jam is pretty close to what i would expect this player to do, villains response to my jam should be something like:

https://i.gyazo.com/f254b354cb01be6d344e0af32353e7ee.png




what do you guys think? by plugging in a highly exploitable donking range, do you think you can use a solver to create an optimal exploitative line?

either way, i think playing with the solver is a lot of fun haha

EDIT: FYI, the closer to black a square is the lower the weight is in the range, so if its 50% black, that means its weighted at 50% but if its completely bright it means 100% weight, if its totally black its 0% weight. makes sense right?

I quoted my post but this time, i put the links to the images in the quote. next time i post pictures this way ill have to remember to put the links. its weird that its working for me. im using google chrome, i wonder if its the browser or browser settings.

 

[Ahoy]

I quoted my post but this time, i put the links to the images in the quote. next time i post pictures this way ill have to remember to put the links. its weird that its working for me. im using google chrome, i wonder if its the browser or browser settings.

Im also using Chrome and now can see the quoted images, thanks!

 

[Galmedic]

Works well now on iphone mobile App. Also I don’t play A,9o here.

 

[Gildog89]

great question! i think i would be burning money if i didnt cbet here when checked to. I think i would go for a smallish sizing to encourage calls from marginal gutshots and second/third pair+gutshot type hands like KQ or JT

OK, there is a similar A9o preflop hand in another post, but the flop came A23r there. In that case you opted for check in the button when checked to. I think you were saying you were either crushed or had a situation where none of the limpers could call when bet into, so check to keep worse hands in. Here, there are too many hands that are behind that can rationalize a call, so go ahead and bet for value. Am I understanding your thoughts on the difference in these hands correctly? I would c-bet small here too btw.


That GTO+ solver is pretty interesting. I'm going to have to look at that some more.

 

[mbrenneman0]

That hand was A24r flop and you cant play A9o with a one size fits all strategy. A24 flop and AKT flop are very different board textures, especially when you consider that the other hand had a much larger raise sizing preflop so theres going to be much narrower ranges where the other players arent going to have second pair hands or straight draws

 

[CuddlyBobcat30]

Serious question - Do you actually think villain is limping, then flatting, with hands like AQ, QQ, TT ?

As for c-betting here, I wouldn't be when checked to. When a pot is this crowded you're going to get at least one caller and, unless you have a good enough hand to continue with on later streets, what's the point?


Pretend I'm a villain in this hand holding KJ or Q10 suited I can easily float you with a pair + gutshot + backdoor flush possibility and then decide how I want to proceed on the turn. Or some of the time I might decide that I'm not believing your c-bet and semi-bluff check raise you. Now a large percentage of your range is put in a tough spot and I still have equity if you do call, not to mention there's plenty of cards I can continue to barrel with on the turn.


Just my opinion, what do you think ?

 

[mbrenneman0]

Serious question - Do you actually think villain is limping, then flatting, with hands like AQ, QQ, TT ?

As for c-betting here, I wouldn't be when checked to. When a pot is this crowded you're going to get at least one caller and, unless you have a good enough hand to continue with on later streets, what's the point?


Pretend I'm a villain in this hand holding KJ or Q10 suited I can easily float you with a pair + gutshot + backdoor flush possibility and then decide how I want to proceed on the turn. Or some of the time I might decide that I'm not believing your c-bet and semi-bluff check raise you. Now a large percentage of your range is put in a tough spot and I still have equity if you do call, not to mention there's plenty of cards I can continue to barrel with on the turn.


Just my opinion, what do you think ?

i think it would be a more valid opinion in an online game.

and YES I absolutely think villains limp call hands like AQ and TT in live 1/2. He definitely doesnt limp call QQ though, so youre right about that, idk why i put that in my original question. but yes, ive seen plenty of players who have a 70-80% limping range that limp-call AQ pre.


live players dont really know how to check raise as a bluff. ive seen them very rarely do it with the flushdraw, but these generally arent players with a wide limp-call range.
hands like KJs or QTs floating me on the flop would be what i want with my cbet. whether or not theyre capable of turning it into a bluff is something id have to consider if im facing a call, but i would think them having more bluffs in their range is good for me right? but as before, its possible that a live player who limp calls could decide to turn KJ or QT into a bluff on the turn, but i really think the odds he's capable of that are very low, so if i get check raised on the flop or on the turn it becomes a very easy exploitative fold. even if he's bluffing with the check raise, then "nice bluff, well played sir"