plo deepish top set on mono flop with blocker

[doubleup]

Hero (BTN): $190.20 (190.2 bb)
SB: $54.43 (54.4 bb)
BB: $50 (50 bb)
UTG: $58.64 (58.6 bb)
MP: $109.28 (109.3 bb)
CO: $241.14 (241.1 bb)


Preflop: Hero is BTN with
2 folds, CO raises to $3Hero raises to $8, SB calls $7.50, CO calls $5

Flop: ($25) , , (3 players)

SB checks, CO checks, Hero bets $18, SB raises to $46.43 and is all-in, CO calls $46.43,


should I raise here with the blocker to get heads up and obv risk getting heroed by the CO or just call and risk getting pushed off on the turn?

[SuuPRlim]

Options options.

You can call here and the bet the turn, you should be checked to almost always, if he jams the turn you're in a real pickle though, and what size to bet the turn is interesting, I think i'd prefer a small bet to basically VB vs QQQ (if he's a good player) you're not gonna have a very big river jam though so might get hero'd by a lot of flushes (bet $48 on the turn and $105 or w/e it is OTR) I think if you bet the turn then you really should bluff the river.

You're next option is to raise this bet again, this I don't like because you'll get him of a flush yes, but you are prolly gonna need to fill up to beat the side pot anyways and we'll prolly get him to fold QQQ so the raise seems kinda pointless.

You could call here and then check the turn back and just try fill up, if he leads the river then you could consider going all-in, he'll be getting a great price to call though and you prolly lose the middle pot so not a huuge amount of point imo.

I think my preference is to chk the turn and try fill up, he should check the turn almost always so you'll get a free turn/river out of it. I don't actually think with the sidepot and the stack depths here your blocker is REALLY worth much more other than the knowledge that you'll very likely be seeing the river card for free.

[doubleup]

good stuff dave

I just called the flop bet and the Q came on the turn.  I bet and he folded - prob a mistake there - think I should've just checked and then bet on the river.

[pleno1]

Is pre flop sizing optimal?

[SuuPRlim]

good stuff dave

I just called the flop bet and the Q came on the turn.  I bet and he folded - prob a mistake there - think I should've just checked and then bet on the river.

certainly not, betting for sure but bet v small.

Is pre flop sizing optimal?

mmmmm.

It's a tough one tbh, for years I've been experimenting with various strategies for sizing 3bets pre-flop, and the "fashion" has changed quite a bit over the years. I was working for ages on building two 3bet sizes, one for pot, and one for this size (2.25x the raise or something like that) I also tried making all my 3bets this sort of size.

The main advantages of having a 3bet size like this is that a) you could 3bet more, and yoou could punish guys who open a bit too wide and you often leave them in a very awkward spot for 4betting with most 100-150bb stacks. However there are just so many problems and as such I've never managed to convert my conviction that there is DEFO a good small 3bet strategy out there into anything workable. i) its actually very difficult to balance, as most often a vacuum spot will prefer a small or a pot 3bet and it can often be quite obvious, ii) vs unknown players you're always better off potting, iii) you get calls behind more often and if you're 3betting with a wider range this is very bad for you, iv) as soon as you get over 160bb you really wanna be potting, speshly IP as you're making life much harder for your opponents by doing this, 3betting to $8 over $3 with 200bb stacks is kinda letting them off, if they are opening to wide or peeling 3bets too much you're basically letting them make those mistakes for a cheap as possible here.

In terms of balancing as I said I started out just 3betting the weaker hands to small (hands i wanted to ISO and cheaply call 4bets with) and then when a dynamic started to form with a player where I felt he was starting to realise I was 3betting small with these hands I affectively swapped the ranges around, potting with those weaker hands (expecting to be 4bet very infrequently) and was using my small sizing with hands I wanted to 5bet with. This lead to all sorts of levels and problems and many silly spots developed where keeping it simple PF would have made life a lot easier for me.

There was a craze about 2 yrs ago where people were tiny 3betting AA, OOP, I fell for it plenty when I thought with AKQ* or KK** "well who would tiny 3b AA from the SB" and pot 4b getting it in terribly plenty of times till i realised. I adjusted to this easily by just never 4betting those bets, even with AA just playing a pot with deep stacks IP - I think that style was pretty bad tbh.

I've never seen any reg in any of my games properly implement a good multi-3b sizing strategy either, I think it's one of those styles that is prolly best left as an exploitative adjustment to a specific player or vacuum play. I think it pretty every case for your range you should just be potting it, this example is certainly one of them (hand and range)

[doubleup]

Think I was on the wide 3 betting (smallish) on the button v3.1 strategy that day 

[pleno1]

@dave we are so see here that it seems like t won't/shouldn't make a difference. But ty for the lost especially good for 100bb stacks

[SuuPRlim]

@dave we are so see here that it seems like t won't/shouldn't make a difference. But ty for the lost especially good for 100bb stacks

Yeh, for 200bb stacks its SO hard to play against 3bets OOP even if you're against an over-aggro 3-better providing he isn't a total monkey there is very little you can really do about it. This is why we really wanna make our 3bets to POT when we are deep and in position, cos even if we're 3betting a bit too much were making ourselves very difficult to play against.

If we change our default 3bet size to smaller we're still punishing him if he is opening too wide but against decent players who are opening decent ranges we're just letting them off what should be all types of coffin for them. We can still 3bet pretty wide so we don't really need to lesser our sizing to widen our range here (unless you specifically want that, can see no need, spesh at these stakes)

I think if you're unhappy with how you're playing the stronger hands, IP, with deep stacks then going simpler and just being more TAG  is the best way to go about it, 80-140bb stacks and it's a LOT more interesting imo, speshly as people can play back against you and exploit mistakes in your ranges/frequencies a lot better, it's by no means "solved" but 100BB PLO pre-flop is becoming another area where even just decent players don't make too many mistakes and where stnd "expoitations" like in NLHE are generally pretty affective

[gouty]

I think my preference is to chk the turn and try fill up, he should check the turn almost always so you'll get a free turn/river out of it. I don't actually think with the sidepot and the stack depths here your blocker is REALLY worth much more other than the knowledge that you'll very likely be seeing the river card for free.



This is golden really. I never thought of it that way. Then again you don't flop top set with nut blocker very often. It's like a pretty crap spot to make any more money than is in the pot now. At least you get 2 cards to fill up. I have played a similar pot live this year and now realise I pretty much instigated a massive side pot against a better hand.

So the bare ace can be used as a defensive weapon as well as all out super doper aggro barreling which is just the best fun ever.

[wazz]

'should I raise here with the blocker to get heads up'

Why would you want to get it heads up? When you're behind to anyone in the main pot and you can improve, you want as much money in the pot as possible. If you think there's a chance you're fighting the all-in guy with a lower set and you can win the sidepot vs a lower flush obv do it but that's pretty rare.