Triple barreling 3betpot BvB $200nl

[griffey24]

Its out of balance but with this specific hand i think you kind of want to put more money in while cards are to come. I think griffey's suggestion of 40/shove turn is waywayway overkill for this though (you bet 40 with your whole range into a 44 dollars pot on the flop?). I would probably bet like 22-24 on the flop and like 56 ott. At 1/2 anyways. I think at higher stakes I would take a more consistent betting line and do what you normally do.

On the river you might as well go for it for the odds and its a reasonable bluffing card. I can't fault checking river too much though when the current six max game paradigm is to never fold in a big pot if you have a pair (omg redline).

Legitimate question, but I'm wondering why everyone is always trying to balance with their triple barreling range, as if this is the only balance question.

Why is it not credible to balance with our bet flop/shoving turn range?

It's not like its difficult to bet flop, shove turn with KT+, overpairs here.

[JL]

Legitimate question, but I'm wondering why everyone is always trying to balance with their triple barreling range, as if this is the only balance question.

Why is it not credible to balance with our bet flop/shoving turn range?

It's not like its difficult to bet flop, shove turn with KT+, overpairs here.

But what do we do with our 98o, K2s, A5o hands?

[Renton]

Legitimate question, but I'm wondering why everyone is always trying to balance with their triple barreling range, as if this is the only balance question.

Why is it not credible to balance with our bet flop/shoving turn range?

It's not like its difficult to bet flop, shove turn with KT+, overpairs here.

betting 40 is gross because its horrible bluff odds. You make a lot of money in reraised pots from betting small on the flop and taking it down a lot, relying on the strength of your range to force people to fold despite the odds. Betting 40 as a standard would dramatically curtail the profitability of your bluffing range, and thus curtail the profitability of your overall range, with the only benefit being that you might get more value from your big hands some % of the time (but note you often stack them with big hands no matter what sizing you choose).

[griffey24]

betting 40 is gross because its horrible bluff odds. You make a lot of money in reraised pots from betting small on the flop and taking it down a lot, relying on the strength of your range to force people to fold despite the odds. Betting 40 as a standard would dramatically curtail the profitability of your bluffing range, and thus curtail the profitability of your overall range, with the only benefit being that you might get more value from your big hands some % of the time (but note you often stack them with big hands no matter what sizing you choose).

I don't think the benefit of betting small is necessarily to improve our bluff odds. I'd argue that betting small if anything a) encourages more floats and peels OOP,such that we are forced to double barrel bluff (ie: needing to risk more to take down the pot), and b) encourages more bluff c/r on the flop.

Obviously when we have a hand, this is one of the big advantages of betting small. but when we don't have a hand, I wouldn't necessarily say its helping our odds of taking down the pot.

I'm just playing devil's advocate. Ofcourse I think tripling small is good most of the time. I'm just saying that people hate the double barrel line (bet/shove) so much.. balance yada yada.. and there are ways to incorporate both types of lines in a balanced way by taking advantage of the dynamic of value shoving or bluff shoving and getting called, creates.