PAHWM: 25NL Zone on Ignition

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
25NL Zone at Ignition. Hero has AKo in CO.
Folds to HJ who opens to $0.75 (3BB is std). Hero 3! to $3.10 (4x is std IP). and BN cold calls. Blinds fold and HJ calls.
Going 3 ways to the flop OOP in a 3 bet pot. Not ideal with AKo.

1620496302219.png


Flop comes A-high and slightly connected. HJ checks. Hero?

1620496331644.png
 

Legend5555

Full House
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
2,847
Reaction score
3,788
Location
Georgia
Dry board. Bet $3. With plan to call a raise or bet ~$10 on turn if just called.
 

AR_poker

High Hand
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
88
Reaction score
91
Location
Little Rock, AR
25NL Zone at Ignition. Hero has AKo in CO.
Folds to HJ who opens to $0.75 (3BB is std). Hero 3! to $3.10 (4x is std IP). and BN cold calls. Blinds fold and HJ calls.
Going 3 ways to the flop OOP in a 3 bet pot. Not ideal with AKo.

View attachment 695496

Flop comes A-high and slightly connected. HJ checks. Hero?

View attachment 695498
Probably just half-potting this flop. I’ve been experimenting with getting away from downbetting in these spots, particularly in a multi-way scenario. This board is favorable for us as the preflop 3bettor, we’ll likely want to fire with some bluffs here, and we rate to have the best hand most of the time. There’s some merit to checking if you think BTN will stab, but I think we’re not at a good stack depth to check-jam and there’s no other good raise size for a favorable turn SPR. Because we don’t have a good check-raise size, I don’t like turning what’s probably the second strongest hand in our range (behind AA; I’m probably flatting 66 100% in this formation and 3betting 88 something like 30% of the time) into a bluffcatcher right on the flop. There’s plenty to get value from: all weaker Ax, KK - TT should call at least once, 98 or 87 with a back door, 97, etc. Calling if we face a single raise, in a really weird spot if BTN raises and HJ 3bets.
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
My standard cbet as the preflop aggressor in 3 bet pots is 1/3 - 1/2 pot. Multiway I'm going to lean on the smaller size. I agree with the feedback that I am the only uncapped player and have AA in range and ahead of any Ax that called. I do think that JJ- is the primary calling range for the field and am wary of sets. So while I want to get worse hands to call here and maybe deny equity to a low PP that has not connected (e.g. 44, 55, 77), I want to go a little smaller than 1/3 as its multiway and makes the sizing facing a raise smaller than going 1/2 pot and getting raised, so more of an ability to call a raise given stack depth if I go smaller. I am not thinking about jamming as in this pool 66 and 88 are definitely in both V's ranges and I am trying to stop jamming into the nuts. If I'm raised I will have a difficult decision - could be raised as a bluff so if the raise is small I can call once and see what the turn brings.

@AR_poker and @Legend5555 I like your analysis and agree - I'm never checking here given how hard this hits my range and calling facing a single raise.

Hero bets $2.59. BN calls and HJ folds. Turn is the 9s. Hero?

1620508588558.png
 

Phoenix_Lights

Sitting Out
Joined
May 5, 2021
Messages
32
Reaction score
31
Location
Ohio
I would bet around 1/2 pot here. Honestly, no matter what we bet here, we’ll be able to get it in on the river. If we get raised, we should shove. We can expect BTN to have worse aces in their range, definitely some 87s, maybe 9Ts, and TT-QQ type hands.
 

Legend5555

Full House
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
2,847
Reaction score
3,788
Location
Georgia
My standard cbet as the preflop aggressor in 3 bet pots is 1/3 - 1/2 pot. Multiway I'm going to lean on the smaller size. I agree with the feedback that I am the only uncapped player and have AA in range and ahead of any Ax that called. I do think that JJ- is the primary calling range for the field and am wary of sets. So while I want to get worse hands to call here and maybe deny equity to a low PP that has not connected (e.g. 44, 55, 77), I want to go a little smaller than 1/3 as its multiway and makes the sizing facing a raise smaller than going 1/2 pot and getting raised, so more of an ability to call a raise given stack depth if I go smaller. I am not thinking about jamming as in this pool 66 and 88 are definitely in both V's ranges and I am trying to stop jamming into the nuts. If I'm raised I will have a difficult decision - could be raised as a bluff so if the raise is small I can call once and see what the turn brings.

@AR_poker and @Legend5555 I like your analysis and agree - I'm never checking here given how hard this hits my range and calling facing a single raise.

Hero bets $2.59. BN calls and HJ folds. Turn is the 9s. Hero?

View attachment 695625
Hmmmm.... Well the button basically can't have 57 or T7 given the flat of the 3bet. It's possible he could have 88-QQ, AQ, or AK as well. So they only thing to really be afraid of is 88 or 99. But they both seem a bit unlikely. More likely he has TT-QQ, AQ, or AK. We are still way ahead, but need to pick a size to maximize getting called. Though I said $10, it seems more like $6-8. Def get called by the As, and possibly by the lesser pairs. Sets up a 60-75% jam or just another value bet on river depending on what comes. If we get raised here we vomit and probably fold.
 

AR_poker

High Hand
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
88
Reaction score
91
Location
Little Rock, AR
My standard cbet as the preflop aggressor in 3 bet pots is 1/3 - 1/2 pot. Multiway I'm going to lean on the smaller size. I agree with the feedback that I am the only uncapped player and have AA in range and ahead of any Ax that called. I do think that JJ- is the primary calling range for the field and am wary of sets. So while I want to get worse hands to call here and maybe deny equity to a low PP that has not connected (e.g. 44, 55, 77), I want to go a little smaller than 1/3 as its multiway and makes the sizing facing a raise smaller than going 1/2 pot and getting raised, so more of an ability to call a raise given stack depth if I go smaller. I am not thinking about jamming as in this pool 66 and 88 are definitely in both V's ranges and I am trying to stop jamming into the nuts. If I'm raised I will have a difficult decision - could be raised as a bluff so if the raise is small I can call once and see what the turn brings.

@AR_poker and @Legend5555 I like your analysis and agree - I'm never checking here given how hard this hits my range and calling facing a single raise.

Hero bets $2.59. BN calls and HJ folds. Turn is the 9s. Hero?

View attachment 695625
This is also why I liked sizing up to half-pot on the flop so we wouldn't be in this kind of 2:1 SPR turn spot where any amount we bet gives villain an easy shove spot. I'm definitely check-evaluating, pretty split between check-calling and check-shoving. This card hits villain's range more than ours, and I don't know how many bets we want to have here. If BTN bets tiny then I might just flat, but facing a half-pot or more bet from villain I think we're best served by shoving and denying equity to his combo draws, pair plus draws, and put his stubborn Ax in a tough spot. Unblocking spades is nice I guess, but I wouldn't expect villain to float the flop with that many unpaired flush draws (maybe some of the suited broadway spades hands float in a position to a 1/3 pot bet and hope to turn backdoor equity [and they'd prefer to have the Ks to have the backdoor NFD], but that's ambitious). I actually kind of dig that play—when we don't have an A or a set, bet flop, and check turn, villain will be able to take it away a bunch. From an equity standpoint it's *very* nice that the BDFD matches the A, meaning he doesn't have any top pair-plus-nut-flush-draws that, though we're ahead, have lots of equity, or Aces-up-two-pair-plus-nut-flush-draws that we're basically dead to.

Trying to think more through what we're behind. He's probably got 99, 88, 66 in full (not a huge reason for him to raise his sets on the flop with a mostly dry board, the stack depths make it easy to get all the money in on the turn or river, and he wants to let us keep firing with our bluffs). Expecting an anonymous BTN to flat the preflop 3bet some of the time (correctly or incorrectly) and wind up on this turn with Ah9h, Ah8h, Ad8d, 9h8h, Ad6d. Let's give him 2.5 of those combos to hedge. I think 9d8d should fold flop with no backdoor. So, what do we beat? 8s7s and 7s6s, but those have slam-dunk call-offs if they're putting us on AK/AQ since we're basically flipping, and we're not sad if those hands fold their equity. Maybe Ts8s, though plenty of BTNs will just fold that facing the 3bet pre. 9c7c, 9h7h, a little better for us than their combo draw cousins. All suited broadway AhXh and AdXd, though some of those will mix a 4bet. All eight combos of AQ, though some of those will mix a 4bet. QQ - TT at some frequency, maybe 100% depending on villain's comfort 4betting. So, that's 11.5 combos we're behind, 2 combos we're racing with, 2 combos that are drawing but we're doing a little better against, 6 combos of top pair we're beating, 2 combos of top pair we're chopping with, and 18 combos of broadway pocket pairs that are drawing very thin. Villain *might* bluff Th9h and Th9c that floated the flop in position with backdoors, but they also turned showdown value and can just check behind.

All told, I'm probably check-calling and praying for a blank river. The nice thing about a check-call line is that BTN could go for thin value with his Ax on the river targeting your KK-TT or your AJ/AT/suited wheel aces with his AQ. I hate having to turn our third/fourth strongest hand in range into a bluffcatcher (we will have 99 and 88 sometimes through this line, for sure), but c'est la vie. I love the spirit of a check-jam, but I think it's an overplay, and the main hands to deny equity to have pretty easy decisions (8s7s and 7s6s call; 9c7c and 9h7h probably fold). Sure, we can maybe stack villain's AQ or AJ, but those might also find tight folds. I think the target is just too narrow.
 
Last edited:

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
@AR_poker we are on the same page here. IMHO this card shifts the nut advantage squarely to V who has 88, 99 and possibly 66 at lower frequency in his 3! flatting range on BN. Based on Brokos' book, V is the player who can represent a polarized range here and we are OOP and have a condensed range with a medium strength hand. It is time to shift into X/C or X/F mode here.

There is one dynamic here: in my experience with this pool, when we cbet OOP and then check turn, we are almost guaranteed to see a bet on turn and a bet on river and 50% of the time V will be bluffing. Checking turn here is seen as an admission that I cbet range and missed and V will use position to try and take down the pot. This is so consistent that I have started checking stronger hands in this scenario, not to protect my checking range as the game is anonymous, but rather as an exploitative play to get more value from weaker holdings.

Hero checks. V bets just under 1/2 pot. Hero calls.

1620564836897.png


The river is not a good card for Hero. Not afraid of the FD here because I think they would consist of Ax spades and KQ spades primarily (I could be holfing KJs though and would fit my play), but I've felt that AQs was a possible holding that V could call a 3bet IP at some medium to lower frequency. Hero is checking here and V bets just under 1/2 pot.

Hero?

1620565568021.png
 

Attachments

  • 1620564741802.png
    1620564741802.png
    220.9 KB · Views: 18
  • 1620564859847.png
    1620564859847.png
    217.6 KB · Views: 18

Legend5555

Full House
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
2,847
Reaction score
3,788
Location
Georgia
In your experience, are people really flatting 3Bets cold with 88 and 99 like this? It just seems he is more weighted toward AQ+ and TT-QQ. And would he even call in this configuration with 99 on the flop if he did call cold pre? He still has to worry about the guy behind him.

You were barely deep enough to set mine against pre for someone to call cold with a pair.
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
@Legend5555 good question. I would say yes on calling the 3bet pre cold IP with 66/88/99. There are a lot of gamblers on the site.
Good point about calling the flop cbet with those hands but I think there is a 50/50 chance that they call because of my small sizing.
I dont think they are generally worrying about being raised behind. So 99 would call pre and likely to call a < 1/3 flop cbet even multi-way IMHO in this player pool.

I think BN's calling range looks something like this with AKo, AKs and QQ 4 bet 50% and 22 - 44 folded 50%.
I dont know if the < 1/3 flop bet sees any of these hands fold except 22 - 55.
I dont know if V is really calling with this many combos of SCs; maybe only 65s & 76s at 50% - but I know the pool is spewy and am trying to represent that by including these hands.

1620571977772.png
 

Attachments

  • 1620571240677.png
    1620571240677.png
    48.6 KB · Views: 21
Last edited:

Legend5555

Full House
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
2,847
Reaction score
3,788
Location
Georgia
In my experience with those games a few years back, anyone that has a 2x or bigger stack isn't that spewy typically. I'd weight those players more toward playing fairly decent straightforward poker. So I'd almost always discount 66 and a lot of 88. 99 maybe, but I still don't think it's a slam dunk call on the flop for 99 with another player in the pot.

Anyway, we'll see what happens. I'm more on the continue to value bet train to target AQ and TT-QQ. But if your read is accurate, I get the check.
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
So this is difficult to solve given the multi-way nature of the hand, but if I ignore the 2nd V on the flop the solver bets 1/3 pot on flop with 64% of range and checks the remainder. From there on we're heads up so maybe the solution is relevant despite.

On turn, I checked to X/C. Solver is still X 77% of range including this combo and all AK at about 35% but given the choice of X and bet 33%, 66% and 100% of pot, solver leads 100% pot 65% of the time with AK so a pot sized lead here is preferred.

Additionally, when solver X AK and V bets 1/2 pot, solver JAMS AK here 75% of the time. V arrives on the turn with a range of {AK, AQs, AJs, ATs, QQ, JJ, TT, 99, 77, 66, 55, 44, 33, 22, 65s, 76s} and bets 1/2 pot with the following:
- bet 1/2 pot at high frequency {AK, TT, 66, 55}
- bet 1/2 pot at medium frequency {QQ, JJ, 33, 22, 76s}
- bet 1/2 pot at low frequency {AQs, 99, 77, 44, 65s}

88 is no longer in V's range as she would have raised flop at 100% frequency. 66 raises flop over 60% frequency.

On turn the solver has V checking behind 46% of hands and we are ahead of the vast majority of the range that is bet 1/2 pot so I guess that is why the jam makes sense here.
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
On the river, solver has Hero X 100%. Here V mixes check/raise at 25%/75% but when betting goes pot+. There is no scenario where V bets 1/2 pot.
Facing a pot sized bet, solver calls AK at 88% frequency.

Solver has V betting a polarized range for a pot sized bet including all sorts of junk with almost no equity, hence the call.
So betting all the strongest hands including 6s5s, 7s6s, all combos of AQs and QQ; calling hands with SDV like AK, AJ, AT, JJ, TT, etc. and betting weakest hands per the chart below.

1620573306934.png
 

Legend5555

Full House
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
2,847
Reaction score
3,788
Location
Georgia
I still think that 3bet cold calling range is far too wide. ATs? 22-77? I just don't think most of these hands are in the range here realistically.
 

AR_poker

High Hand
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
88
Reaction score
91
Location
Little Rock, AR
@AR_poker we are on the same page here. IMHO this card shifts the nut advantage squarely to V who has 88, 99 and possibly 66 at lower frequency in his 3! flatting range on BN. Based on Brokos' book, V is the player who can represent a polarized range here and we are OOP and have a condensed range with a medium strength hand. It is time to shift into X/C or X/F mode here.

There is one dynamic here: in my experience with this pool, when we cbet OOP and then check turn, we are almost guaranteed to see a bet on turn and a bet on river and 50% of the time V will be bluffing. Checking turn here is seen as an admission that I cbet range and missed and V will use position to try and take down the pot. This is so consistent that I have started checking stronger hands in this scenario, not to protect my checking range as the game is anonymous, but rather as an exploitative play to get more value from weaker holdings.

Hero checks. V bets just under 1/2 pot. Hero calls.

View attachment 695990

The river is not a good card for Hero. Not afraid of the FD here because I think they would consist of Ax spades and KQ spades primarily (I could be holfing KJs though and would fit my play), but I've felt that AQs was a possible holding that V could call a 3bet IP at some medium to lower frequency. Hero is checking here and V bets just under 1/2 pot.

Hero?

View attachment 695992
Ehhh, I actually think I’m making a tight exploitative fold here, absent some more info/reads on villain. None of villain’s bluffs want to choose this sizing, and I really doubt they would when they have an obvious shove staring them in the face. And I’m not even sure what villain’s logical bluffs are. He probably should fire any 97 or 87 or whatever he shows up with here, but that’s a hard trigger for some villains to pull when they could convince themselves their showdown value is good (it never is) and check back. I know plenty of your HHs end up showing villains having random trash in these spots, and if we’re getting over bluffed then good for villain. But this line looks to me like a flopped/turned set or a rivered two pair that’s more scared of running into AA, QQ, or a rivered flush than it should be, or a combo of 8s7s or 7s6s that can’t believe it binked and doesn’t want to scare you away.

Edit: and, related, I reeeeally don’t think villain should be value betting AJ, AT, etc. If they are and we fold, that’s annoying, but knowing that they’re going for suuuuuper thin value should be exploitable moving forward if we see this villain again (as a live player, I have no idea how online play works w/r/t whether we’re going to see this player again).
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
@AR_poker sorry wasnt trying to rope you into my river decision :) I was noting that we were thinking about the turn similarly.

@Legend5555 I appreciate your feedback - solver has this as a call because of how wide I have entered V's range. If I trim V's range the solver calls the river bet about 35%.

1620589790838.png
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
So in the end, mostly because of the following:
1. the pool is wide and spewy
2. I cbet flop and checked turn OOP which often results in turn and river bluffs at a high frequency from the pool, and
3. V's sizing, while looking more like thin value afraid of the AQ or FD, was easier to call than a jam

I sigh called. Got lucky this time.

1620589944049.png
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
For me the real miss here is how I played turn. Even if I tighten V's range per the above snip, the solver is check/jamming turn here a very high % of the time and jamming with Ks almost 100%. I dont really understand this - is it because of SPR?


1620590881494.png
 

AR_poker

High Hand
Joined
Jun 14, 2020
Messages
88
Reaction score
91
Location
Little Rock, AR
For me the real miss here is how I played turn. Even if I tighten V's range per the above snip, the solver is check/jamming turn here a very high % of the time and jamming with Ks almost 100%. I dont really understand this - is it because of SPR?


View attachment 696177
Fun to see that my check-jam instinct is borne out here a little! Even though I ended up opting against it in my analysis. I do think the check-jam makes sense with this river SPR (I just really hate arriving on the river significantly below 1:1 SPR), though I can be gunshy about randos because my live game pool just doesn’t have anywhere near enough floating IP or bluffing. I’m really curious if it’s just an equity-denial play, or if it’s hoping to get called by a lot of worse Ax.

Seeing 54 suited is super helpful in understanding the spot. Villain is very wide (I think 54 is a fold, 76 is probably bottom of my range in this spot, calling some, 4betting a small amount, and folding some), and your instincts about the pool were great. This is a *horrific* candidate for villain’s actions on every single street. Play with this person more!
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
@AR_poker the unfortunate thing about Ignition is that its anonymous so it would not be possible to play against this person again per se. But they are in the anonymous player pool, and they're not alone in their spewy tendencies!

I ran the solve with just over double the stack and the raising frequencies on turn are down substantially. The interesting thing is that on the flop Hero has no betting range at this stack depth which I dont understand at all.

Does anyone have a good book or other info that talks about the impact of stack depth on decisions? This is definitely something I dont understand and would like to learn more about.

1620592347120.png
 

Legend5555

Full House
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
2,847
Reaction score
3,788
Location
Georgia
@AR_poker the unfortunate thing about Ignition is that its anonymous so it would not be possible to play against this person again per se. But they are in the anonymous player pool, and they're not alone in their spewy tendencies!

I ran the solve with just over double the stack and the raising frequencies on turn are down substantially. The interesting thing is that on the flop Hero has no betting range at this stack depth which I dont understand at all.

Does anyone have a good book or other info that talks about the impact of stack depth on decisions? This is definitely something I dont understand and would like to learn more about.

View attachment 696187
If I had to guess, it's strictly for pot control. Solvers don't like to put money, especially big money, into the pot until there equity is quite high. OOP with one pair it's just to ready to get raised in the flop and be screwed to a 3 barrel. Plus, it protects your range.

How did you run the preflop action exactly?
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
I had to start at the flop and even then couldnt account for a multi-way pot so had to run HU which isnt ideal.
 

Legend5555

Full House
Joined
Jul 15, 2019
Messages
2,847
Reaction score
3,788
Location
Georgia
I imagine it's kind of messed up then. What about starting pre with you opening and him 3 betting? Then just take the low probability line of you just calling. It's an approximate, and would include stuff like 77+, ATs+, A2-A5s, and some suited connectors.
 

boltonguy

Flush
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Boston, MA USA
I cant start pre - I dont think many solvers can or many people have the compute resources to do so. I need to start on the flop and make some assumptions about ranges that call my 3bet pre IP with another player behind. Then when SIMing from the flop onward cant do multi-way. So I think the multi-way nature of the flop "should" make V's play more straightforward but I dont think that is a safe assumption with this pool ;)
 
Top Bottom