|
|
villain here is 14/13/10 over ~110.
his ATS is currently 30. fold to 3b is 1/2
he probably sees me as being kind of spastic, in terms of number i'd guess like 19/16 with 3 or 4% 3bet.
I'm just going to look at some different opening/continuing ranges in the hope of getting a feel for when to open up my value:bluff ratio for 3bet hands so i can hopefully add value to the "nut" end of my 3b range, and also make more money by exploiting people who fold to 3b's too much. cool.
PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.25 BB (9 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com
MP1 ($9.20)
MP2 ($36.70)
MP3 ($25)
CO ($20.69)
Hero (Button) ($25)
SB ($9.70)
BB ($25)
UTG ($28.24)
UTG+1 ($19.58)
Preflop: Hero is Button with 3 , K
5 folds, CO bets $0.75, Hero raises to $2.30
granted this may not be the absolute best choice of hand to 3bet (i don't really like flatting A2-A7s here so they would be great choices to 3b as bluffs) but i do have a blocker to KK and AK, and i also have the sootedness etc. so now for some ranges:
first, i'm risking 2.3 to win 1.1, so my breakeven fold frequency in a vacuum is going to be ~67-68% if my mental calculator isn't retarded.
opening:
22+ (72), A2s+(46), A7o+(81), K8s+(18), KTo+(27), Q8s+(16), Q9o+(36), J7s+(16), J9o+(24), T7s+(12), T9o(12), 97s+(8), 98o(12), 87(16), 76(16), 65s(4)
that comes to 416 combos on first count, which is good enough for me. it is also 33% of total hands according to pokerstove, so hopefully reflects the size of his actual opening range give or take 5% of hands due to an unreliable sample size.
now some different continuing ranges:
77+,AK (57 combos): 13% of opening range, 87% folds
77+,AQ+ (73 combos): 17% of opening range, 83% folds
22+,AK (84 combos): 20% of opening range, 80% folds
22+,AQ+,KQs (94 combos): 22% of opening range, 78% folds
22+,AJ+,KQ (132 combos): 31% of opening range, 69% folds
22+,AJ+,KQ,QJs-76s (156 combos): 37% of opening range, 63% folds
so we can see that is pretty damn +EV to 3bet "bluff" this guy. even if he flats as many hands as 22+,AJ+,KQ+ our 3bet is still +EV in a vacuum WITHOUT even considering any postflop equity. also, this guy's kind of in a "damned if you do, damned if you dont" kind of spot because (assuming he doesn't adjust his opening range, which should be his first adjustment to my 3bet range being composed of 50% or more "bluffs") to become unexploitable by 3b bluffs, he is going to have to start flatting a pretty large and weak (in terms of relative hand strength) range OOP to my 3bets, and is going to have to C/F a loooooot of flops (due to the predominance of small-mid pairs which probably only continue when they flop a set 1 in every 9 flops) and also suffer RIO on some the weaker broadways like AQ,AJ,KQ.
as best i understand it, my choice of 3bet range depends on his 4bet+ tendencies.
if he 4bets a "linear" range, as best i understand it, we're best to polarise our 3bet range between hands we continue to a 4b with (call this the "nut" part of our 3b range), and hands we gladly muck to a 4b and which weren't profitable in our calling range. this is so we don't end up turning hands very strong hands such as JJ-QQ and AK into bluffs by 3betting them and then having to fold. afaik the best approach is to play the maximum amount of hands we can with a positive expectation.
actually could i get some clarification on that?
let's say this guy ONLY 4bets a super strong range, call it KK+. or QQ+,AK at absolute widest. should we then be polarising our 3bet range (ie take x amount of hands from the top of our folding range and 3betting them as well as the hands we intend to continue to a 4b with) to exploit his high fold to 3bet?
but then the thought "hands like JJ and QQ have easily >50% equity against any continuing range which flats pairs worse than 99, so they should be +EV 3bets, right?" came into my head. acccording to the logic of the last paragraph, this would be "turning them into bluffs" if we 3bet them with intentions of folding to 4b.
so can we 3b for value with intentions of folding?
or should we not risk having to fold hands which do so well vs his continuing range?
that got a little off-topic and probably incoherent. if it's legible, i'd love to hear some other people's thoughts.
|
Reply With Quote