$1 PLO 4-Bet defend vs nutty range w A in hand

I perceive villain to be a weak regular. He is running at 31/19 over ~3k hands. His aggression frequency is 39% and his 4-Bet ratio is 2. I have not been 3-Betting a lot.
Preflop I decide to 3-Bet to retain my positional advantage and isolate the weaker player. If I peel here, the SPR on the flop will be 1.5. What are your thoughts on peeling the 4-Bet, does anybody disagree with my 3-Bet?

Submitted by : InsideMan

$1 PL Hi 6 max - Omaha Hi - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4: http://www.pokertracker.com

UTG: $187.37
Hero CO : $160.10
BTN: $215.45
SB: $104.55
BB: $133.90

SB posts SB $1.00, BB posts BB $1.00

Pre Flop: pot: $2.00 Hero has

UTG raises to $4.00, Hero raises to $12.00, fold, fold, fold, UTG raises to $38.00, Hero...

what u need to decide whether or not to 3bet is his utg opens %, it can really go either way
easy call of the 4b w 160bb stacks but a good question would be how deep do we need to be to be able to call the 4b

bad 3bet imo

def call this deep

The 3bet is fine, our hand is pretty strong against even nitty opens from the hijack, but I think calling is better. This is a great hand to play multiway.

another thing to consider for pf decision would be how bad the blinds are, the worse they are the more we wanna call

Are we assuming he has AA here? If so, seems like a losing call unless we expect him to check give up some % of the time, no?

At SPR of 1.5 on flop, we need like 37% to get it in on flop, which we will have about 40%. Our average equity when we get it in is 55%.

So .40*(321.7*.55-122.1)=21.934, which we then compare to cost of calling the 4bet (26$). Not even counting rake which is capped to... 2.8? So ends up being like 19 compared to 26. (change A to J and we end up at about 30$ which is better than folding pf)

Is this too simplistic because we have to account for times he check folds in disgust (but given our hand, that's actually gonna be some of the time when we crush the board, isnt it? so is that really good for us?) at some ridiculous board, or that he might not have AA (but that doesnt actually help us I think, if he has I dunno, KKQQ or AKQJ that's not much better)?

If we had in AKK*ds and AKQJds it actually makes our EV go even further down than if he only has AA to do this. Add something like JT89ds and we STILL aren't even doing better than folding.

So basically we'd have to make up for this by somehow outplaying him with spr of 1.5, can we really do that? Is he going to be making so many more mistakes of c/f:ing than we are going to be folding incorrectly?

@ MiPwnYa

He's definetly not a nit. Raise first in from MP is 25% (117/475). Yea, I should probably have offered a little more insight into the table. The button is LAG, running at 39/22 with an AFQ of 51% and squeeze of 4% (BTN 3Bet 9%). SB is mediocre, probably recreational, playing a similar style to villain.
Just to clarify, I'm definetly not arguing for a 3Bet 100%, just giving my reasoning for 3Betting at the time. I definetly don't think call is bad.

@ TianYuan

Yea, that's sort of why I was asking. If we assume his range consists of decent AA, which I don't think is unreasonable at these stakes given my image, villains playing style and the 3Bet positions, then in the theoretical model where he stacks off 100% of the time on 100% of flops and we stack off when we have 37% equity or more, we lose money. This is obviously not realistic as there is too much money left to play for and he's not bet/calling 100% flops at a SPR of 1.5.
As you pointed out he will be check/folding sometimes when we hit hard, but also when we miss, beyond that it's not like there is enough room to take away the pot from him on the turn when he likes the flop or get him to bet/fold the flop. So we need to figure out if this is a good thing for us or a bad thing. Mathematically this seems like a pretty tedious thing to figure out as we would need to estimate our EV across various flop types and then aggregate. Intuitively I would say when he check/folds flops he misses, our preflop call gains value and we realize more than our pot equity. I also think he makes mistakes when we flop medium strong and he check/folds 40-50% equity, we also gain there. The only bad situation is when we flop huge and he makes a correct fold. Intuitively that should occur less frequently than the former two scenarios though.
Another advantage we have is that our range is less face up than his, so we can make a more "informed" decision about our hand v range equity than villain.

*sorry, double post*

Not really relevant but I was surprised that @ 100 bb this is breakeven call pre-rake (losing post rake), thought it would be more clearly -EV than that. Nvm made a slight mistake, it is very clearly -EV as I thought.

Btw, if we were out of position, would that be enough to make it a fold?

yea we make perfect decisions postflop whereas he dsnt
I can't give tianyuan mathematical arguments in favor of calling cuz I'm an idiot when it comes to maths, but I can tell you I don't think any of the top players folds that pre after 3betting, even say 130bb deep, of course "everyone does it therefore it must be right" isnt exactly an argument but thats all I got lol

On August 06 2012 09:13 MiPwnYa wrote: yea we make perfect decisions postflop whereas he dsnt I can't give tianyuan mathematical arguments in favor of calling cuz I'm an idiot when it comes to maths, but I can tell you I don't think any of the top players folds that pre after 3betting, even say 130bb deep, of course "everyone does it therefore it must be right" isnt exactly an argument but thats all I got lol

I suck at math too tbh, and I'm not really sure at what stack depth what I listed ceases being relevant. Like it's very cut and dry @ 100 bb just because we have a spr of <1 so there's no post flop play...

About 130 bb, I'm very curious about what makes it a call... We have *just* over pot left, and if both of us were to play perfectly calling would be >6bb worse than folding pf.

I feel like I'm arguing against you here which makes me feel stupid because I suck lol, but I'm not sure how to quantify our post flop value at 130 or 160, like I don't have a good feeling for how often someone is gonna c/f AA and thus how much value we are going to recuperate that way.

Plus the times he checks some horrible board and we go "ship ship" and ship into his flopped hidden ultra nuts. Bleh.

We're not gonna solve the problem until someone with decent poker maths skills comes down here : ) Tbh I call almost of the time with 100bb stacks (I've been told it's a close fold) cuz Im awful at folding and the gambling craving is always stronger (not to mention my opponents 4bet a whole lot of non AAxx hands). Also the tiltier your opponent is the more you should just go ahead and gamble (assuming you won't tilt if you lose the hand).

isnt your postflop profit gonna be more on boards that he gets in way behind than boards that he check/folds?

should get it in better than 55% if he gets in on XXY where you have trips or monotone spades when he has As, and stuff like that

On August 06 2012 09:13 MiPwnYa wrote: yea we make perfect decisions postflop whereas he dsnt I can't give tianyuan mathematical arguments in favor of calling cuz I'm an idiot when it comes to maths, but I can tell you I don't think any of the top players folds that pre after 3betting, even say 130bb deep, of course "everyone does it therefore it must be right" isnt exactly an argument but thats all I got lol

Yea but doesn't people higher up have a bit of random rundowns and crap that we actually do good against when they 4bet?

fair point, I still cant fold that hand vs nits who only 4bet AAxx tho : )