2.5 Level Thinking? Strategic question when PT is involved (LONG)

[ev_slave]

Under recommendations from several 2+2ers, I've invested in PT and PAHUD. So far it's good, as it has allowed to me to better study what's going on with my game. PAHUD, while it may not do anything more than attach specific numbers thto factors that would be considered as a part of someone's table image in a live game,however, seems to add an additional twist to the game. It allows specific plays to become more mathematical and exact, and this is an example of where the information from the PT/PAHUD combo may be utilized in an interesting and unusual way. Generally, I'm hoping to lay out a situation, and then get some input if this actually does happen (if some of you 2+2ers use it, for example) or if you've also had suspicions about this happening.

So here's the scenario. We're playing a 6-max table where everyone has 100BB stacks, and are dealt AQs in UTG+1, after UTG folds, we make the "2+2 standard" raise to 4BB. CO folds, Button calls, Blinds fold: we're heads up OOP with 9.5BB in the pot. Flop comes J93 Rainbow. We C-bet 8BB: a little over 3/4 pot as per our usual.

We see that Villain on the button is TAG over many hands (we know from PAHUD) with moderate PostFlop Aggression, and seems smart enough from how we've seen him play. Moreover, we know he's multi-tabling (we've checked it out), so it seems likely that he 1) is probably a thinking opponent, and 2) spends enough time online to make PT/PAHUD worth his money. He raises our bet to 22 BB. We have to call 15BB OOP for a pot of 38.5BB. We're getting a little better at 2.5:1 on the call.

My standard line is to give TAG credit for a hand and fold. It may be a leak, but without a specific reason to do otherwise, I don't think it is. All sorts of suited connectors now have us beat, and PP has us beat, and we may even be facing a set. BUT, before we click the fold button, we look at our own stats to make sure we're not being had. We notice that our Aggression is reasonable, but specifically we see that we C-bet 85% of the time. Now things are tricky.

The 85% is how often we've been C-betting at this table only, and villain likely has that exact number since he probably has PT. So he should know that since we only pair or better on the flop <40%, we're applying pressure with air roughly half the time (since we'll have PPs some times that we raise PF). In those cases that we have air, we're going to have a very hard time standing up to this aggression OOP. He's bet 22BB into a 16.5BB flop, so if he's hoping to take the pot now, it has to happen 57% of the time to break even. This number isn't much different from when we have exactly nothing. It's looking like he's getting about the right odds to make this move on us with ATC! (since technically, his ATC will be ahead of us here sometimes too).

If we simply call, we have 66BB left with 2 streets to go in a 49.5BB pot, so obviously on case by case hands implied odds and hand ranges are important factors, but this general point still holds true: Many times we'll have the best hand in this situation, and have to lay it down just because the opponent has PT and thus has the exact stats that we do. Other lines are to call and c/f the turn if unimproved, or go ahead and push and hope he was getting too fancy. Neither seem great.

The main question is this: will the likelihood that the villain has taken a look at the stats (ours and his) and made a reasonable ~+EV decision EVER be enough to persuade us to go ahead with the push here? If he did call in position with this exact plan in mind, then in the case laid out above, we happily push since we have >50% equity over a random hand. Obviously this is the extreme scenario, but exactly how much better than two random cards he might be calling with is unclear.

Now that I've typed all of this out and people have read this far, I'm sorry if it seems obvious or uninteresting: "Wait for a better spot," seems like the typical (and probably correct) advice. But I've been whiffing AQ/AK in and out of position like crazy lately, and have been having a hard time knowing how to handle flop aggression when it happens. How often does this sort of thing seem to happen? How often will you guys change a "standard" decision based on villain stats, and what neighborhood do the stats have to be around to convince you to deviate from the standard line? How often do you guys call from position PF with the intention of raising a habitual C-Better?

Hopefully this is an interesting scenario to people who aren't me and there will be some discussion. All thoughts are appreciated.

[StubbornRussian]

I will be the first to go ahead and fire the boring response of fold and find a better spot. Its just too easy to make a profit at micro stakes to need to resort to making moves on solid players. If this guy is a positional lag and keeps calling your raises and pushing you around then you either leave and find a juicier table or make a stand if you feel like absorbing a little variance to your game. My winrate went up considerably once I stopped assuming people were making moves on me because in reality its happening less than you think.

[bored]

A few problems I can see here.

-Not everyone has the cbet stat on so unless you are cbetting the TAG a lot and he is folding he might not even be paying attention. Also IMO TAG multitablers do not pay much attention to how you are playing at a single table; nor do they have the stats for that.

-You don't have to lay down your hand because your opp has your PT stats; you have to lay it down because your A high is a massive underdog to any hand that calls your shove.

-If Villain is doing a bunch of this stuff, it is easy to see and shove with a real hand or smooth call depending on his aggression.

[Waingro]

Your average villain bluffs a lot less than you would believe. It only seems like that when you miss every flop and villain always cr you. I think you should buy a cat and torture it before you start spewing with a whiffed AQ. With some history all this changes obv.

I am going out on a limb here and state that most villains play is not based on mathematics but instead on "feel". They look at their hand and if they miss they fold, to "wait for a better spot to stack your bluffing ass". Every once in a while they make a play at you, sure, but nowhere near what would be mathematically correct if they knew your exact ranges from various postions.