zoom AA (when) will you fold?

Originally posted by NothingIsForSho

Originally posted by la55i
I didn't quite get that. We know that standard villain shouldn't have many weaker holdings than JJ,QQ. Why do you want to call this?

Defending vs a bet here is burning money. It is as if you had a hole card camera, you see that villain holds a monster but you decide to call just so you wouldn't be exploited? Poker in theory is different than poker in practice at least on NL5.

What do you mean by that you would all of a sudden have a different answer for villains betting range? Do you now think that villain plays TT like this? Or KJ? In that case villain would be stupid. And we cannot assume he is stupid if there is no info on him.

No I'm just saying if I gave you an answer in such a way that you would conclude that we should have 80% fold to bet, then my answer would change to a range that includes a lot of bluffs. I.e. it's dependent obviously on how we respond. That's all.

Well, maybe we should not fold all our combos then...

Originally posted by NothingIsForSho

Originally posted by la55i
And then I would say that your range is unrealistic and you are treating unknown villain as a maniac and you can't do that. What would you say then?

Not really if I knew that hero was folding 80% on the turn right. Because I can just add more and more bluffs until the hero responds somehow and changes his range back. And in that case hero can't fold his KK and AA anymore. So there is of course some convergence of the ranges somewhere

Listen, it is a 3B pot, it is quity big already and bluff raises are not that common. It is nl5 , dude.

Originally posted by la55i
Aaaand what if I told you for the millionth time that this is NL5 and villain is unknown. I know that in NL2000 vs a villain who has 10k hands on us our approach would be a lot different. As I said earlier poker in theory and poker in practice at least on NL5 are different. Here villain doesn't know that and he should treat us as unknown too. So no fancy bluffs.

So if I say that villain has no info on us you can't say he knows we are folding 80% on the turn.

And BTW:
hero is not necessarily folding 80% on the turn. Hero is folding only because of this board texture and the way this hand was played.

Totally agree. If in this situation we fold, in another we will not.

GTO is interesting but it is not always the best approach at the micros in my opinion. I'm sure that we will lose in the long run if we keep calling on the turn in this particular spot vs unknown. But that is just my opinion, I might be wrong. I just don't see many bluffs here because UTG's call 3bet range should be pocket pair heavy and he should 4bet KK+ pre and he might bluff 4bet AJs for example. He shouldn't raise our cbet with many hands and if he does that as a bluff I think it is stupid to continue betting OTT. Imo there is nothing to solve in this hand.

Originally posted by NothingIsForSho

Originally posted by la55i
Aaaand what if I told you for the millionth time that this is NL5 and villain is unknown. I know that in NL2000 vs a villain who has 10k hands on us our approach would be a lot different. As I said earlier poker in theory and poker in practice at least on NL5 are different. Here villain doesn't know that and he should treat us as unknown too. So no fancy bluffs.

So if I say that villain has no info on us you can't say he knows we are folding 80% on the turn.

And BTW:
hero is not necessarily folding 80% on the turn. Hero is folding only because of this board texture and the way this hand was played.

Well yes that's fine also. The whole GTO vs exploitative again, which is the other most difficult thing in poker to understand.

My basis of thinking right here and now is in terms of GTO. In reality it's just something I like talking about right now - that is when you face a bet, since I've in the last few weeks and months been successful in getting my fold vs bet down from 65+% to about 50%, which has helped me to keep my red line up.

Man, It is not worth basing your decisions on GTO only.

There are situations where it helps, apparently, but there are situations where it will not give you the right solutions. As here if most of the time you will be dead, putting more money in the pot is not ok.

Well, maybe we should not fold all our combos then...

too advanced

We have to start from somewhere.

Originally posted by NothingIsForSho

Well, maybe we should not fold all our combos then...

too advanced

You can't be talking about GTO approach vs unknown at NL5 and then say that is too advanced.
GTO is advanced. We can beat the micros by playing simple.

Originally posted by nitrol

Man, It is not worth basing your decisions on GTO only.

The emotional tendency is to be exploitative, and obviously there are a ton of spots where that effectively works, but I tend to try at least to be as GTO thinking as I can so that I have more of a chance of learning something new. It's not always the best option, but I think the positives are better than the negatives.

One of the biggest things I'm trying to work on in that regard is to stop myself from thinking this exact exploitative sentence in my mind when I'm losing a hand which is "Okay, my opponent has already decided preflop he is going to win the hand, so I should x/fold every street", and instead put an effort in to try as hard as possible to calculate what the ranges should look like approximately, and what the exact correct move should be, like I'm playing a game of chess. For tilt at least for myself it separates the emotion.

You are going somewhere else, man. You can rely on GTO but it is not applicable 100% of the time. If so, they would have created bots to play the game...
About the hand, I still think that villain has better hands and we can fold at least on turn.
Folding flop is weak, I agree.

Originally posted by la55i

Originally posted by NothingIsForSho

Well, maybe we should not fold all our combos then...

too advanced

You can't be talking about GTO approach vs unknown at NL5 and then say that is too advanced.
GTO is advanced. We can beat the micros by playing simple.

Yes, play simple straightforward poker.

I could write a book on GTO vs exploitative play at this stage.

Well, write something, I would gladly read it .

Exploitative play at the micros can be more profitable.
I'm doing fine without thinking what is the GTO approach.
I exploit my villains. I know when it is good to fold and when to bluff catch. No need to think too complex at NL5. Most of the players are not so good and have too small sample to start exploiting us and when they do we will adapt. We can use population tendencies and info on villain and print money.

Originally posted by nitrol
Well, write something, I would gladly read it .

I would definitely read it too.

Exploitative is GTO. But it is not all...

whoa guys

Hot discussion. ..

this kind of plays i see daily at iPoker NL5 speed, against a solid regular player i would consider folding at turn, but against a unknown Chinese guy playing 1 table i would get the money in..