I think we can throw MDF out the window when villian takes an unorthodox lead turn line in a 3bet pot. Our hand screams strength and I think opponent would be hard pressed to have many bluffs at all in this spot. Im not great at poker but just my 2 cents
I agree with throwing MDF out the window, but I'm not sure hero's hand screams strength after what looks like a (correct) range bet on flop, then a flat on the turn. AcXc, JJ-77, and some weaker clubs can all easily be in hero's range even after the turn call. Of course turned trips+ can also be in there, but overall it's still a somewhat soft range.
@@1vailchris "Every flush draw" meaning all 5 combos of them, lol. He has 15-ish combos of Qx (AQ-QJ). Only reasonable flush draws that defend against 3-bet OOP and then take this line are AKc, AJc, ATc, and JTc. Pretty obvious villain has a queen and wants max value versus overpair or JJ/TT.
@@noex100he could have every Ax of clubs, plus the broadway connectors, and if he's loose, some of the lesser suited connectors. Even if he just plays AK/AJ/AT/A9/A5/A3/A2 and KJ/KT/JT, that's ten flush draws he could have for bluffs.
Love this video, perfect title. It seems like such a slam dunk call from a GTO perspective (flush draws and the occassional JJs, 10s, KKs,etc. far outweigh the small number of Qx 6x hands) but do a lot of people really take this line and bluff on the river? Not too often. Still I'd probably turn my back to the table and say "I call. Please tell me when it's over".
If I call, they show me KQs. If I fold, they show me TT or JJ. The problem with betting 1/3 on flop with entire range, is a failure to protect, and a failure to find out where you're at. If you can play like a computer without protection or info, go for it. I'm a big believer in somewhat randomizing C-bet sizing. Let's say 40% 1/3, 20% 1/2, 20% 2/3, 20% pot. And on top of that, I don't mean exactly those amounts. 2/3 could be anything from 58% to 83%, maybe. Let them try to read some meaning into the exact bet size, when there is no meaning to it. Having said that, NLHE by definition is a game of bet sizing, so while balancing and randomization to keep them guessing is super important, it is also really important to sometimes be unbalanced and just choose the sizing which a particular opponent will react to in a particular way, considering your long-term history with them, the short-term history at the table, how they're running, how you're running, their table image, your table image, and everything else. A table full of perfect GTO players, all have a win rate of 0 bb/100 against each other. How many bb/100 does each of them win against a near-GTO player who uses slightly different bet sizes, or even quite different bet sizes half the time? Not as much as you'd think, and certainly WAY less than the win rate of a good player at a table of mediocre players. A chess analogy is that a stronger player can play slightly weaker openings to get a weaker player out of their "opening book" comfort range, them mop them up once they have to think for themselves because you're not doing things they even know how to interpret. They know your move isn't what grandmasters would play against each other, but their chance of figuring out why, and how to punish it, is nil.
If V has a history of folding to 3-bets, and then starts donk leading turn here, this just seems like a standard fold. Maybe V is getting out of line every once in a while after reading H as not having a Q, but V's sizing screams value to me. Now exploit me.
I disagree. I think a tight player who's been folding pre to 3-bets would be more likely to check turn with Qx, to trap an overly aggro opponent. That's the whole point of calling the pre-flop 3B with Qx - to outplay and trap your oppoent post-flop. Donking the turn with Qx defeats the purpose. V's turn donk-lead actually looks really bluffy to me, like he's trying to rep Qx while on a flush draw, or perhaps even massively over-playing KK.
@@ewallt that's correct. I don't think a good player with Qx is going to be afraid that hero will check back after hero bets turn. I think a good player with AXcc would be more worried that his flush draw will brick out and any river bet he makes as a bluff will get snapped off.
Idk, my natural inclination is to snap fold. Donk bluffing a 3! pot OTT followed by a large bet OTR is just such a bizarre play. It's very hard for me to think of intuitive bluffs for V, whereas there's tons of obvious value hands.
This seems like an easy fold against most players, since most players aren’t going to take this line enough as a bluff, so you don’t even have to consider mdf. If you do have the rare player who would lead bluff the turn in a balanced way, or bluff heavy, raising the turn needs to be considered, or else he can lead on the turn with impunity. Given a lot of players won’t raise in position against the donk turn bet, it makes donning there an interesting idea.
Can't believe all the comments I'm reading, saying this is a pure fold, because V is never bluffing. Hero's pre-flop 3B was 3.5x V's open, then hero's flop bet was less than 1/3 pot, heads-up. Hero's line doesn't look all that strong when he does that. It induces this line from V, who has all the flush draws as bluffs in his range here. The weak flop bet followed by the board-paring Q on the turn is just the green-light for V to put hero in a tough spot by taking the betting lead and repping Qx. He can win if hero folds turn, disguise his hand and get value if his flush draw gets there, or credibly bluff the river by firing the second barrel.
I think against a lot of straightforward players you can fold and feel good about it. But against more aggro types you definitely can’t and against a balanced player it has to be a call.
@@JohnSmith-nx7zj I'm inclined to agree, though I think it comes down to our perception of the V's skill level. Against most bad recs, I'm folding, but against a competent player, I have to call. If he's got it, he's got it.
I can't decide if I think V had Qx and was value-betting, or if he had AX of clubs and was bluffing. Depending on the opponent, some guys will get overly trappy here when they turn trips with Qx, and will just check turn, lead river when the flush draw bricks. If V has AcXc - he opens-flats pre. Hero gives him a good price to chase his flush draw with the small flop bet. V sees an opportunity to start a bluff when the board pairs Q on the turn, making it less likely hero has AQ or QQ. On the river he can't beat anything so he fires the second barrel. This is a tough fold here with AA, simply because if V had QQ/66/44, he most likely would have x/r'd flop on this wet board, especially given hero's small bet sizing. If V has sets on the flop, it's more likely hero has over-pairs and flush draws, so V would want to start piling money in. The suits of hero's AA block V's AQs combos, so it really comes down to whether or not we think V is capable of turning AcKc into a bluff on the turn, or if he's more likely to slow-play trip Q's.
I don't know how much I buy your theory of villain deciding to start his bluff line into someone with a range advantage right when he loses half his equity. I get the thought process, it just feels so unnatural. x/r the flop with AXc seems very natural. Donking OTT with AQ or KQ seems like a natural thought process. It's definitely not standard, but it seems way more intuitive than starting a bluff.
I pretty much agree with you. I just think players creative enough to take this line as a bluff are more rare than players who are simply playing straightforward. I think the turn donk is usually a Q+. QX, 66, 44 all have hero pretty much dead.
@@88mphDrBrown My thinking is that if V is just never bluffing, always value-betting when he donks turn, then hero has to fold. In order to call, hero has to find some bluffs V can have. As played, I think I could see AcKc being played this way, and it makes more sense than AQo, as that should probably be folded pre-flop when hero 3B's pre. QQ is a 4B pre, and 66/44 are almost mandatory x/r's on the flop. I can understand not crediting V for AcKc because he didn't x/r flop and loses equity on the turn, but at the same time, it would be a disaster for V to x/r flop and have to fold if hero 3B's over his x/r, and the turn creates a situation where V might realize his best chance to win the hand is by starting a bluff, in a spot where he can credibly represent Qx, and hero is less likely to pay off if the river is another club.
@@EllieBanks333 For me this really depends on my read of the opponent. I'd fold to a bad rec on the turn here, or at least the river, because a bad rec is just never bluffing in this spot, and is just going to check-call with all his flush draws and worse 77 to JJ holdings. But I think a good reg could find this bluff, in this spot, if he doesn't 4B pre with AKs. With the $20 straddle on, they start 175BB effective, which is a little awkward, and might lead V to just flat hero's 3B rather than 4B. The donk-lead on the turn is really the only way V can represent Qx. He can't wait until his flush draw bricks and then stab at the river. That would just look too bluffy, and hero's going to snap call with AA/KK. The real question for me would be whether or not a good reg would take this line with a hand that actually beats AA here. I think QQ is going to be 4B pre a lot. 66 and 44 are almost mandatory x/r's on the flop. I think QQ might also x/r flop. AQo might call hero's 3B pre, but I think AQo should probably be a fold if V has any respect for hero at all. 64 really shouldn't be in V's range, but if it gets to the flop, again, I think it's a mandatory x/r. So the question is whether or not V flats hero's pre-flop 3B with AQo, which just comes down to the leveling of how hero thinks V views hero. This actually reminds me of a hand I recently played, not long after sitting down at a new table. I raised pre with AA from the CO. An OMC who limped UTG calls. He then donk leads on a K-high disconnected flop, and barrels big when the turn is another K. I folded AA there, because I couldn't credit an OMC with a bluff. It took me a few orbits to realize he was actually a lunatic who was constantly donking and bluffing with total air. That donk-lead line on a paired board is very polar.
@@1vailchris So you think folding AQo pre by V is expected, but then he thinks to himself "I'm going to represent QX when I have almost none and my opponent has tons"? Tbc, I'm not saying people don't make weird decisions that have conflicting lines of thinking, it just seems especially bad here. In general lines skew towards value, there's tons of lines that effectively have no bluffs. The thought process of "I have a great hand, I need to get money in" is very common, whereas "I need to be coming up with weird unconventional 4d bluff lines even though I might be punting into the nuts" is extremely uncommon.
MDF goes out the window with a villain that takes this line. They’re not bluffing nearly often enough and we are punting EV if we base our defense frequency on the assumption that they are.
Slam dunk third-pot with range on flop in *theory*. Doesn't mean you can't go larger as an exploit. One downside of not having the Ac is that with the Qc on board, there's only one combo of AQs available. Just a subtle thing. With the Qd on the turn, now there's no AQs available, so now that's good. I think AA is a bet there if checked to, but villain takes the hand off the rails instead. Turn lead is super weird. Theory is probably to raise turn with this combo of AA and bet river, but a human donk range probably has too much KQs and QJs to make that a good idea. Given that both Bart and the caller want to check back this turn, donking Qx is probably a useful exploit in live poker. Not sure this is the *only* combo of AA to defend with, but it's definitely the best one. LJ isn't supposed to call the 3-bet with AQo and we already know they've folded to multiple 3-bets from the caller. Doesn't make it impossible, but def discounted. Any AA no club seems better than A with a club (though villain's line is pretty weird with AcXc). We're completely out of theory at this point because villain just isn't supposed to donk this turn, so you can go MDF (in which case probably call) or make an exploitative/able fold because you think Qx/66 is more than 69% of villain's range. I only count 5 "reasonable" value combos for villain, so even just 2 bluff combos would make it pretty close. Interesting hand and very reasonably played by hero.
It seems unlikely to me that AQo would be folding to a three bet here, nor that it would be a difficult decision, as described, as it sounded like he felt frustrated he was being 3 bet so much, so AQo would be an easy call, like “Finally I’ve got something I can fight back with!”, although this is admittedly guess work, but my feeling on your analysis is that it was giving too much importance to AQ suited, in terms of actual play, not theory. I think your point about raising the turn in position being the right default play, and the fact that most won’t do that makes turn donning an interesting exploit is spot on. If you can donk lead there with impunity, that’s terrific for the OOP guy. On the river, it seems to me an easy fold against an average player, and a fairly easy call against a good one, as if you’re going to call for mdf reasons, this would have to be one of your calling hands.
even if villain defends w AQo i think it’s still relevant. Yes theres AQo but blocking the other AQs and half of the AQo combos is still blocking a lot of AQ. I’m not the biggest fan of blockers but if you’re going to care about blockers then I think the logic is fine
I disagree with Bart's comments about sizing larger preflop. There is a tendency in poker to underestimate our opponents but I've noticed a HUGE leak in cash players that when they have a strong premium hand their bet sizing shows it. IOW they normally raise to $15 in a 2/5 game and suddenly it's 25, boom premium hand. The normally 3 bet to 3x the size of the open, all of a sudden it's 4x or 5x boom a premium hand.
V could had anything. This depends on H profile. If V sees H as a splashy LAG, then he might had any 2 cards (A or K high) bluffing right on turn followed by hammering river to seal the deal. I don't think that top FH would've slammed river bet on an opponent who might have a high pair. . BTW, I would never call turn donk bet to fold on bricky river bet. What's the point of calling turn bet, anyway?
I am folding to a jam and calling 1k into 1.2k. Not mentioned in this vid is that the 6 on river is a really bad card for our hero. As a decent portion of the villains' donk bluff range on turn would contain a 6....
Right??? Especially small flop bets following larger pre-flop 3B's. Hero's pre-flop 3B was 3.5x. Then he bets less than 1/3 pot on this flop texture, heads-up, and no one here sees all of V's obvious bluffs? I feel like I'm taking crazy-pills reading all the comments that say this is never a bluff, and just a pure fold on turn or river. Hero induced this line from V, and needs to call here.
It’s pretty close, it basically is a slightly positive EV call on the River. If he jams or bets up to putting in about 100BB of chips then we become 0 EV. We’re not really getting exploited that much even if he’s over bluffing so I want to fold here I think. But this relies on you having QT/QJ in your range to call.
Unless V has shown big bluffs before or has you pegged as a nit snap fold for me. What bluffs does he have. And the down bet is standard at many houses. Also many Nits will still call down AA here. I agree how caller handled this hand.
Love your content, Bart!!! I watch a fair amount of poker content, and one thing I hear people say is that they could have a set. I think people are overly concerned about a player having a set. If someone has a set, you're probably going to hear about in their actions if you're playing correctly on bet sizing. That's my opinion. Anyway, thanks for the vlog.😊
im guessing because bart assumes he doesnt call in a hand that he folds on the turn, or he read the hand notes and knows this but doesnt explicitly say it
Of course: The Turn lead is not a thing in theory, taking away the option to C/R while being completely unbalanced at the same time. However, when he already takes this line: Then why so small?! - With his polarized range, I would assume that Villain goes on the Turn for anything between 1 and 1.5 size of the pot. But also that he would shove with the 6 arriving on the River, as he has either a Q or nothing, in any case. With his small Turn sizing: For close to 3x pot, accordingly. - Taking this into consideration, I strongly feel that Villain categorizes Hero as a weak-tight nit that can be bluffed off a hand as strong as JJ with an unconventional line fairly cheaply.
@@qlow5956 Well: Can Hero really fold a 6, 88, or a Nut Flush draw against a pot-sized Turn bet when the Queen pairs? - Even AK might find it kind of difficult at times , although it is obviously a 3-bet pot HJ vs CO.
@Badbentham part of my problem is, I'm 95%+ putting V on a random QX or 66 (maybe 44 on turn, but then I dismiss that on river). So on turn... 6X: trivial fold; drawing dead to most of my opponent's range, and only runner-runner outs against 44 88: not calling 1x pot; 88 and AA are basically the same hand here (as is 99, 1010, JJ, KK), except I'd prefer 88, since V could have AQ for a single out with AA; I can reluctantly call .5x for "5th Street Chicken" purposes and a sliver of drawing equity, but I'm still pretty confident in V's range AcXc: I'd feel much better about calling 1-1.5x, because that looks much more like a protection bet, as oppose to a value bet; still not a super price considering implied odds, but I think it's probably close enough for me to hunt a clean river club; however, if no club, then what is my calling range to a jam? As played, I'd call turn -- though not loving it -- and cry call 600 on river expecting to lose 95% of the time, but not 1000 into 1200 with AA. Now exploit me.
@@qlow5956 It obviously depends on the level you play on: When Villain pots then he is obviously polarized. His value starting probably with QJ+, and including all boats. However, he can also bluff with a wide variety of hands: 22/33/55/54s , plus all Flush draws. He could, with all the trash he still holds after Hero's small Flop bet, also be way more creative than I am. 😉Against all those, 6x is a call; there is indeed little difference here between it and AA, at least when without a Club blocker. - All you actually say is that you expect, from your personal experience, that Villain is vastly underbluffing with his weird Turn lead when he pots, and that you can thus react by overfolding everything outside of KQ/AQ on the Turn. Likely true, until you get completely overrun by a capable opponent. 😃 - Edit: Villain's chosen line maximizes Fold equity for a cheap price, over checking the Turn. As he expects Hero, vulnerable to aggression, to check behind without nutted hands. If Villain checks on the Turn instead, it becomes that much harder to get Hero off a pair on the River, even for 2-3× pot. Means: With actual value, he would likely have chosen that line.
@@Badbentham all fair points. And I'm not playing at the 5-10-20 level that his hand is at, or the 25-50-100 game that the H mentioned frequenting. So maybe there's another level of maniac/capable of yet to see. And maybe I'm overweighing the H characterizing the V as someone who folds to a lot of 3-bets, suggesting tight nit who doesn't find many creative bluffs... or someone who is tired of getting pushed around
Because he can beat JJ most of the time when he asks the hero that, the other small % of the time he's putting hero on JJ and was trying to bluff him off of it
Nah. He was just reacting to the kid saying it was a tough fold and villian guessing what a tough fold in that spot would be. He prolly just guessing the kid calls kk plus
@@banks7714 Is AA a tough fold? I'm just not sure it's very far removed from JJ here. Maybe villain has KK and did not 4 bet pre. And maybe he plays KK as a check-call, donk turn, big river bet here......?
We are told that is villain is a good player, so for him to lead this turn, he does not respect the hero. Hero needs to figure out if he does not respect him because he views him as weak tight or weak loose. If hero can’t figure that out, then he just needs to call and use this as a Datapoint going forward.
I'm folding turn against alot of villains that aren't button clicking and my image is not tight. There's no reason to donk the turn unless you have a Q and you think the preflop raiser is going to check back alot of pocket pairs but are going to call when the board pairs. A thinking player isn't going donk turn with a draw after check/calling flop. Unless maybe Hero has been overfolding the session but even then, it would be very rare.
Not bart obviously but I think it would be a little dependant on your read. You really don't want to kill your action with aces if you think he's going to be folding to that sizing a lot. Would just have to do the math if the amount he 4 bet shoves and you hold outweighs the loss of him folding more pre
Yes, he could have KK, maybe, but KK is more likely a 4B pre. However, if V does flat hero's 3B pre with KK, then he could conceivably turn KK into a bluff to get hero off AA, by representing Qx on the turn, or he might have been doing it to get value from hero's worse pairs and flush draws. Flatting with KK pre, flatting flop, and donk-leading turn as a bluff would be a very unconventional line, but as I was watching the video, it also occurred to me that V might have thought he was trapping pre by flatting with KK, and saw an opportunity to take the lead with his turn donk-lead, either for value or as a bluff.
I’m only ever folding this to someone I know never ever ever bluffs. This smells like KK or JJ that he’s turning into a bluff. Maybe AKc, but I doubt it. So unlikely he has a Q or a 6, and 44 is never betting a grand on this River.
