[fivebyfive]

This is a test

[fivebyfive]

Still trying to get this posted. If it duplicates that is why…

************************

We just recorded a Forums podcast episode about this scenario. I think it raised a ton of questions and good discussion, but not a lot of answers, so I thought I’d go into the solver to see what other things we might find about this situation. As a reminder, solvers aren’t answers, they’re how a hand would be played in equilibrium. So they give us a sense of the optimal way to play a hand versus a perfect opponent, not necessarily against the field. With that said, a few of the parameters I used: I gave a fairly reasonable HJ open and BB defend range. I did not allow the OOP player to donk on the flop and had the IP player check. On the turn, OOP could lead for 33% pot. When checked to IP could bet small (35%), big (80%), or check back. When led into, IP could call or raise 3x the bet. With all that said, here’s where we landed.

TURN LEADS
The solver does not lead very often on this turn, checking 91% of hands. Although it sometimes doesn’t have these hands, when it does, it leads 100% of the time with its best and worst pair (AQ and 63s). It does not seem to care whether it has the Ah with AQ. The other high frequency leads are 98 without hearts and Q7 (top 2). It also sometimes leads a few K high flushes (KQ, KJ, K10, K9), but otherwise most made flushes are not leads.

TURN CHECK THEN LED INTO
When we check with most of our range, the check raises on this board are really interesting. So first, we’re folding 33% of our hands in this spot. All of our non-heart garbage basically. Our check raises (9.1%) are some nut flushes (eg Ah4h, some weak flushes (eg 5h4h), sets of 33 with the heart, and a few AhX (A5 & A4 mostly since it helps block the straight). Again, though, we’re calling a lot in this spot. More than I would expect. We’re calling with every Q, 7, 6. We’re calling with a lot of AhX.

SPECIFIC HANDS
Again, we don’t necessarily play exactly like the solver, but this with the hands in question, here is how GTO+ would play them:

1. Qs10d
This hand is almost exclusively a check call on this turn.

2. Kh2h
This hand is a frequent check raise (93% of the time).

3. 8h5h
This hand is more of a mix. 65% of the time it is a check raise, 35% of the time it is a call. I don’t for the life of me know how you’d decide this in real time.

4. Ah8s
This one really surprised me. It is 100% a check. No mixed strategy at all. I would be very tempted to lead or check raise with this hand. But the solver likes a much more passive line with it.

5. 3d3s
This hand is also a check call. If we had 3d3h, it is a high frequency check raise. Just being able to block that one flush card is a big enough value to turn it from almost always a call to almost always a raise.

[pokergeekmn]

Excellent and surprising insights.

[fivebyfive]

@Jim Thoughts on this? (but also testing tagging you to see if it breaks this post)

[eanderson85]

Monotone Boards Flashcards | Quizlet

[fivebyfive]

So @Jim and @PokerGeekMN and I recorded a forums episode about this spot last night. We came up with a lot of questions, but few answers. So I’ve dug a little deeper into GTO+ for some solver help in this spot. I put some fairly reasonable HJ open and BB defend ranges in at 50bb effective.

Turn Leads

The solver has very few turn leads in this spot. I was surprised how few. The solver checks 91% of range on the turn. I’ve marked the most common lead spots in red circles. We don’t always have either of these hands in the BB spot, but when we do, our best top pair (AQ) and our worst bottom pair (63s) become almost 100% leads (regardless if we hold a heart). 98 (suited or unsuited, without a heart) is the other very common leading spot. Either 9h8h or 98 with a heart are still part of our checking range. We are checking a ton of flushes on this turn. The most common flush lead is a K high flush (KQ, KJ, K10, K9). In essence, we should probably be leading our best and worst pair combos here and a few K high flushes, then checking most everything else.

Turn Check Raises

When V decides to make a bet into this board, our check raises vs calls are interesting. We’re still calling a lot with 57.5% of hands (any Q, 7, or 6). Folding any garbage without a heart (around 33%). And we’re only check raising 9.1% of remaining hands. We are check raising 100% of the time with a few hands: Sets of 3s with the heart (we call without the heart), low flushes (4h3h, 5h3h, 5h4h, 8h5h), and most of our nut flushes. The AhX is a very low frequency check raise here and most often a call (this surprises me a lot!). The only AhX hands the solver likes to raise is Ah5x, Ah4x, perhaps because it blocks a lot of straights. Instead of the AhX hands, the solver seems to prefer hands like JhTx as its heart bluffs.

Specific Hands in Question

So to go back to the hands in question and if we follow the solver at GTO (something we don’t always do).

Qs10d would be a check call on this turn.

Kh2h would be a high frequency check raise, which the solver prefers over KJ-K8 flushes, which I think is because it helps unblock some of V’s potential lower flushes?

8h5h would a mixed strategy, but also a higher frequency check raise.

Ah8s would almost exclusively be a check call.

And 33 would be a check raise if we held the 3h, it would be a check call if we didn’t.

[fivebyfive]

So I wrote something up about this earlier, but it weirdly disappeared. So if you see something twice that’s why.

@jim and @pokergeekmn and I just recorded a Forums podcast episode about this scenario. I think it raised a ton of questions and good discussion, but not a lot of answers, so I thought I’d go into the solver to see what other things we might find about this situation. As a reminder, solvers aren’t answers, they’re how a hand would be played in equilibrium. So they give us a sense of the optimal way to play a hand versus a perfect opponent, not necessarily against the field. With that said, a few of the parameters I used: I gave a fairly reasonable HJ open and BB defend range. I did not allow the OOP player to donk on the flop and had the IP player check. On the turn, OOP could lead for 33% pot. When checked to IP could bet small (35%), big (80%), or check back. When led into, IP could call or raise 3x the bet. With all that said, here’s where we landed.

TURN LEADS
The solver does not lead very often on this turn, checking 91% of hands. Although it sometimes doesn’t have these hands, when it does, it leads 100% of the time with its best and worst pair (AQ and 63s). It does not seem to care whether it has the Ah with AQ. The other high frequency leads are 98 without hearts and Q7 (top 2). It also sometimes leads a few K high flushes (KQ, KJ, K10, K9), but otherwise most made flushes are not leads.

TURN CHECK THEN LED INTO
When we check with most of our range, the check raises on this board are really interesting. So first, we’re folding 33% of our hands in this spot. All of our non-heart garbage basically. Our check raises (9.1%) are some nut flushes (eg Ah4h, some weak flushes (eg 5h4h), sets of 33 with the heart, and a few AhX (A5 & A4 mostly since it helps block the straight). Again, though, we’re calling a lot in this spot. More than I would expect. We’re calling with every Q, 7, 6. We’re calling with a lot of AhX.

SPECIFIC HANDS
Again, we don’t necessarily play exactly like the solver, but this with the hands in question, here is how GTO+ would play them:

1. Qs10d
This hand is almost exclusively a check call on this turn.

2. Kh2h
This hand is a frequent check raise (93% of the time).

3. 8h5h
This hand is more of a mix. 65% of the time it is a check raise, 35% of the time it is a call. I don’t for the life of me know how you’d decide this in real time.

4. Ah8s
This one really surprised me. It is 100% a check. No mixed strategy at all. I would be very tempted to lead or check raise with this hand. But the solver likes a much more passive line with it.

5. 3d3s
This hand is also a check call. If we had 3d3h, it is a high frequency check raise. Just being able to block that one flush card is a big enough value to turn it from almost always a call to almost always a raise.

[fivebyfive]

So I wrote something up about this earlier, but it weirdly disappeared. So if you see something twice that’s why.

@jim and @pokergeekmn and I just recorded a Forums podcast episode about this scenario. I think it raised a ton of questions and good discussion, but not a lot of answers, so I thought I’d go into the solver to see what other things we might find about this situation. As a reminder, solvers aren’t answers, they’re how a hand would be played in equilibrium. So they give us a sense of the optimal way to play a hand versus a perfect opponent, not necessarily against the field. With that said, a few of the parameters I used: I gave a fairly reasonable HJ open and BB defend range. I did not allow the OOP player to donk on the flop and had the IP player check. On the turn, OOP could lead for 33% pot. When checked to IP could bet small (35%), big (80%), or check back. When led into, IP could call or raise 3x the bet. With all that said, here’s where we landed.

TURN LEADS
The solver does not lead very often on this turn, checking 91% of hands. Although it sometimes doesn’t have these hands, when it does, it leads 100% of the time with its best and worst pair (AQ and 63s). It does not seem to care whether it has the Ah with AQ. The other high frequency leads are 98 without hearts and Q7 (top 2). It also sometimes leads a few K high flushes (KQ, KJ, K10, K9), but otherwise most made flushes are not leads.

TURN CHECK THEN LED INTO
When we check with most of our range, the check raises on this board are really interesting. So first, we’re folding 33% of our hands in this spot. All of our non-heart garbage basically. Our check raises (9.1%) are some nut flushes (eg Ah4h, some weak flushes (eg 5h4h), sets of 33 with the heart, and a few AhX (A5 & A4 mostly since it helps block the straight). Again, though, we’re calling a lot in this spot. More than I would expect. We’re calling with every Q, 7, 6. We’re calling with a lot of AhX.

SPECIFIC HANDS
Again, we don’t necessarily play exactly like the solver, but this with the hands in question, here is how GTO+ would play them:

1. Qs10d
This hand is almost exclusively a check call on this turn.

2. Kh2h
This hand is a frequent check raise (93% of the time).

3. 8h5h
This hand is more of a mix. 65% of the time it is a check raise, 35% of the time it is a call. I don’t for the life of me know how you’d decide this in real time.

4. Ah8s
This one really surprised me. It is 100% a check. No mixed strategy at all. I would be very tempted to lead or check raise with this hand. But the solver likes a much more passive line with it.

5. 3d3s
This hand is also a check call. If we had 3d3h, it is a high frequency check raise. Just being able to block that one flush card is a big enough value to turn it from almost always a call to almost always a raise.

[fivebyfive]

So I wrote something up about this earlier, but it weirdly disappeared. So if you see something twice that’s why.

@jim and @pokergeekmn and I just recorded a Forums podcast episode about this scenario. I think it raised a ton of questions and good discussion, but not a lot of answers, so I thought I’d go into the solver to see what other things we might find about this situation. As a reminder, solvers aren’t answers, they’re how a hand would be played in equilibrium. So they give us a sense of the optimal way to play a hand versus a perfect opponent, not necessarily against the field. With that said, a few of the parameters I used: I gave a fairly reasonable HJ open and BB defend range. I did not allow the OOP player to donk on the flop and had the IP player check. On the turn, OOP could lead for 33% pot. When checked to IP could bet small (35%), big (80%), or check back. When led into, IP could call or raise 3x the bet. With all that said, here’s where we landed.

TURN LEADS
The solver does not lead very often on this turn, checking 91% of hands. Although it sometimes doesn’t have these hands, when it does, it leads 100% of the time with its best and worst pair (AQ and 63s). It does not seem to care whether it has the Ah with AQ. The other high frequency leads are 98 without hearts and Q7 (top 2). It also sometimes leads a few K high flushes (KQ, KJ, K10, K9), but otherwise most made flushes are not leads.

TURN CHECK THEN LED INTO
When we check with most of our range, the check raises on this board are really interesting. So first, we’re folding 33% of our hands in this spot. All of our non-heart garbage basically. Our check raises (9.1%) are some nut flushes (eg Ah4h, some weak flushes (eg 5h4h), sets of 33 with the heart, and a few AhX (A5 & A4 mostly since it helps block the straight). Again, though, we’re calling a lot in this spot. More than I would expect. We’re calling with every Q, 7, 6. We’re calling with a lot of AhX.

SPECIFIC HANDS
Again, we don’t necessarily play exactly like the solver, but this with the hands in question, here is how GTO+ would play them:

1. Qs10d
This hand is almost exclusively a check call on this turn.

2. Kh2h
This hand is a frequent check raise (93% of the time).

3. 8h5h
This hand is more of a mix. 65% of the time it is a check raise, 35% of the time it is a call. I don’t for the life of me know how you’d decide this in real time.

4. Ah8s
This one really surprised me. It is 100% a check. No mixed strategy at all. I would be very tempted to lead or check raise with this hand. But the solver likes a much more passive line with it.

5. 3d3s
This hand is also a check call. If we had 3d3h, it is a high frequency check raise. Just being able to block that one flush card is a big enough value to turn it from almost always a call to almost always a raise.

[fivebyfive]

So I wrote something up about this earlier, but it keeps disappearing, so trying this again. If it shows up twice that is why.

@jim and @pokergeekmn and I just recorded a Forums podcast episode about this scenario. I think it raised a ton of questions and good discussion, but not a lot of answers, so I thought I’d go into the solver to see what other things we might find about this situation. As a reminder, solvers aren’t answers, they’re how a hand would be played in equilibrium. So they give us a sense of the optimal way to play a hand versus a perfect opponent, not necessarily against the field. With that said, a few of the parameters I used: I gave a fairly reasonable HJ open and BB defend range. I did not allow the OOP player to donk on the flop and had the IP player check. On the turn, OOP could lead for 33% pot. When checked to IP could bet small (35%), big (80%), or check back. When led into, IP could call or raise 3x the bet. With all that said, here’s where we landed.

TURN LEADS
The solver does not lead very often on this turn, checking 91% of hands. Although it sometimes doesn’t have these hands, when it does, it leads 100% of the time with its best and worst pair (AQ and 63s). It does not seem to care whether it has the Ah with AQ. The other high frequency leads are 98 without hearts and Q7 (top 2). It also sometimes leads a few K high flushes (KQ, KJ, K10, K9), but otherwise most made flushes are not leads.

TURN CHECK THEN LED INTO
When we check with most of our range, the check raises on this board are really interesting. So first, we’re folding 33% of our hands in this spot. All of our non-heart garbage basically. Our check raises (9.1%) are some nut flushes (eg Ah4h, some weak flushes (eg 5h4h), sets of 33 with the heart, and a few AhX (A5 & A4 mostly since it helps block the straight). Again, though, we’re calling a lot in this spot. More than I would expect. We’re calling with every Q, 7, 6. We’re calling with a lot of AhX.

SPECIFIC HANDS
Again, we don’t necessarily play exactly like the solver, but this with the hands in question, here is how GTO+ would play them:

1. Qs10d
This hand is almost exclusively a check call on this turn.

2. Kh2h
This hand is a frequent check raise (93% of the time).

3. 8h5h
This hand is more of a mix. 65% of the time it is a check raise, 35% of the time it is a call. I don’t for the life of me know how you’d decide this in real time.

4. Ah8s
This one really surprised me. It is 100% a check. No mixed strategy at all. I would be very tempted to lead or check raise with this hand. But the solver likes a much more passive line with it.

5. 3d3s
This hand is also a check call. If we had 3d3h, it is a high frequency check raise. Just being able to block that one flush card is a big enough value to turn it from almost always a call to almost always a raise.

[eanderson85]

A monotone board with connectors is the definition of a wet board.

– Similar to low boards – equities run close together
– 4th flush card changes board drastically
– Larger sizing appropriate to deny equity
– Some hands benefit from check
– Gives you bluffs on 4th flush card
– Generally check pure airballs
– Nut flush blocker is important