$25 NLHE 6-max: 3way 3bet pot 200BB deep

[cs_rlewis]

Yatahay Network - $0.25 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BB: 107.84 BB
UTG: 100 BB
Hero (CO): 218.04 BB
BTN: 117.6 BB
SB: 197.6 BB

SB posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

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

fold, Hero raises to 2.48 BB, BTN raises to 8.4 BB, SB calls 8 BB, fold, Hero calls 5.92 BB

Flop: (26.2 BB, 3 players) A♥ Q♦ 7♥
SB bets 19.64 BB, Hero calls 19.64 BB, fold

Turn: (65.48 BB, 2 players) T♥
SB bets 40 BB, Hero calls 40 BB

River: (145.48 BB, 2 players) 3♦
SB bets 129.56 BB and is all-in, Hero calls 129.56 BB


I think I may have misplayed this hand slightly. The SB had reggish stats. I think pre flop is where I made a blunder here - should I be 4betting this hand rather than calling? Im not sure if playing a 3bet pot 3 ways is that profitable.
What about the river call?

 

[fundiver199]

Preflop
If SB had "reggish stats", then him cold calling the 3-bet from SB is frankly quite concerning. Some will argue, that we should never make that play, and when he did do it anyway, it should be a very strong range. Much stronger than the range, which BTN is using to 3-bet a CO open. Maybe someting like TT-QQ, AQ-AK, could even be KK-AA looking to trap. These are the kind of hands, I am thinking he have, and against that kind of range AQ is obviously not a 4-bet. So I would also just call and see, how this plays out postflop.

Flop
Great flop for you obviously but the strangeness in the hand continues, because now SB donk leads into the preflop 3-better, into two opponents, and he does it on a board, which smashes the 3-betters range. The 3-better has all the AA, QQ, AQ and maybe even 77 and A7s as well, since he was 3-betting BTN vs. CO. So SB is showing an extreme amount of strength here, and for that reason I would also just call. Keep his bluffing range alive, if he has any, and allow yourself more options in the hand.

Turn
Th is not a great card for you, because if his preflop range is wider, than I estimated, and he was bluffing on the flop, then he probably got there now. Hearts completed, and KJ completed as well. I also dont think, he is still betting AK for value, so now I am in a mode, where I am almost hoping, he has the same hand. Calling for a chopper is typically not great, but even so folding top two on the turn is really tough, so I would probably also make this call. But I would certainly not be excited about it, and if he checks the river, I am checking back.

River
Pretty much a brick, and now he bombs it all in. You have to call off 129BB here, so more than a whole buyin, and now I dont even think, he is value betting AQ. I also dont see, what bluffs he have, unless he is a crazy maniac on tilt, and this is not the reads, you gave. So I think, you need to lay it down. This is where, the deepness of the hand matter. With 100BB I probably just get it in on the turn and chuck it up to a cooler, if I am beat. But 200BB deep stack off ranges need to be more narrow, and against a reasonable player top two is usually not a stack off on a board, where draws completed. I think, he is going to show up with at least a set the vast majority of the time.

 

[cs_rlewis]

Thanks fundiver.
He did indeed show up with 77.
I agree with everything post flop.
However I believe 4betting is a better option. Usually I don't 4bet AQs, but in this situation it might be a better option.
1. It thins the field, but if all 3 players call, the SPR is now much lower.
2. 4betting AQs also does well against a narrow cold call 3 bet range.
3. It is an easy fold to a jam.

Maybe this is a hand where losing the least would be the better option.

 

[fundiver199]

If the SB cold calling range is wide enough to contain 77, then 4-betting AQs obviously becomes way better. This is where, the read was perhaps a bit off. I would not expect someone with "reggish stats" to cold call a 3-bet out of position with 77, so maybe this was more of a play machine, funplayer, recreational, whatever you want to call it.

As played postflop is obviously a fairly gross cooler, but I still think, you could have saved that big river bet. And this matter not only to long term results but also for bankroll and tilt management. Admittedly I have played more full ring than 6-max, and 6-max tend to be a bit more action heavy, as does 25NL compared to say 2NL or 5NL. But even so I will still say, that when he makes that huge river jam, then 77 is probably the bottom of his range, and once again I just dont see the bluffs.

 

[gustav197poker]

In this hand the point in question occurs on the turn, where it is necessary to make the most important decision, between continuing in the race or folding in the hand. You claim that the villain has reggish stats, however it is necessary to know if in real time you have taken these parameters into account, or now they can be fully observed in retrospect. This is important, since sometimes the stats that we observe differ a lot from the perceived image we have of the villain, especially if we have been able to observe some showdowns where he participated. Some questions may arise from here. Does the villain bet donk mostly for value or bluff? Does the large sizes he applies relate to strong values ​​or does this villain polarize his range often?
The river is a super brick, so all the concerns of this hand must come from the previous streets.
Going back to the first point of the hand, the preflop, our AQs could certainly fit into a 4-bet range. But here we must also consider the image of BTN. Does this villain bet 3 often when it is IP? If villain is not 3-bet light being IP (likely more closed range) and we haven't considered SB stats in real time, it's best to call 3-bet and see a flop, keeping the SPR in shape.
If the button takes advantage of his position to bet 3 relatively frequently, our concentration should be mainly on the SB. Could this villain be calling preflop with a super strong hand to set us up a postflop trap? If we believe in this last possibility, the closest thing is to finish our participation on the turn.
Greetings.