My first thought was to get stacks in on the flop as we block a lot of hands, but their flop raise with a person behind really weights their hands towards value than draws imo. If there was a FD on the flop I'd defo get stacks in, as played I think you played the hand fine vs this player type.

Peel flop and check jam turn? AF is infinite over a small sample. Our concerns here are QJ 67 T9 T8 and that is it really. 88 99 we block TT would likely 3b pre... Villain is likely to raise flop with JT J9 77 KJ etc. On the turn we are not very deep relative to the pot after he bets.

What does he perceive your opening range to be and how does he think your range interacts with that board against what he thinks you think his range is? How likely is he to attack your range here? That effectively decides how you should respond on the turn. So now for you to figure out what % of the time he has X vs Y.

If we lump hands we are terrible against with hands we are doing well against and see how often he needs to have what for our hand to get it in on the turn we can look at the numbers.

9% vs QJ / 67

4.5% T9/T8

72% vs J8 J9

60% vs JT

77% vs 77


QJ / 67 is more likely a combo than T9/T8 as we have 89 so consider 60% QJ/67 40% T9/T8 which gives 7.2% against this range.

J8/J9 we can assign 25% to JT 50% to and 77 25% to which gives 67.25 %.

Some percentage of his range is going to be total beans we can excuse ourselves from considering that as he will fold the turn if we check jam, though you may get some weird turn call by KQ QT etc.

You would be putting an additional $4.96 in on the turn into a pot that would then total $21.67.

We need 4.96 / 21.67 = 22.89% equity to break even on shoving.

22.89 - 7.2 = 15.69

15.69/0.6725 = 23.33

I may have done this wrong but he needs to have the semi-bluffs 23% of the time for this to be profitable. Does he have QJ 67 T8 T9 77% of the time?

To check the maths .77*7.2 +.23*67.25 should = 22.89% ... nope it equals 21.01% This may be due to rounding.

Feel free to tear apart my maths here it has been a very long time since I have done this stuff.