AA, overpair vs wet board, straight draw completes, facing raise

You might add some more bb's pre-flop (0,4 will do)

Preflop you could 3bet a bit bigger. I think that 0.4 mentioned above would be good.

This flop is good for villain. I think choosing a smaller sizing would be better here. And we could actually even go ahead and check this. You have As which blocks some of villain's draws and if turn comes a spade you have a nut FD yourself.
Snowie would recommend a half pot bet here but EV between betting 1/2 and check are quite close.

That turn card is not very nice. Snowie would check here most of the time but betting half pot has similar EV. I personally would probably fire another barrel. That raise I wouldn't call.

So imo the mistakes here were bet sizes and calling that turn raise.

If I bet half pot on the flop, would I not give all the draws correct odds to call?

If I check on the flop, would it be a check/call?

A half pot bet means villain must have about 12 outs to have direct odds. So all of his draws won't get a good price. But in addition to protecting we also must consider pot control. Villains range has several better hands than AA. We probably don't want to be betting all 3 streets here.
If you check it would be a check call.

If you bet flop, then make sure his implied odds aren't super-juicy. A pot-sweetener bet serves little purpose. Small flop value bets are for dry boards. This is so, even if Snowie believes otherwise when playing against itself.

Yea but even if the board is more wet it doesn't hit our range that hard but it hits villains. So I believe betting big might be questionable.

We don't have that many bluffs here. Villain has all the possible nuts but we don't. I'm not saying we should be betting small but I would prefer using an average sizing instead of a bigger one. And I think in a 3bet pot this maybe is a bit on the big side?

That opinion of course comes from a theory point of view. And I hope I have got the theory correct.

That's why I think checking is an option too. We'd represent something like AK if we check-call.

I don't think we disagree in principle, just on the precise numbers.

The board isn't that extremely wet. Only 11 likely combos beat us (all sets + only 2 two pair), but there are many draws and pairs, and the board is inviting for a float. I think a normal bet (on the bigger side), followed up by a smaller turn bet (implied odds for villain are then much worse) on a blank would clarify the situation better than a smallish flop bet.

The fact that it is a 3-bet pot with normal stacks means that implied odds are cut down automatically, so yeah, that means we can bet smaller than in an single raised pot (with normal stacks). It does not have to do with pot control only.

Originally posted by la55i
Preflop you could 3bet a bit bigger. I think that 0.4 mentioned above would be good.

This flop is good for villain. I think choosing a smaller sizing would be better here. And we could actually even go ahead and check this. You have As which blocks some of villain's draws and if turn comes a spade you have a nut FD yourself.
Snowie would recommend a half pot bet here but EV between betting 1/2 and check are quite close.

That turn card is not very nice. Snowie would check here most of the time but betting half pot has similar EV. I personally would probably fire another barrel. That raise I wouldn't call.

So imo the mistakes here were bet sizes and calling that turn raise.

Which range did you give? It's really hard to think a range that we are loosing on flop.
I think that this is a good range for this situation: JJ-22,AJs-A7s,KJs-K7s,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,87s,76s,AsQs,KsQs,As6s,Ks6s,As5s,Ks5s,As4s,Ks4s,As3s,Ks3s,As2s,Ks2s,AJo-A8o,KJo,QTo+,JTo,T9o,98o. Here, we have 77% of equity.
The only reason to bet smaller is to keep vilain in the hand.
I believe that I haven't studied enough theory to understand why snowie give this action + EV, could you please explain?

I think that range is too wide. Calling a 3bet with A8o or K2s doesn't seem that good to me.
I used: TT-55,AQs-A9s,A5s-A2s,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,87s,AQo-AJo,KQo

And it is range vs range. Not villains range vs our hand.
Our whole 3bet range is behind vs villains calling range on this flop.

I believe we already went through the reasons why a smaller size or even a check would be reasonable. If there is something you don't understand I can try to explain better

I agree very strange playing preflop

I beg to disagree. I believe 3x villain's raise is the normal size for a 3-bet. Yes, when the original raise is a minraise, we can raise more. But I don't think it qualifies as 'very strange'

Originally posted by la55i
I think that range is too wide. Calling a 3bet with A8o or K2s doesn't seem that good to me.
I used: TT-55,AQs-A9s,A5s-A2s,K9s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T8s+,98s,87s,AQo-AJo,KQo

And it is range vs range. Not villains range vs our hand.
Our whole 3bet range is behind vs villains calling range on this flop.

I believe we already went through the reasons why a smaller size or even a check would be reasonable. If there is something you don't understand I can try to explain better

That range looks reasonable. But your conclusion goes against conventional reasoning. Conventional reasoning is "the wetter the flop, the more opponents, the worse your position, the more you bet - up to a point, where you check and call or even check and fold". For instance, a flop of T♣:9♣:8♣: should in my opinion not bet bet, even against a single opponent. But this flop is fundamentally different, because the number of made hands that beat us is small. According to your count, it is merely 8. The safest bet is that villain is drawing. Thus if you bet, a 40% bet is precisely what villain wishes for. Juicy implied odds. His decision becomes comparatively very easy.

That said, you can check on the theory that villain will fire a decent sized bluff bet.

The sentence I emphasized in the quote does not argue for a small bet. It argues for a check. Then you can also say that you don't "play your range". You play your hand. Always. You are aware that a sophisticated opponent will put a range on you, and you use it to your advantage given your exact holding.

Thanks for that post
You are absolutely right that my arguments speak for a check, not for a small bet. I made a mistake here.

About playing our range:
I think we are on the same page with this but I just chose my words poorly in my previous posts.

There are almost always contradicting arguments, all qualitatively valid. So, there's no absolute right or wrong. Even if there is if it were the only hand to ever played, balancing (we play more than one hand) calls for occasional deviations, like once in a while not reraising IP with AA in position preflop. But always putting in a "disclaimer" in every post would be too much work.:)

How does Hero 3b range look like?
That will be the key to determining how we should play value range on this flop.
The more 9x we have, the better it looks for us to check AA KK and such hands that require less protection. If on the other hand we have very little to no 9x in 3b pre flop, then over pairs are top of our range and we have incentive to value bet them with higher frequency then if we had 9x here.
AxAs certainly likes checking more because on spade turns it continues to call. Ace without spades on the other hand will want to value bet with higher frequency.

P.S. Over pairs will always have higher EV to bet vs check on this type of texture as there is flush draws, straight draws and opponent has over cards with some or none draws.

50% on the flop is fine you charge all his 8x 9x and gutters TJ and flush draws/combo draws .If you bet 3/4 pot those hands wont fold regardles and your just bloating the pot a little to much for the turn. You want to charge those hands but you don't want to over commit. In a 3bet pot i also don't mind a 30% cbet in some instances and also check calling flop is fine. As people have already said slightly bigger pre 3.5x or 4x oop and 2.5x or 3x ip.

I think the range la55i gave is a very solid good range for villain possibly some of those combos are in a 4bet range with a few different combos added to the calling range but i mean it's 5nl so id give a little leeway for villain just being a fish and perhaps not be on such solid ranges.

So to sum up i think one of the common mistakes for newer players is to blast flop and turn big and over commit and it's not the line we should take in a'lot of instances. Change the board texture to K82 or Q67 etc... then were going to be happy firing bigger all streets or even going for a river shove line with AA

Originally posted by BingoWings
50% on the flop is fine you charge all his 8x 9x and gutters TJ and flush draws/combo draws .If you bet 3/4 pot those hands wont fold regardles and your just bloating the pot a little to much for the turn. You want to charge those hands but you don't want to over commit. In a 3bet pot i also don't mind a 30% cbet in some instances and also check calling flop is fine. As people have already said slightly bigger pre 3.5x or 4x oop and 2.5x or 3x ip.

I think the range la55i gave is a very solid good range for villain possibly some of those combos are in a 4bet range with a few different combos added to the calling range but i mean it's 5nl so id give a little leeway for villain just being a fish and perhaps not be on such solid ranges.

So to sum up i think one of the common mistakes for newer players is to blast flop and turn big and over commit and it's not the line we should take in a'lot of instances. Change the board texture to K82 or Q67 etc... then were going to be happy firing bigger all streets or even going for a river shove line with AA

This is about getting everything wrong that is possible to get wrong at all (except perhaps villain's range).

Originally posted by YohanN7

This is about getting everything wrong that is possible to get wrong at all (except perhaps villain's range).

In your opinion. I'm not sure how saying all options are o'k though is bad advise lol.

Originally posted by YohanN7
There are almost always contradicting arguments, all qualitatively valid. So, there's no absolute right or wrong.

Id also bring your attention back to this statement.

Exception, not the rule. Fail to understand that, then you are in for a loss.

To be very clear, you advocate the exceptional play. I advocate the standard play you'd make if this were a single hand (as it is) and not a million where you'd occasionally play otherwise.

A little deception is good, but make no mistake about it, bet big with good hands and bet small/not at all with the bad ones. if you constantly get this wrong, you're dead. At least, you'd be the world's easiest opponent.