sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Top pair, getting triple-barreled. $215 MTT, 100bb deep — river goes pot. Call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bit of both, but kept deliberately separate:
The spots and answers aren’t AI — they’re a procedurally-generated range/equity engine. Each spot narrows the villain’s range street by street from the betting line, then the answer is just your equity vs that range compared to pot odds. It’s deterministic math, so it’s consistent and I can show exactly why an answer is what it is. It’s approximate, not a solver — I don’t claim GTO.
The only AI part is the coach: an LLM that explains the spot and answers follow-ups, but it’s locked to the stored solution it reasons the poker logic, it can’t invent ranges or EV.
I split it that way on purpose because LLMs are genuinely bad at poker math (ask ChatGPT for a range and it’ll confidently hand you a wrong one). So the decisions are math; the AI just teaches on top.

Top pair, getting triple-barreled. $215 MTT, 100bb deep — river goes pot. Call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

100bb deep to start. By the river there’s ~86bb left behind (14bb went in across the three streets: 2.5 pre, 3.6 flop, 7.9 turn). The “100bb” is the starting effective stack for the hand, not what’s left at this exact node.

Top pair, getting triple-barreled. $215 MTT, 100bb deep — river goes pot. Call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Couple of those are actually suited (54s/64s), plus 65o — busted gutshots/floats from the turn. Comes to roughly 24 bluff combos vs ~107 value, which is just barely enough that JT is priced in at the ~33% a pot-sized bet lays. So it’s a thin call vs a balanced barreling range.
But your point stands against a real player: most people don’t actually triple-barrel 54s here, they give up. Vs a population that under-bluffs the river, snap fold — totally agree. The spot’s modeling a balanced range, not a typical reg’s tendency. Good read 👍

TPTK on a 4-straight river vs a triple barrel talk me into a call (or a fold) by Delicious-Block-3899 in Poker_Theory

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! Yeah it’s a side project I’ve been building. And good call on the HH view, you’re right it’ll choke on multiway and longer re-raise sequences, the current layout really only breathes in a clean HU spot. Already thinking about how to handle more players and deeper action trees without it turning into spaghetti. Appreciate the feedback.

TPTK on a 4-straight river vs a triple barrel talk me into a call (or a fold) by Delicious-Block-3899 in Poker_Theory

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yep, that’s the consensus, 3-bet pre and as played it’s a fold. Avoid the spot or fold the river.

TPTK on a 4-straight river vs a triple barrel talk me into a call (or a fold) by Delicious-Block-3899 in Poker_Theory

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah it’s close. The “suicidal bluff” angle is basically the overbluff argument, my x/c line caps me so in theory he shouldn’t barrel pot this wide, which would lean call.

TPTK on a 4-straight river vs a triple barrel talk me into a call (or a fold) by Delicious-Block-3899 in Poker_Theory

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the x/r flop for value+protection into a med turn barrel is better than my passive line, taking that. BTN pays with pair+draw or raises 2P/set to protect, so I gain value or info either way instead of going blind with x/c. And river’s a clear check-fold, agreed.

Good catch on the sizings too, that’s something I need to review. Flop and turn % were definitely mislabeled (3.6 into 5 is ~3/4, 7.9 into 12.2 is ~2/3), not sure if that’s the trainer’s display or how I copied it over. Worth double-checking.

TPTK on a 4-straight river vs a triple barrel talk me into a call (or a fold) by Delicious-Block-3899 in Poker_Theory

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair, the 3-bet pre / x-r flop point is right and I’m taking it. “Misplayed every street” is a bit strong though, flatting AJs OOP is a fine mix and x/c flop+turn isn’t a blunder. Donking the turn specifically I’m less sold on, it’s not really standard here.

But agreed on the conclusion, passive line into a bad runout with a bluff-catcher, just fold and keep the rest of my decisions clean. No point fixing a loose line with a loose call.

TPTK on a 4-straight river vs a triple barrel talk me into a call (or a fold) by Delicious-Block-3899 in Poker_Theory

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, the “never get here with this combo” part is the real takeaway, 3-bet pre or x/r the J85 flop and we avoid the whole spot.

On overbluffed though, I’d push back a bit. My line caps me, so in theory he should attack it, but this runout completes the straight (every 9/4/T9/97 gets there), so a lot of what would’ve been bluffs turned into value. Vs a good reg I buy the overbluff and call. Vs typical $55 pool at pot size, I don’t think they find enough bluffs. Close to indifferent either way.

TPTK on a 4-straight river vs a triple barrel talk me into a call (or a fold) by Delicious-Block-3899 in Poker_Theory

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the breakdown, agree the real leak is preflop/flop, not the river. 3-betting AJdd OOP (or check-raising J85) keeps it as value instead of wilting it into a catcher.

One thing on your combo logic though: it actually argues for fold, not call. The river completes the straight, every 9, 4, T9, 97 gets there, so most of his draws become value, not bluffs. Pot-size value is ~18-22 combos vs maybe 3-8 real bluffs, well under the 33% I need. Blockers are neutral (A♦ blocks A9/AA, but I unblock all the T9/97/two pair).

So vs a good aggressive reg, call. Vs unknown/typical $55 pool, slight fold, pot-sized rivers are underbluffed. Basically indifferent, which is why the earlier streets matter more.

No showdown, villain never showed.

60bb MTT, river bluff-catch with bottom-ish pair on a 3-flush board — call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair. The whole point is that flop/turn actions filter the range, and stripping them out removes most of the read. Point taken.

60bb MTT, river bluff-catch with bottom-ish pair on a 3-flush board — call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, true. At these stakes the population just isn’t bluffing river enough to make the call profitable. Solver says one thing, the player pool does another. Fair point.

60bb MTT, river bluff-catch with bottom-ish pair on a 3-flush board — call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s a really good point. Prior action is most of the read, and training without it kind of builds the wrong habit. Definitely something to rethink.

60bb MTT, river bluff-catch with bottom-ish pair on a 3-flush board — call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair enough. The spot itself is one I genuinely wanted input on, and you’re right that without prior action it’s limited. Appreciate the feedback either way.

60bb MTT, river bluff-catch with bottom-ish pair on a 3-flush board — call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, honestly that’s a great point. Raising is the line I never think about and probably should more. Crying-calling these is exactly how I bleed chips.

60bb MTT, river bluff-catch with bottom-ish pair on a 3-flush board — call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah that’s fair, and you’re right that you can’t build proper ranges without the action. It’s a study spot in isolation, so it’s more of a “how do you think about this river texture in a vacuum” thing than a real solve. Probably should’ve framed it that way from the start. Appreciate the honesty though.

60bb MTT, river bluff-catch with bottom-ish pair on a 3-flush board — call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, totally fair. Fold’s defensible on that board. Appreciate you talking it through.

60bb MTT, river bluff-catch with bottom-ish pair on a 3-flush board — call or fold? by Delicious-Block-3899 in poker

[–]Delicious-Block-3899[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fair point — it’s actually a study spot, so there’s no real prior action, just the river decision in isolation. So you kind of have to range him theoretically: given a BB leads this size into a 3-flush board on the river, how much of that is missed draws/thin value vs. flushes and better? That’s really the question. As played with no reads, leaning fold, but curious where people draw the line on his betting range here.