The following is hand analysis from 2CardsCollege pro poker training coach Yuri, aka iwantbearich.

The villain is a good regular, playing 22/15 over 1,300 hands. His total 3-bet is 9.4%, CO 3-bet is 13%, continuation bet is 77% (82% in 3-bet pots), and CO call-open is 4%.

I picked a rather interesting playing line. The default play in this spot would be check/shoving the flop since slightly less than half of our stack is in the pot already.

First, let us define the villain’s betting ranges on each street. We need that to determine our equity and fold equity. Then we can calculate the expected value of the turn check/shove and compare it to the EV of the flop check/shove. In both cases, we are going to use the following formula:
EV=FEq*Pot+((1-FEq)*(EqWin*WinPot – EqLose*EqLosePot)).

The villain’s pre-flop 3-bet range:

I assume his range is like that because he almost has no range of call-open at all and because the stacks are 40 bb deep. Hence, it is profitable for him to use a bipolar range to 3-bet. He knows I would not 4-bet too often here and his 3-bet sizing means he would like to get called more often.

His c-bet range:

The villain would bet with 67.7% of his range. I think, considering the flush draw on the flop, he would bet about 25% of his top set. He would bet 88 and 99 half of the time to protect the equity of those hands. The same goes for A5s and weak pairs. With the rest of the hands that give him an edge when playing his range against mine on the flop, the villain would bluff rather frequently.

To determine our fold equity, let us first define the villain’s range of calling our check/shove:

I think the villain would call our check/shove with an A-high rather often because I would almost never push a Kх hand. Thus, the villain is ahead of my range and able to make the right call. Yet, I’m going to remove those hands from the chart. Otherwise, check/shoving would have overwhelming EV compared to other lines. I would have 65% equity against the whole bet/calling range if the villain would call with Aх hands.

Of course, this is a very profitable shove. For convenience, I’m going to use the pre-calculated values. You can make the calculations yourself using the formula and get the same figures. Our fold equity is (67.7% – 35.7%) / 67.7% * 100% = 47%. The flop check/shove EV is 1,414 chips.

However, during the hand, I had an assumption that since the SPR would be >1, the villain would not overbet-shove for value and would continue betting the turn with a wide range. The villain seemed aggressive to me and if I’m right, he would continue betting frequently since this flop fits his range better and he could try to make me fold my medium pocket pairs. Yes, most of them go to the 4-bet/shove pre-flop, but I should fold my weakest flush draws and some backdoors that I could call with on the flop.

Actually, I’m looking at this hand now and I’m realizing that it is not profitable for the opponent to bluff against my range on the turn often because my range is not too wide. Thus, he would make me fold a few hands like 65s with no flush draw. It turns out I would hardly fold in more than 20-25% of cases, which makes his bluff a negative EV one.

Plus, I’m getting to the river with an even stronger range and I’m afraid the villain should take the bet/check/bet line because he can balance it much better. However, this is primarily connected to the fact that most likely I would not call the turn optimally. Unfortunately, it is hard to be precise without GTO software. Let us see what my expected value is if the villain continues bluffing with only the combos that are best suited for it.

The villain’s continuation range:

I decided that the villain would check some of the low top pairs (KT and K9) in order to catch my river bluffs sometimes. Maybe he would check the strongest top pairs as well because he only beats the draws with those hands anyway. This has almost no influence on my equity, as it only decreases by 2%. I included QJ and QT in the bluffing range since they block some of my top pairs and the villain would get more folds from me.

Of course, it is very difficult to define the precise range of the opponent, so I only rely on my own image of it. I could be mistaken and he, for instance, would check a lot of flush draws half of the time or disregard betting A-high hands, some of which would be the best hands for a bluff as shown on the screenshot since they also block my top pairs. The rest of the bluffs and turned-into-a-bluff hands are even more default.

The villain’s check/shove calling range:

This time, my equity decreased significantly and I think the villain would fold his weak hits after my check/shove and only call with a single 8c7c of all his draws because this would be the hand with the biggest equity. Our fold equity is (60.7% – 32.8%) / 60.7% * 100% = 46%. The turn check/shove EV is 1,310 chips.

Conclusion: During the hand, I decided the villain is aggressive and would often bet/fold on the turn. With that, he would call narrower and fold weak hands, so I would have a very low equity against his calling range. But anyway, we should sometimes make decisions like that to have more expected value.

However, it is important to note that sometimes you should check/call with a part of a flush draw combo instead of check/shoving. Otherwise, there would be no nuts combos in our range when the flush draws get there on the turn or the river, which would makes us vulnerable to barreling. This applies more to playing with deeper stacks, but I found it necessary to clarify this.

Good luck at the tables! Visit 2CardsCollege pro poker training today.