Missed value by playing my range?

Flop is fine. Turn I like the check, but once he barrells he has 3 kind of hands:
- bluffs
- straights
- boats

Versus bluffs it doesn't matter what we do, as he shouldn't continue after we call the turn. Unless river is blankish and he feels adventurous. But thatäs not a good card to barrell with a bluff, and especially with small sizing. I think bluffs are quite small in his range

Versus straights we need to raise to get value. If we call, he most likely checks back the river or goes for small bet-fold. If we raise the turn, most likely he wouldn't fold to that raise.

Versus boats we want to raise to bloat the pot and get the max value.

To me it's quite clear raise on the turn, we don't achieve much by calling oop.

Basically keep it simple dummy. I'm going to write that somewhere as a reminder when I'm playing.

Keep it simple.

Why do we play our range instead of our actual hand here? The answer is simple, if we don't a good opponent can exploit that we show our hand strength with actions. When opponent is somewhat unknown, we play our default, where flop play is good. But after that things get so specific, that usually we can start to throw our balance away. Meaning that situation where we are HU 200bb deep EP vs LP on straigth+fd board, pairing turn versus that same opponent is going to happen so rarely, that he will now exploit us if we go to unbalanced mode on turn+river. He doesn't know that, and to have enough sample size with showdown hands on similar spots it would take so long that he has forgotten the earlier hands.

Be balanced when you need to, but not always.

I dont think we'd get value against straights unless villain is a sticky fish but it's still a X/R on the turn with top-full for value. You should usually raise your top-full unblocking the pair on the board cause you unblock his fulls and drawing trips and you are more likely to get paid off big (some trips are in pretty bad shape and domination of calling ranges is a winning recipe on lower stakes). Check-raising flop is also an option especially if he flop cbets wide.

As played I kinda don't like the small sizing otr. Villain probably would bet-call little bigger like 60-70%pot with basically the same range so we are missing some value. Another thing is, you generally do not want to vary your sizing here according to handstrength, you would not raise :7x::6x: or :Jx::Jx: with half-pot either, right? X/C X/C X/R is not a line we have a lot of bluffs or high frequency so the smallish sizing is suboptimal, only okayish if you think he'd fold more mediocre hands against the bigger raise (like the straights+B or bottomfull if he is loose).

Originally posted by Mascherano95

As played I kinda don't like the small sizing otr. Villain probably would bet-call little bigger like 60-70%pot with basically the same range so we are missing some value. Another thing is, you generally do not want to vary your sizing here according to handstrength, you would not raise :7x::6x: or :Jx::Jx: with half-pot either, right? X/C X/C X/R is not a line we have a lot of bluffs or high frequency so the smallish sizing is suboptimal, only okayish if you think he'd fold more mediocre hands against the bigger raise (like the straights+B or bottomfull if he is loose).

When he Bet33 turn I put him on more straights then FH. So by x-c turn, x-raise50 river I would get max value from straights and some under-fulls. That being said you and Kybberi are absolutely correct, I should have raised turn. Get value from str8+B or weaker FH to call. I fixated on the fact that villain will be overly aggressive by merge betting straights, and some bluffs, thinking I am deficient in FH, and so the best way to combat that is to x-c my top range.

If the line is under bluffed shouldn't we raise smaller to target indifference? I'm definitely missing something here. Sizing up allows us to have more bluffs so I should size up my raise to have more bluffs in this under bluffed spot? Is that it?

Originally posted by Mascherano95
Another thing is, you generally do not want to vary your sizing here according to handstrength,

But from my limited studying I have noticed that solver does bet/raise based on hand class strength, there's also some slight mixing to protect/get max value I think.
So this spot I would raise100 77/JJ, then I would rise50 66 (quads) and 67. For quads I'm hoping to get a 3bet shove from villain.

Hypothetical example BU vs BB, in a Bet check Bet scenario, texture shifting river. solver, I think, would split bet50 /B100 based on strength. E.g on straight river, B100 with straights and B50 with Top two/sets +B.

I would use one sizing approach on river when x-r in general and usually it's going to be pot or 3/4 pot. It's very different situation compared to normal betting on river where in position I would use half and pot sizings. OOP we might want to go for blocker (1/4-1/3 pot) and big sizes.

Point is we don't usually look to x-r kind of mediocre strength stuff on river. Like in this case nut straight or weak boats. Our value range is going to be at widest probably 76. So when our value range is very strong we benefit most from bog sizing. We want lot of value when having value but also put lot of pressure when we bluff. If using same sizing for both.

I also somewhat disagree on assumption that opponent range is capped because of sizing. I don't really like his river sizing but if we ask what our range looks like to villain it's going to be mainly overpairs with some support, busted draw with possibly some showdown value and rare trips+. That is also because I doubt pool in general play flop even closely as passive as they should theory wise. Also they might fast play often if checking. So villain could easily bet small with boats in hope we hero some overpair etc.