3bet by bad player BvB flop analysis?

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.10 BB (5 handed) - PokerStars Converter Tool from Play Online Poker, Site Reviews & Poker Forum | FlopTurnRiver.com

MP ($10.10)
Button ($8.36)
Hero (SB) ($10.75)
BB ($8.13)
UTG ($19.36)

Preflop: Hero is SB with Jhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...ilies/club.gif, Ahttp://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...lies/heart.gif
3 folds, Hero bets $0.30, BB raises to $0.70, Hero calls $0.40

Flop: ($1.40) 5http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...es/diamond.gif, 4http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...lies/spade.gif, Qhttp://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...lies/spade.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $1.20, Hero calls $1.20

Turn: ($3.80) 10http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...es/diamond.gif (2 players)
Hero checks, BB bets $3.20, Hero folds

Total pot: $3.80 | Rake: $0.17


This is the 3rd time i'v been 3bet and i know this guy is probably light fairly often here especially BvB.

A few hands after this spot he 3bet from the SB when someone iso'd a limper. Then bet a QT8 tt board with Q3s TPNK and called off a 30 bb shove over. This info is just to paint a more accurate picture of this villain.

So what do you guys think the best line preflop is?

At the table i was thinking of jamming over because i think we would have tonnes of FE and if we do get called there's a good chance he has a PP likes 55-TT or something like that i don't think we'll be running into JJ-AA AK too often here given the dynamic and history.

I decided on calling though because alot of his Ax Jx combos that he may be 3betting preflop we have dominated going to the flop and also if he had some random suited connectors he might start barreling off on an A high board both of which we will gain value from and more than the dead money already in the pot.

Then What do you think is the best line on the flop?

My flop call is absolute spew i think i tilted and snapped him off without thinking too much about the decision. I think folding the flop is probably best here as we believe he made a mistake pre-flop and we set ourselves up to gain from it only we whiffed totally.

I do think i should have a bluffing range vs this guy here though as he is most likely weak, the strongest hand i can see him having is some Qx and very occasionally an over pair. The rest is air.

What he did after this hand is largely irrelevant.

Calling is a pain in the ass because you're out of position.

A 4-bet jam is probably worse than a normal-sized 4bet with some range when you never plan on folding to a 5bet since it allows him to shove a wider range than he would call with.

Get a HUD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

What he did after this hand is largely irrelevant.

---

Why is it irrelevant? it shows that he was capable of 3betting light and so we can account for this during our review? I wouldn't be surprised if my logic was all wrong here feel free to correct me if needs be.

So we would be 4betting for value and to induce with an example range of say AJ-AK JJ+

So will our range break down to;

Fold---Call---4bet or just Fold---4bet ?

If we have AJ+ in our 4betting range are we planning on flatting at all oop with any Ax/broadway hands? Or is our plan to 4bet wider and call off 5bets wider than usual or fold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

Why is it irrelevant?

---

You didn't have the information at the time of the hand, so it doesn't help you to learn how to make a better decision in the hand if you use that information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

This is the 3rd time i'v been 3bet and i know this guy is probably light fairly often here especially BvB.

---

This is the information you should be using in your next post when you give your open-raising range and tell us how you think you should adjust to the BB's behavior. You might also find it useful to stop using the term "light" in favor of terms that try to more accurately describe the opponent's range and/or behavior (ie: 3-betting wide for value, 3-bet bluffing wide, etc.), but that's up to you.

Okay so the player in this hand is a fish i have him ringed green he's been calling a wide range preflop then calling flop and turn bets with 2nd 3rd pairs etc pretty much your average station.

My original adjustment to this is open a tighter range BvB because he is basically never folding i'm either getting called or raised and i believe he is capable of 3bet bluffing a wide weak range.


My opening range in this spot is;

{ ATo+ 22-AA JT+ KQ }

So i get 3bet by what i suspect to be a wide bluffing range i.e a weak range

I have no idea how he reacts to 4bets, whether he will spew or fold i'm unsure. I know if he's betting a weak range and is likely to fold a lot i should have a weak 4betting range to exploit this and gain the most value from his folds, also i dont believe this guy is thinking about my range that much, if at all.

So the adjustments i think i can make are weaken my 4bet range by adding in weaker hands or i could strengthen my calling range by adding in strong hands.

If i weaken my 4bet range, me entire range would look like:

Fold to 3bet {22-88} 4bet call {99-AA AQ-AK} 4bet fold {AJ AT KT QT JT-JK KQ}

I don't have a calling 3bet range here probably because my range was pretty tight from opening. I just ran out of hands.

If i strengthen my calling range then my range would look like;

Fold to 3bet {22-88 AT KT QT JT-JQ} Call 3bet {99-TT AJ+ KQ KJ} 4bet call {JJ+}

I think the first adjustment would be more +EV as we might get all the chips in pre-flop more often when we're ahead and win when villain folds. Although if he starts spewing like crazy i think we can just call off wider anyway so that would be our next adjustment if he were to go mental.

Are these adjustments any good?

Your first four lines don't make any sense. He's a passive calling station who 3bets wide? They don't match

Peoples behavior isn't 100% static, someone can on the whole have passive calling tendencies and still be capable of 3bet bluffing a wide range.

I'm pretty sure he was trying to adjust and play back at the time i had an active table image.

Edit - When i raised his blind i was expecting to get flatted like 90% of the time then 3bet the rest. I never expected him to fold IP BvB when he was playing so many pots and calling everyone down.

You seem to be trying really hard, so I'll take five minutes or so and show you an example of seeing how your first range works out by looking at how often you're folding to 3-bets and 5-bets.

JT+ doesn't mean anything. And you have ATo+ without ATs+? From the rest of what you wrote, I'm going to assume that you meant a range of {22+, AT+, KT+, QT+, JT}. AT+ is AT-AK, KT+ is KT-KQ, QT+ is QT-QJ, and JT is just JT.

Villain is 3-betting to $0.70. He's betting $0.60 to win $0.40. For his 3-bet, A = 0.6/(0.6+0.4) = 60%. You are exploitable to his 3-bets with any two cards if you fold more than 60%.

You have 13 pairs and 10 unpaired hands in your range for a total of 238 combinations.

In your first range you gave where you do not have a calling range, you have suggested folding {22-88}. This is 42 combos, so you will be folding 17.6%. This may be excessively low since you could fold more hands and still not be exploitable to 3-bet bluffs at this bet size.

You are 4bet/calling 68 combos and 4bet/folding the remaining 128. When you 4-bet, you will be folding 65.3% of the time. This is way too much, and I'll show you how to prove it. If you were to 4-bet to $2.00, as an example, you can treat his 5-bets as shoves. If he did shove, he would be betting $7.43 to win $2.70. Suppose E is the equity his hand has against your calling range. The EV of his shove would be:

<EV, shove> = (0.653)($2.70) + (0.347)(E)($8.93) + (0.347)(1-E)(-$7.43)
<EV, shove> = 1.763 + 3.100E - 2.578 + 2.578E

The EV of him folding to your 4-bet is 0. The EV of 5-betting is better than the EV of folding for him when:

0 < 1.763 + 3.100E - 2.578 + 2.578E
0 < 5.678E - 0.815
...
E > 0.144

This means that he can shove any hand with more than 14.4% equity against your calling range of {AQ+, 99+}. So which hands does that include?

Hint: 32o has 23% equity against your calling range.

Since he can shove any two cards against us profitably with these ranges, this means that we're folding too often to his 5-bets. From this point, you'd need to make some adjustments. As pointed out earlier, you could stand to fold to 3-bets a little more often. You could also introduce a calling range like you did in your second example. I'll leave that analysis up to you.

Important: It might seem like you'll generally have to be folding to 5-bets less often than you're folding to 3-bets. This is correct. Do you see why?

Okay first off thanks for such a helpful response i've absorbed some good info here.

To answer the question at the bottom of the post i think it's because;

7.43/(7.43+2.70) = 0.73 so if i fold more than 73% of the time villain can 5 bet any two cards profitably.

But with his 3 bet sizing i have to fold more than 60% for him to be able to 3bet any two cards profitably against me.

So to avoid being exploited by folding to much to 5bets i will have to fold 73% which means i'm calling 27%.

Also to avoid being exploited by 3bets i will fold 60% which means i'm calling or 4betting the remaining 40% of the time.

I thought that would be the answer but i'm obviously wrong.

I'm going to bed it's pretty late i'll try and figure this out tomorrow with a fresh head. Also i'll see how my second range plays out using what i've learned here.

Make it a general rule not to flat (properly sized) 3-bets OOP. Or if you do find a really good reason to.

With a small 3b like this one vs a bluffy-aggro opp, I think both calling and 4-betting are OK.

Villain's 5-bets rely on both fold equity and showdown equity.

Villain's 3-bets only rely on fold equity if you're never calling.

Note that even if you are calling sometimes, his 3-bets still rely much more on fold equity than his 5-bets.

I never would have thought of that by myself, so if villains 5bets rely on fold equity and pot equity when called then;

If we start calling more 5bets we reduce his fold equity but we get into more all-in situations. If we start calling wide then his 5bets have little fold equity against us and rely more heavily on showdown equity. So 5 betting a weak range would become less appealing to villain as he has little fold equity he will have to narrow his range to increase his showdown equity vs my range? If I’m calling a lot that is, seems like the obvious adjustment for him.

So if villain 5bets all-in with a weak range then he wins when I fold and he will still win the pot x% of the time when I call.

If villain 3bets a weak range he only wins if I fold, he can also win if he flops big but that won’t happen very often. I don’t think I’v caught on to what you were trying to point out here, I’ll have to think over this one again.

I’m going to try and see how my second range plays out here;

So I’ve got my opening range {22+, AT+, KT+, QT+, JT} A total of 238 combinations.

Villain 3bets us and we can see from his bet sizing that we will be exploitable to
3bet bluffs with any two cards if we are folding more than 60% of the time.

238*0.6=142.8 so the maximum amount of combos I can fold to his 3bet without being exploited is lets say 143. I think I should be folding fairly close to this number as I am OOP and the mistakes that I will inevitably make post flop vs him will be larger due to the smaller SPR’s.

In my second range I suggested folding to 3bet with {22-88 AT KT QT+ JT} for a total of 7 paired hands and 5 unpaired hands which = 122 combinations. This means I will be folding to 3bet 51% of the time this is a lot better than ~17% in my first suggested range.

I suggested calling 3bets with {99-TT AJ+ KQ KJ} this is a total of 2 paired hands and 5 unpaired hands for a total of 92 combos. Which means I will be calling a 3bet 38.6% of the time.

Then I suggest 4bet calling {JJ+} which is 4 paired hands for a total of 24 combos. I will be 4bet calling 10% of the time.

Since im never folding to a 5bet I think the EV equation would look like this;
Assuming the same 4bet and 5bet sizing as your previous post.

<EV, shove> = (1)(E)($8.93)+(1)(1-E)(-$7.43)

Since there are only two possible outcomes, I call his 5bet and he wins the pot his equity% of the time or I call his 5bet and he loses his bet, 1 minus his equity % of the time.

I’m only realizing now I don’t know how you get 8.93 in the ev equation.

If I call his 5bet 7.43+7.43+ the 2.70 already in the pot would the pot not be ~$17?

Since I’m never folding he can only 5bet profitably against me with a hand that has >50% equity vs my calling range I think? So KK seems like the worst hands that has >50% equity QQ only has 40%. So he can only 5bet a range of KK+ profitably. Breaking the EV formula down and comparing it to 0 villains EV from folding to my 4bets isn’t necessary here is it since im never folding to 5bets he can only 5bet with over 50% equity? This logic just hit me when I was thinking about those ranges is this correct?

Apologies for such a monster post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

Since I’m never folding he can only 5bet profitably against me with a hand that has >50% equity vs my calling range I think?

---

If you 4-bet, he basically has the options of calling, folding or 5-betting all-in (he could 5-bet to less than an all-in, but that's an inferior option with these bet sizes though I don't feel like proving it right now -- use the search function if you'd like to know more I guess).

You can't assume the bold here since Villain can't check. Since we can't really look at Villain's EV of calling a 4-bet without writing a short novel, check the EV of Villain's other two options and see when the EV of shoving is better than the EV of folding.

For an extreme counter-example to the bold, what if the pot was $1,000,000 and Villain had $1 behind. Would he prefer to shove with 32o (doesn't have 50%+ equity against your calling range) or fold?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

(he could 5-bet to less than an all-in, but that's an inferior option with these bet sizes though I don't feel like proving it right now -- use the search function if you'd like to know more I guess).

You can't assume the bold here since Villain can't check. Since we can't really look at Villain's EV of calling a 4-bet without writing a short novel, check the EV of Villain's other two options and see when the EV of shoving is better than the EV of folding.

For an extreme counter-example to the bold, what if the pot was $1,000,000 and Villain had $1 behind. Would he prefer to shove with 32o (doesn't have 50%+ equity against your calling range) or fold?

---

Ill try comparing the EV of folding to 5bet shoving. Well the EV of folding is obviously 0 so ill try work the rest out.

So if the stack and pot sizes were different he wouldn't need 50% like in your example.

So can we assume that providing the villain has a decent stack left and isn't pot committed he needs 50% equity to shove?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seven-deuce

Ill try comparing the EV of folding to 5bet shoving. Well the EV of folding is obviously 0 so ill try work the rest out.

So if the stack and pot sizes were different he wouldn't need 50% like in your example.

So can we assume that providing the villain has a decent stack left and isn't pot committed he needs 50% equity to shove?

---

It's not so much about the stack/pot sizes as it is about his alternative option to betting being folding. Folding has an EV of 0. If your alternative option to betting is checking, then this isn't the case (checking has an EV > 0).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

It's not so much about the stack/pot sizes as it is about his alternative option to betting being folding. Folding has an EV of 0. If your alternative option to betting is checking, then this isn't the case (checking has an EV > 0).

---

Ah right i get it now, why would he choose an inferior option, he can fold and gain 0 EV or shove and gain some EV. And we're always trying to take the option with the greatest EV.

I'd call pre and once he'd bet this size on the flop realize we can exploit him to death by just callling premiums pre and c/c all day until he proved this was wrong.

Basically if he is almost going to pot it IP when he 3bs so tiny you are getting an insane price to peel pre. You basically called 40c to win 2.60 as long as he bets this amount 100% which probably isn't true but even if he cbets this size 1/2 the time you are still getting an incredibly good price plus now we get to get to showdown for cheap.

If this doesn't make sense just say the word.

word. "showdown for cheap"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icanhastreebet

I'd call pre and once he'd bet this size on the flop realize we can exploit him to death by just callling premiums pre and c/c all day until he proved this was wrong.

Basically if he is almost going to pot it IP when he 3bs so tiny you are getting an insane price to peel pre. You basically called 40c to win 2.60 as long as he bets this amount 100% which probably isn't true but even if he cbets this size 1/2 the time you are still getting an incredibly good price plus now we get to get to showdown for cheap.

If this doesn't make sense just say the word.

---

Thanks for the reply, i like the adjustment you suggested. I understand we're getting a deadly price pre to call (if he c-bets this large as standard) we're getting 6.5:1 if my math is correct.

So he will be firing away into a very strong range and we can just call down and let him spew chips to us.

I don't follow where you say we're getting to showdown for cheap?

given reads that he's an aggro monkey:

4b to 1.75 pf to call a shove, yet calling is okay too. just fold flop though as you don't even have a bd fd.