Lets all beat 200 and 100 NL

When we were in Vegas, ISF and I were about 3 days in playing FR live and we were down. It was very confusing for us because the play was so horrific and we felt that we should have been destroying it. Obviously varience was a part of it, but we really wanted to figure out how to absolutely crush the games.

We started listing off typical leaks of the regs and figuring out how to exploit them. For example, Leak: Regulars were very scared of flush draws and were not very attentive. Exploitation: Call on boards with Flush draws with other less obvious draws and almost always bluff the flush.

So i got the idea that we should do this for 200NL and 100NL (since a lot of us play these levels and they are similar levels IMO), but i also think this will have value for everyone.

So lets start out by listing the common leaks of the regs. I'll start.

1. Regulars usually call 3-bets too much both in position and out of position. I say too much because they a. play their hands too passively b. set camp without odds because they aren't stacking you with a set enough c. Play their hands too obviously.

Ok now you guys list some. Later we'll try and break down how to exploit these leaks.

OMG I accidently deleted this post, but at least we seem to have solid discussion about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Massimo

1. Regulars usually call 3-bets too much both in position and out of position.

---

For sure, I keep not folding to threebets (unless I have shit like KJo), to the point that I have "Learn to fold to threebets" pinned on my wall, as getting 11:1 on someone's stack with 98o seems fun but it always ends in pain.

I get the feeling I'm gonna fall in love with this thread.

I don't understand why you'd want to 3-bet suited aces and kings when you're more than likely not winning a big pot unless you make trips or a flush. Like you said it's a good idea to play the opposite of what our opponents put us on. They probably put us on JJ+/AK because that's what they would 3-bet themselves since they're nits, so if they call with a PP they'll probably just check-fold when we make top pair. Have you experienced a lot of people calling down with PP's on A or K high flops because I haven't.

Like you said they'll peel one off on a J-9 high flop a lot of the time so wouldn't it make more sense to choose a suited J or T as the trash we're gonna 3-bet with, as opposed to a suited A or K?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

2. Players often are way too passive with their betting on the turn and river, missing tons of value and not pushing hands out enough.

---

pfff that can't be true... :oops:

very nice post btw, some of it went through my head, i'll need to reread and redigest. thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcatdog

I don't understand why you'd want to 3-bet suited aces and kings when you're more than likely not winning a big pot unless you make trips or a flush. Like you said it's a good idea to play the opposite of what our opponents put us on. They probably put us on JJ+/AK because that's what they would 3-bet themselves since they're nits, so if they call with a PP they'll probably just check-fold when we make top pair. Have you experienced a lot of people calling down with PP's on A or K high flops because I haven't.

Like you said they'll peel one off on a J-9 high flop a lot of the time so wouldn't it make more sense to choose a suited J or T as the trash we're gonna 3-bet with, as opposed to a suited A or K?

---

Our Aim when we threebet light isn't to win a massive pot, if that was true we'd want to threebet sc's. It's to have the greatest equity against our opponents calling range so they don't beat us as much when we do it.

Here's a hypothetical.
200nl - Guy raises 4x ($8) from CO 100bb deep. I reraise to $26 with K3s. He calls. Flop comes K75. he checks I bet he calls. turn is a 5. he checks, i check. River is a 9. he checks again i bet he calls with QQ, we win. It's not so much low pp's, but people really dont want to let go of TT-KK. Mostly the value is on the flop, but if we check the turn than bet the river they think "Oh god this is so bluffy i call and my hand is so face up..... omg wtf K3s, what an idiot. LOL just forgot that hand because my other 11 tables are beeping non stop."

This hand happens way more than you think, and if we beat the KK-JJ, we've just ruined his edge, and now he's playing 80% of his calling range in "I don't want to felt" mode.

The problem is people most of the time aren't pushing light enough on the flop to warrant even calling with tp on a J93 board. That's why we don't do it.

Axs has been a staple of my opp 3betting range. A5s on a 955 or a A57 flop is just money in the bank. Haven't tried the Kxs though, hmm. I am more than willing to help everyone beat these levels, however I am much more inclined to not post publicly about certain strategies. There are more regs lurking than you guys think. PM are always welcome...

heres a plan- 3bet pretty much always when ur hand is ahead of their range and also a fair amount of the time when it isnt. So if a 20/16 opens in the CO and you look down at AJo-3bet, u look down at ATs-3bet, u look down at KK-3bet, you look down at 66-3bet

cause 3betting is just so powerful

one time i was tilting and so to make myself feel better i sat to the left of a reg who was annoying me on five tables and 3bet every opening raise he made (with any two cards) for 2 hours. I won a bunch of money.

3betting a wide range effectively is the single most important lesson you can learn from the cardrunners videos also.

ISF, what are you doing if you whiff completely?
CO opens, you 3bet K3s, blinds fold. flop comes...A75 rainbow. are you still cbetting here? turn and river plan?

if there is an ace or king on flop u cbet close to 100%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce123

if there is an ace or king on flop u cbet close to 100%

---

yep

if the flop is J high or below its cbet nearly 0% of the time, it all depends on what you think there calling range is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jager

Axs has been a staple of my opp 3betting range. A5s on a 955 or a A57 flop is just money in the bank. Haven't tried the Kxs though, hmm. I am more than willing to help everyone beat these levels, however I am much more inclined to not post publicly about certain strategies. There are more regs lurking than you guys think. PM are always welcome...

---

Hypothetically...

Can't you tell a difference at the table between the multi-table nit regular (8+), and the thinking exploitive regular? The multi-tabler is going to have a hard time adjusting his game specifically to one person, and is unlikely to be reading these kind of posts. The exploitive regular you obviously don't want to give a lot of information to, but I would think you would avoid tangling with them anyway.

I guess the person you fear giving information to is the person who is trying to think, but right now is behind you in skill. If you unintentionally feed this person information it hurts you.

Are we talking about 3 betting in position or about 3 betting both in and out of position?

There have been a spate of these posts lately and I dont really understand how we play so many flops after 3 betting light. Someone fill in the gaps for me.

1. Play worse hands than the other players and raise more.
2.....?
3.....?
4.....?
5. Profit?


The K3s hand you posted. Dont we lose quite alot when they start check/calling real hands against us?

Can we move on from threebetting and think of more typical leaks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Quote:

---

2. Players often are way too passive with their betting on the turn and river, missing tons of value and not pushing hands out enough.

---

---

Biggest leak = not concentrating

This thread is quite funny to me for a few reasons:

1. I really don't think you guys should be putting this in writing in a public forum at all ever never ever never. You have AIM, Vent, IRC, etc for this type of discussion and I would suggest using that. You of course know this but I think it should be said

AND

2. So far it's turned into a PF thread. What's funny about that is when we first started playing poker at 5nl/10nl/25nl we could easily win a lot of money by just outplaying our opponents PF. We had large edges in equtiy in pots b/c of the fact that our opponents ranges were huge and they took weak holdings too far. Once we get to 50nl/100nl we realize that the players for the most part have looked at PF charts and have become much more competent there. So what do we do? We adjust. We learn to play better postflop and then we start winning again.

However, once past 100nl (granted I haven't played 200nl in forever) players postflop games are fairly solid meaning they for the most part don't make large errors postflop (I could be wrong and I hope this thread uncovers their big mistakes postflop). Therefore, what do we do? We adjust again. However, now we go back to PF play. We start trying to find edges PF. It's just interesting that's all, the cycle of it.

bigspenda- i think players games pre and postflop (on average) progress fairly linearily throughout the limits.

as in i think a typical 2/4 reg is playing significantly stronger poker both pre and postflop than a 1/2 reg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

However, once past 100nl (granted I haven't played 200nl in forever) players postflop games are fairly solid meaning they for the most part don't make large errors postflop (I could be wrong and I hope this thread uncovers their big mistakes postflop).

---

Yes, I think you'll be happy to know you are wrong, and once we touch on ISF's 2nd topic you'll see that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce123

bigspenda- i think players games pre and postflop (on average) progress fairly linearily throughout the limits.

as in i think a typical 2/4 reg is playing significantly stronger poker both pre and postflop than a 1/2 reg

---

Oh I do not doubt this at all and it wasn't really what I was getting at. The question I really have is that if we are playing in more 3bet pots with subsequent shallower stacks how exploitable can our opponents really be postflop? Isn't taking the lead by 3betting and winning the pots the majority of the time on the flop still PF exploitation? If you guys want me to shut up and just read I will, just tell me.

GoGoGadgetpostlfopdiscussionments

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce123

bigspenda- i think players games pre and postflop (on average) progress fairly linearily throughout the limits.

as in i think a typical 2/4 reg is playing significantly stronger poker both pre and postflop than a 1/2 reg

---

Oh I do not doubt this at all and it wasn't really what I was getting at. The question I really have is that if we are playing in more 3bet pots with subsequent shallower stacks how exploitable can our opponents really be postflop? Isn't taking the lead by 3betting and winning the pots the majority of the time on the flop still PF exploitation? If you guys want me to shut up and just read I will, just tell me.

GoGoGadgetpostlfopdiscussionments

---

No seriously, keep asking questions, it only helps.

You're right, the more money you put into the pot the harder it is for you to play badly postflop. I think in terms of threebetting it's sole exploitation is the fact that people don't understand how to correctly handle 3 bets OOP, and since they are making mistakes, captilizing on it makes us money, As well as having our premium threebet hands make tons more money also.

This isn't to say we threebet every time in position we have a decent hand. That IMO is a gigantic leak. We're calling a shitload of hands in position rather than threebetting them.

NOW

IowaSkinsFan wrote:
Quote:


2. Players often are way too passive with their betting on the turn and river, missing tons of value and not pushing hands out enough.

explain.

Checking too often or betting too small?

What sort of strength hands are you talking about?

Biggest leak I fixed: Calling with pocket pairs against button raises.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelion

explain.

Checking too often or betting too small?

What sort of strength hands are you talking about?

---

If this question is directed towards me i really dont get what ur talking about????

I mean. What kinds of hands are we losing value on? I assume you mean TPGK types.

How do we lose value? By pot control checking in inappropriate spots? By betting too little when we bet? Other?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

2. Players often are way too passive with their betting on the turn and river, missing tons of value and not pushing hands out enough.

---

BUT WORSE HANDS WILL FOLD AND BETTER HANDS WILL CALL... surely?

Whilst if we're the aggro fucker we're trying to be, and we're putting players to a decision every time we're in a pot with them, then yeah, we get paid, but there's normally a station or two at most tables I'm at, and we can't get them to fold TP+.

100NL is an interesting level for me - the stakes are just high enough for the good regs to make decent money, yet just low enough for the stupid tourney donks/drunk gambl000rs to come for some fun.

So are the posts in this thread aimed at beating the regs only?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelion

Dont we lose quite alot when they start check/calling real hands against us?

---

This is exactly what we're exploting. They aren't and if they somehow do we adjust.
And if they're that passive im probably not betting the river.
neways most of the hands that have us crushed when we hit tpnk are hands that were 35% to pair a flop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelion

I mean. What kinds of hands are we losing value on? I assume you mean TPGK types.

How do we lose value? By pot control checking in inappropriate spots? By betting too little when we bet? Other?

---

I'm thinking I'll get what your asking if you quote the thing you have a question about. Because right now, maybe im just dumb, but i dont get the question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by euphoricism

Biggest leak I fixed: Calling with pocket pairs against button raises.

---

thats only a leak if you are only playing them for set value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

2. Players often are way too passive with their betting on the turn and river, missing tons of value and not pushing hands out enough.

---

I meant this bit. But Im starting to think you mean OTHER players are too passive and we should exploit that somehow, rather than we are toopassive and should fix that somehow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

2. Players often are way too passive with their betting on the turn and river, missing tons of value and not pushing hands out enough.

---

I meant this bit. But Im starting to think you mean OTHER players are too passive and we should exploit that somehow, rather than we are toopassive and should fix that somehow.

---

yeah exactly, you hit the nail on the head, other players.

havent even read any part of this thread but the first post, but i think 3 betting a lot is the best way to crush these. The players are so weak and any time a 3 bet comes along they fold way 2 often. Most tables are loose passive and playing solid abc with a wider 3 betting range pre and post is prob about optimal no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EzDuzIt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by euphoricism

Biggest leak I fixed: Calling with pocket pairs against button raises.

---

thats only a leak if you are only playing them for set value.

---

In my long long stint at £25NL my biggest leak, ultimately, was playing mid PPs too hard post-flop when I didn't set. I think I hve a better balance now I'm playing at $100NL but it's still very hard to get right, and only really works if you're playing a straightforward tight player who has less than top pair and folds to a flop bet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trikflow77

havent even read any part of this thread but the first post, but i think 3 betting a lot is the best way to crush these. The players are so weak and any time a 3 bet comes along they fold way 2 often. Most tables are loose passive and playing solid abc with a wider 3 betting range pre and post is prob about optimal no?

---

maybe they will listen to you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce123

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trikflow77

havent even read any part of this thread but the first post, but i think 3 betting a lot is the best way to crush these. The players are so weak and any time a 3 bet comes along they fold way 2 often. Most tables are loose passive and playing solid abc with a wider 3 betting range pre and post is prob about optimal no?

---

maybe they will listen to you

---

we do listen to both of you :cry: dont be sad

BIG BIG leak of mine I guess Ive discovered the last few days is i 100% c/b after i 3 bet regardless of flop. Im a tight player who doesnt 3 bet all that often.

I've spent the last couple of sessions at 100NL three-betting light in position and sometimes from the blinds if it looks profitable, and it seems to be like automoney at the moment.

As a light three-bettor, is it correct to pretty much always felt AK and QQ pre?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ash256

As a light three-bettor, is it correct to pretty much always felt AK and QQ pre?

---

I wait until someone starts playing back at me more than once before I start doing this. Too many people think "Look at this maniac, just wait until I get AA, then I'll show him!"

you have way more fold equity than u think and fold equity>pretty much everything else

I read this whole thread and I still can't beat 100NL. Maybe it would help if I put in some hands?

This, I think is really really important to my development as a poker player so please help me out quick..

If I have 8 outs to the nuts on the flop, how often does my opponent have to fold to my push for it to be profitable? Let's say that there's 36 in the pot and I come over the top for 70 more.

i wanna say its like breakeven or slightly above ev if he calls half the time. but i could be wayyy off on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ash256

This, I think is really really important to my development as a poker player so please help me out quick..

If I have 8 outs to the nuts on the flop, how often does my opponent have to fold to my push for it to be profitable? Let's say that there's 36 in the pot and I come over the top for 70 more.

---

There's a lot to take into account but think, with 8 outs you have about 33% equity in the pot. That means he has 67% considering he is ahead. You would think you need to pick up 17% in equity (him folding 1 out of 4 times) but if there is already money in the pot you probably don't even need him to fold that much.

That doesn't seem correct but I typed it and I aint deletin' it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zenbitz

I read this whole thread and I still can't beat 100NL. Maybe it would help if I put in some hands?

---

If you are about break-even, table selection alone can make you a winning player. Just keep moving tables until you sit with at least one donator. Not just a fish, but someone seriously donking stuff off. They're out there. I 4 table and I always have at least 1 table with someone basically donating their money. I dump tables really quick if they seem like they are full of solid players. I also love to sit at tables with a lot of half and 3/4 stacks. Less than half a stack is just annoying, but the 1/2 to 3/4 guys are often people who bought in for less or bought in full, lost money, and suck so much that they don't top off. IMO, those guys around 3/4 stack are the best targets.

Yesssss, table selection is the 6th man in poker. I like to sit at loose/agro tables full of donkeys and ideally a donator or two. I refuse to sit at a table full of regs. If your table tightens up, or there is no one on the table who you consider weak or a donk, move to a new table.

I try to find tables initially based on:
1) Known Donks
2) Unknowns who look like they are taking a shot or just the casual weekend type
3)Loose/agro tables.

Also, don't be afraid to move tables even if you are stuck some money. I remember thinking, "Im going to leave this table because its gotten so tight as soon as i get back to my full 100", forget that, just move when the table is no longer profitable. It really doesn't matter how long you've been there or how much you've won/lost. If the table is no longer profitable, Move.

I raise bad players' donk bets far too often. Not those retarded minbet ones, but when the board pairs on the turn and they donk out w/ a serious bet ...

you can't push. Its a bad idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mixchange

I also love to sit at tables with a lot of half and 3/4 stacks. Less than half a stack is just annoying, but the 1/2 to 3/4 guys are often people who bought in for less or bought in full, lost money, and suck so much that they don't top off. IMO, those guys around 3/4 stack are the best targets.

---

1/2-3/4 stacks are def. one of the biggest things i look for when table selecting.

I am liking this line towards light 3bets more and more. It does not pot commit you preflop, and it seems to be just as effective as a full 4 bet. As we all know we only need to 'steal' a 3bet 1 out of 4 times to be +EV. I feel that it also is giving me the ability to make more 'read' based decisions preflop, and I can 4bet a wider range. Thoughts?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (5 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

BB ($218.75)
UTG ($429.85)
Hero ($220.75)
Button ($200)
SB ($187)

Preflop: Hero is MP with Khttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/heart.gif, Khttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...es/diamond.gif.
1 fold, Hero raises to $8, Button raises to $26, 2 folds, Hero raises to $60, Button folds.

Final Pot: $89

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (6 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

BB ($366.10)
UTG ($145.40)
MP ($217.25)
CO ($467.70)
Button ($510.15)
Hero ($203)

Preflop: Hero is SB with Qhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...miles/club.gif, Ahttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...miles/club.gif.
4 folds, Hero raises to $9, BB raises to $28, Hero raises to $61, BB folds.

Final Pot: $89

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $2 BB (4 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FlopTurnRiver)

Button ($169.90)
Hero ($199.50)
BB ($324.10)
UTG ($225.90)

Preflop: Hero is SB with Qhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...miles/club.gif, Jhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...iles/heart.gif.
2 folds, Hero raises to $9, BB raises to $30, Hero raises to $61, BB folds.

Final Pot: $91

Small fourbets can put people in a real tough spot. I don't like doing it as a pure bluff though.

i love small 4 bets and think they are the nuts. when you play against someone who never 4 bet pushes and always small 4 bets its definitely tougher

so how many times do we need to 5bet so we're +EV from folding to 4bets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by |~|ypermegachi

so how many times do we need to 5bet so we're +EV from folding to 4bets?

---

just make sure it is balanced with your 6-bet range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by |~|ypermegachi

so how many times do we need to 5bet so we're +EV from folding to 4bets?

---

thats when you just tighten up your 3 bets or change tables

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by |~|ypermegachi

so how many times do we need to 5bet so we're +EV from folding to 4bets?

---

thats when you just tighten up your 3 bets or change tables

---

Seriously, if you're at a table where someone is bluff shoving 5bets you should probably leave (Unless of course they are retarded).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcatdog

I don't understand why you'd want to 3-bet suited aces and kings when you're more than likely not winning a big pot unless you make trips or a flush. Like you said it's a good idea to play the opposite of what our opponents put us on. They probably put us on JJ+/AK because that's what they would 3-bet themselves since they're nits, so if they call with a PP they'll probably just check-fold when we make top pair. Have you experienced a lot of people calling down with PP's on A or K high flops because I haven't.

Like you said they'll peel one off on a J-9 high flop a lot of the time so wouldn't it make more sense to choose a suited J or T as the trash we're gonna 3-bet with, as opposed to a suited A or K?

---

Our Aim when we threebet light isn't to win a massive pot, if that was true we'd want to threebet sc's. It's to have the greatest equity against our opponents calling range so they don't beat us as much when we do it.

Here's a hypothetical.
200nl - Guy raises 4x ($8) from CO 100bb deep. I reraise to $26 with K3s. He calls. Flop comes K75. he checks I bet he calls. turn is a 5. he checks, i check. River is a 9. he checks again i bet he calls with QQ, we win. It's not so much low pp's, but people really dont want to let go of TT-KK. Mostly the value is on the flop, but if we check the turn than bet the river they think "Oh god this is so bluffy i call and my hand is so face up..... omg wtf K3s, what an idiot. LOL just forgot that hand because my other 11 tables are beeping non stop."

This hand happens way more than you think, and if we beat the KK-JJ, we've just ruined his edge, and now he's playing 80% of his calling range in "I don't want to felt" mode.

The problem is people most of the time aren't pushing light enough on the flop to warrant even calling with tp on a J93 board. That's why we don't do it.

---

bolded part - no. it would be much, much closer to true if we're shortstacking and allin (or say, 4-bet shoving with ~100bb eff stacks). with room to play postflop though this isn't right.

Lukie, I don't really understand your response but if you elaborate it would help me greatly because I don't see the flaw in my logic right now.

equity is only the end-all-be-all when you're allin. the more money you have back and the more streets left to be played, it matters less and less. it's something that's hard to put into words but i'm very surprised that you don't understand the concept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce123

3betting a wide range effectively is the single most important lesson you can learn from the cardrunners videos also.

---

Can you point me to a couple of the vids that really hammer home these points. What Videos would some of you guys recommend for hammering the $100NL and $200NL stake. I have had limited time to watch lately and the smaller stake vids are consistently bad. I'd really like to find more theory based videos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lukie

equity is only the end-all-be-all when you're allin. the more money you have back and the more streets left to be played, it matters less and less. it's something that's hard to put into words but i'm very surprised that you don't understand the concept.

---

I understand this very well but i dont understand how this relates to my point.

Okay I think I get it now, at first I wasn't thinking that we were cbet/calling draws but now that it's pretty obvious we are that makes it a lot more interesting.

However it does at least seem we shouldn't be threebetting our sc's all the time (of course) because of their value in smaller pots, but maybe sometimes it would be good especially so exploiting our game isnt so easy (not something we have to worry about too much at 200nl-).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Okay I think I get it now, at first I wasn't thinking that we were cbet/calling draws but now that it's pretty obvious we are that makes it a lot more interesting.

However it does at least seem we shouldn't be threebetting our sc's all the time (of course) because of their value in smaller pots, but maybe sometimes it would be good especially so exploiting our game isnt so easy (not something we have to worry about too much at 200nl-).

---

i wasnt saying that we should always be 3-betting sc's or whatever, i was just saying that your thinking (that our goal should be to maximize preflop equity against our opponent's calling range when the large majority of the money is going in post-flop) was overly simplistic and flawed. that said, i do think there is a lot of merit to 3-betting sc's in certain spots. but i don't think the goal is to be winning massive pots with typical ~100bb eff online stacks (eg 67s stacking AA on a 66x), but instead it's to pick up a lot of little pots preflop and on the flop, and if we do have to get it in, whether it be bet/calling a shove, c/r'ing allin, 2barrell semi-bluffing, etc, we still have somewhat decent equity against their range (with our pair or draw or whatever).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lukie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Okay I think I get it now, at first I wasn't thinking that we were cbet/calling draws but now that it's pretty obvious we are that makes it a lot more interesting.

However it does at least seem we shouldn't be threebetting our sc's all the time (of course) because of their value in smaller pots, but maybe sometimes it would be good especially so exploiting our game isnt so easy (not something we have to worry about too much at 200nl-).

---

i wasnt saying that we should always be 3-betting sc's or whatever, i was just saying that your thinking (that our goal should be to maximize preflop equity against our opponent's calling range when the large majority of the money is going in post-flop) was overly simplistic and flawed. that said, i do think there is a lot of merit to 3-betting sc's in certain spots. but i don't think the goal is to be winning massive pots with typical ~100bb eff online stacks (eg 67s stacking AA on a 66x), but instead it's to pick up a lot of little pots preflop and on the flop, and if we do have to get it in, whether it be bet/calling a shove, c/r'ing allin, 2barrell semi-bluffing, etc, we still have somewhat decent equity against their range (with our pair or draw or whatever).

---

Yeah I get it now, thanks for that. This logic makes perfect sense.

Do you disagree that threebetting Kxs and Axs is bad given the texture of the game? The big problem with it that you brought up is the fact that it's really something we don't want to felt post flop. But they are also hands that when they hit decently will win the pot a good amount of the time. Although, they don't have as much draw value as sc's.

"it's to pick up a lot of little pots preflop and on the flop, and if we do have to get it in...."

its great for balance too!! AA gets so much more action

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

its great for balance too!!

---

lol idk if you're being completely sarcastic or just trying to talk down to your pupils, either way it's hilarious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gabe

its great for balance too!!

---

lol idk if you're being completely sarcastic or just trying to talk down to your pupils, either way it's hilarious.

---

he's being 100% serious, it's great for metagame. especially against spewy tag fishes like me who will overcompensate by doing stupid stuff like 4-betting too light or calling OOP too much.

lukie you just got leveled

he knows im being serious, but he wasn't sure if i really believed that something so obvious needed to be said, i think

I think a factor that is ignored when discussing the relative merits of light 3-betting is that players that do this eliminate most of the postflop playability of their hands by turning them into bluffs preflop. They would probably increase their overall expectation by just calling with many of the speculative hands they feel the need to reraise with.

As far as balance is concerned, you don't need to be reraising every time you don't fold facing an open raise to achieve the balance that you gain from reraising marginal hands preflop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dsaxton

I think a factor that is ignored when discussing the relative merits of light 3-betting is that players that do this eliminate most of the postflop playability of their hands by turning them into bluffs preflop. They would probably increase their overall expectation by just calling with many of the speculative hands they feel the need to reraise with.

As far as balance is concerned, you don't need to be reraising every time you don't fold facing an open raise to achieve the balance that you gain from reraising marginal hands preflop.

---

the thing is though, there are a lot of hands that are -EV to call with and +EV to 3-bet with (or run very similarly in value either way) and you usually want to take the more aggressive option when there are 2 that are comparable. what exactly these hands are depend so much on always changing table dynamics.

I will say though that in the past, I used to 3-bet a lot lighter than i do now, where i call too much in (and probably out) of position and try to outplay ppl postflop. i think I used to be much tougher to play against tbh. results suggest this is true.

lukie- great contributions to this thread and i agree with a lot of what u said.

this is much much more complicated than the tiny post im going to make now but:

1. I went from a strategy (in feb-april) of 3betting with an incredibly wide range while playing taggish preflop and in the next few months experimented with looser opening more pots styles and styles where i called significantly more often in and out of position. I saw my winrate at 3/6 drop as my 3betting frequency lowered, even tho i was playing probably slightly better poker post flop.

2. I know this is counter-intuitive in a way but im absolutely convinced that calling in position with hands like KQ, AJ, AT, AQ, is a negative expected value play against strong tight aggressive opponents as is calling in the blinds with 22-99. Im also convinced 3betting with all of these hands is usually +ev (tho calling/folding to one raise in hu and some multiway pots should also occur with these hands) and as we 3bet more and more often with a predominantly linear value range of hands our opponents will begin to (correctly or incorrectly) call down with a similarly linear range of hands where their range is often more defined than ours and we have the initiative. I think this one fundamental concept of pushing thin preflop equity and playing almost all pots OOP with the initiative and a wide 3betting range is one of the single biggest leaks in otherwise strong players at low/midstakes.

sauce most of what you said (that i understood) i agree with. i'm pretty sure you made a typo on the last line though.

other random thoughts:

- i owe sauce $100 from flipping in vegas but we forgot and i never got his stars name to send it to him (!)

- internet has been going down often so ive been playing 1/2 to stay sharp (or get sharp in the first place). it feels so soft, multiple players with vpip's in the green on virtually every table at all hours of the day. virtually all the regs with typical tagg preflop stats have easily exploitable habits.

- calling oop sucks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce123

2. I know this is counter-intuitive in a way but im absolutely convinced that calling in position with hands like KQ, AJ, AT, AQ, is a negative expected value play against strong tight aggressive opponents as is calling in the blinds with 22-99. Im also convinced 3betting with all of these hands is usually +ev

---

Maybe Im reading this wrong, but are you 3betting 22-99 as a "standard" play? If so, what percentage are you estimating that you do this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andy-akb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce123

2. I know this is counter-intuitive in a way but im absolutely convinced that calling in position with hands like KQ, AJ, AT, AQ, is a negative expected value play against strong tight aggressive opponents as is calling in the blinds with 22-99. Im also convinced 3betting with all of these hands is usually +ev

---

Maybe Im reading this wrong, but are you 3betting 22-99 as a "standard" play? If so, what percentage are you estimating that you do this?

---

You should be threebetting pp's from the blinds a fair amount or folding them if there's only a BU raise involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

This thread is quite funny to me for a few reasons:

1. I really don't think you guys should be putting this in writing in a public forum at all ever never ever never. You have AIM, Vent, IRC, etc for this type of discussion and I would suggest using that. You of course know this but I think it should be said

AND

2. So far it's turned into a PF thread. What's funny about that is when we first started playing poker at 5nl/10nl/25nl we could easily win a lot of money by just outplaying our opponents PF. We had large edges in equtiy in pots b/c of the fact that our opponents ranges were huge and they took weak holdings too far. Once we get to 50nl/100nl we realize that the players for the most part have looked at PF charts and have become much more competent there. So what do we do? We adjust. We learn to play better postflop and then we start winning again.

However, once past 100nl (granted I haven't played 200nl in forever) players postflop games are fairly solid meaning they for the most part don't make large errors postflop (I could be wrong and I hope this thread uncovers their big mistakes postflop). Therefore, what do we do? We adjust again. However, now we go back to PF play. We start trying to find edges PF. It's just interesting that's all, the cycle of it.

---

1. why not? FTR gets very little traffic and this stuff has been written about countless times on other forums (namely 2+2) in more detail and has been seen by pretty much every serious player.

2. the days of winning lots of $$ by just playing reasonably preflop are long over, but it had to happen eventually. it's the players that can balance good even if not spectacular play on all streets that are tough. There are plenty of 20/15 taggs that look tough and are very easy to play against. sidenote, a lot of people still really botch the turn in all kinds of funny ways. IMO easily the hardest street to play, especially given the general flow of ~100bb online games where stacks are often awkward on the turn and ranges tough to estimate against aggressive players.

on 1. -- I don't get this comment either. What's the point of this board if we're not here to help each other?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andy-akb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sauce123

2. I know this is counter-intuitive in a way but im absolutely convinced that calling in position with hands like KQ, AJ, AT, AQ, is a negative expected value play against strong tight aggressive opponents as is calling in the blinds with 22-99. Im also convinced 3betting with all of these hands is usually +ev

---

Maybe Im reading this wrong, but are you 3betting 22-99 as a "standard" play? If so, what percentage are you estimating that you do this?

---

You should be threebetting pp's from the blinds a fair amount or folding them if there's only a BU raise involved.

---

I agree, but the frequency I do it with is less than 50% so I wouldnt call it a standard play. If I read his post correctly, then it makes it seem as though he is doing it >50% which is something I havent really considered. I recently have started folding them to a single button open though, unless they have like a 5% PFR.

Andy,
it seems like most of the time I'm playing against players who's PFR is too low or postflop game is too bad to make me want to threebet sc's. And yes, even against good players i can't imagine and 100% 3 bet frequency.