[PLO2] JTT8d 3bet pot deep

Being OOP there is really not much other options than just x-r. Again hand that wants to get it in on flop or have low enough SPR to shove turn if we like it. In position I could see some merit in calling to be able to raise some blankish turns.

Pre-flop I would consider folding to a 3bet against a passive villain as PLO fish, but flop play seems standard.

Cheers,
SDK1987

JTT8ds too connected to fold pre.

Flop is fine, as often those players also tend to overbet even dry Aces on most flops. C-raise, and we are happy to get it in.

Being OOP there is really not much other options than just x-r.

Not agreed.

JTT8ds too connected to fold pre.

Agreed.

Considering single pairs, Solver somewhat draws a line betweend :Qx::Qx: and :Jx::Jx: starts calling the latter against 3bets oop.

X/r is okay since it´s the default play and fine when villain is stabbing flops occasionally. Against loose passive we should lead the flop more often to generate value and build the pot. The 8♣ midpair blocker is a good sidecard to lead so with your specific hand I would prefer leading.

For donking we want playability. This hand is definition of no playability. We block our boat outs, we dont have any redraw (outside of J sort of giving some) or even bd fd. There are huge amount of board runouts where we get into very nasty spots by donking. So by going for x-r we can achieve two possibilities. Either keep pot smaller if it goes checked and see if we still like hand on turn ---> Time to lead big or we get to x-r versus cbet and make hand one or two street game. Like in this spot if villain bet-call flop SPR is still close to 1. We can x-f spade turns but pretty much pot everything else.

100bb deep I can see donking making more sense as we are way shorter. But these are two very different scenarios.

No playability? We have top-set, we can continue on 100% of turn-cards. You cannot have more playability. We do not want to keep pots smaller with nuts. Big hands want to play big pots, that´s one of the most basic principles in PLO.

So you always call pot size bet on flushing turn with top set?

You can have huge amount more playability with redraws. Give hero nut flush draw with top set and boom playability just sky rocketed.

In a normal dynamic against regular, yes. And follow up barreling on turn-cards is an option too, checking is kinda passive with top-set. I can mix those plays depending on villain, sidecards, etc. Just check-folding top-set because it´s not nuts anymore in general is pretty weak.

But that´s against regs/unknown, not passive players. Those single hand reviews should not fade out the fact we are performing our actions with hand-ranges. I am never playing 100% move in a specific spot with a specific hand.

That´s also why I just give recommendations how to play a hand and try to undermine it with arguments why to do so. If you bet here in such a line, you want to have sets, flushes, bluffs, so you can continue balanced on different river outcomes. When you check you want to have give-up air, flushes and sets too. The spot by itself is not so common and villains miles away from GTO so balancing yourself ain´t that important, that´s why I said leading flop is the better play. Villain will call worse hands, check behind all kind of texture shifts, we win at showdown. If we improve, we have a bigger pot where we can bring even bigger value bets that are going to be called in a bad fashion aswell and win bigger pots. If villain gets aggressive, we play well against very defined ranges by making either implieds calls where if we can assess villains looseness on ie paired rivers to pay out a flush or make a highly exploitative fold on that flush turn card against a pot-sized bet (which is nutflush).

If you want to advance your game from a fit-fold/nutpeddle-style you must think in terms of hand ranges. Because, which kind of passive player calls flop multiway to bet pot on flushed turn-cards? Does he pay out paired river cards`?

You can have huge amount more playability with redraws. Give hero nut flush draw with top set and boom playability just sky rocketed.

Yes so?

When we donk and opponent has a decent hand, we need to dodge turn and river to keep betting. When we c-raise flop, all we have to do is to dodge turn at most. And as said, in HU pots general small stakes population cbets way too much in 3bet pots, that I agree with Ghaleon that c-raise should be our default line.

I have talked a lot about donking vs check-raising over the years. And I claim that having good c-raise range and no donking as default in HU pots doesn't give away EV. Trying to have at least some kind of good strategy and balance to use both donking and c-raising most likely is -EV compared to simpler strategy.

I have used this approach for a long time, and haven't seen any problems with it. I don't have donk in HU as an option in my default strategy. I use it in HU pots if I have information to justify it (opponent is passive, opponent doesn't cbet enough etc.). If this was a single raised pot, I would consider donking as opponent is known to be passive. But most passive opponents still over value AA after 3betting and cbet them way too much on the flop. Therefore I would definitely c-raise here, to make pot bigger with nuts.

Originally posted by Mascherano95
No playability? We have top-set, we can continue on 100% of turn-cards. You cannot have more playability. We do not want to keep pots smaller with nuts. Big hands want to play big pots, that´s one of the most basic principles in PLO.

Originally posted by Mascherano95

You can have huge amount more playability with redraws. Give hero nut flush draw with top set and boom playability just sky rocketed.

Yes so?

So there are ton of hand combos with more playability in top set category. Some top sets perform better for x-r, x-c or donk bet. Being very dry one blocking your own boat outs does not make good candidate for donk bet OOP with high SPR. If villain is not cbetting much then we have reason to donk bet out more but that doesnt really change point that the most dry top sets that have most difficulties with board changes should still check. By going for x-r they minimize positional disadvantage.

Top-set has more playability because of its nuttiness like other hand we wanto to play like 2pair or bottom-set where we might be dominated. Our hand is never dead on the turn.

T♥:T♣:8♣: does not fit well for a check-raise because he is less likely to have a middle-set and top-2pair which prevents a desirable flop stack-off scenario. And we also have no redraws which means we have less playbility for continuing on turn cards (ie villain calls the x/r and turn is bringing a straight for villains drawing range but we hit a bdfd redraw). So when x/r we prefer to have non-nutted sidevalue in terms of redraws like a non-nutted flushdraw blocking villains drawing range ie. If we lead, villain is likely to call most of his draws and we have a more desirable SPR ott oop.

Sure you can wait for top-set plus nutflushdraw plus gutshot etc but 1. this will not happen enough to have a somewhat balanced line and 2. you will not generate max profit by x/r or potting that either.

Ok so I decided to actually check this from gto view in plotrainer. Flop is bit different and positions as well but certain logics dont change hugely. So this is situation, 200bb deep, COvsBU in 3bet pot:

CO range on flop:

Top sets:

Top set that has 8 or 4:

Facing BU 2/3 cbet with top sets:

Top sets that has no flush draw, straight draws or backdoor flushdraw and is with 8 or 4:

Top set with nothing, E.g. the most dry and weakest TT we can have:

So we can see dry sets really dont want to donk bet and they really mainly go for pot size x-r. BU is supposed to cbet close to 50% of time which is really often the case being in position. So yeah if villain checks more we should donk more often. But again I would choose from hands that has support of some sort.

Also same spot but with 100bb stacks that TT84 want to donk bet. Reason is it can make it two street game doing so.

Guys.. I have to tell you sth.:

Originally posted by Kyyberi

I have talked a lot about donking vs check-raising over the years. And I claim that having good c-raise range and no donking as default in HU pots doesn't give away EV. Trying to have at least some kind of good strategy and balance to use both donking and c-raising most likely is -EV compared to simpler strategy.

Absolutely spot on. I've run dozens of sims that show OOP hardly ever gives away anything at all in terms of EV by not donking. Furthermore, solver tends to play hyper-aggressively OOP which is tough to emulate and at low stakes is probably sub-optimal. Sure, if you are programming a bot to take on other bots over a trillion hands then you will probably need a donking strategy.

Originally posted by Nunki

Originally posted by Kyyberi

I have talked a lot about donking vs check-raising over the years. And I claim that having good c-raise range and no donking as default in HU pots doesn't give away EV. Trying to have at least some kind of good strategy and balance to use both donking and c-raising most likely is -EV compared to simpler strategy.

Absolutely spot on. I've run dozens of sims that show OOP hardly ever gives away anything at all in terms of EV by not donking. Furthermore, solver tends to play hyper-aggressively OOP which is tough to emulate and at low stakes is probably sub-optimal. Sure, if you are programming a bot to take on other bots over a trillion hands then you will probably need a donking strategy.

Surely not practically recommendable at the situation described by TO. At those lower stakes leaks are huge.

It makes a big difference if you have a donking strategy or not against let´s say the typical 40/17 AF 1.3 weak passive player who calls trash just to shut down later but does not even stab nutblockers ip. You can only pull out a check-raise when you are facing a bet right?

Default strategy is what we use against uknowns in the player pool. If we have stats on opponent, he is not unknown.

If average player in the pool is 40/10/0 passive, our default strategy should of course be constructed accordingly.

Originally posted by Kyyberi
Default strategy is what we use against uknowns in the player pool. If we have stats on opponent, he is not unknown.

If average player in the pool is 40/10/0 passive, our default strategy should of course be constructed accordingly.

But the average player is not playing GTO either. The average player folds air, calls with medium hands and raises strong hands.

In my opinion average player cbets there often too. But that's poker. We all estimate unknown things differently. I think it's very important to understand the importance of default strategy and also when/how to deviate from it and why.

Here opp can have roughly 3 kind of hands. Premiums, where stacks go in no matter what we do. Then he could have semi-hand or air. Versus air it's hard to get value on the flop, so checking increases our EV versus those hands (as opp is unlikely to bet air on that board, but could get something on the turn). Versus semi-hands (draws, overpair+draw etc.) The question is how opponents play them vs check. If we estimate that he bets medium hits in 3bet pots, c-raise has better EV. If we estimate he would check those back often, betting has better EV.

As in most situations, we can never know for sure which line has better EV. But if we know exactly why we are betting or checking, we are playing good poker.