SH Zoom AKo, TPTK in 3bet Pot

I'd play it the same mate, I think your sizing is fine and betting the river is way too thin.
As you said, I doubt the average unknown would be able to turn his hand into a bluff here. Plus he looks like a recreational limping in pre so I'm not feeling bad about folding.
Not much more you could do here.

On river another draw completes and I think we should not be betting.

I'd play it the same mate, I think your sizing is fine and betting the river is way too thin.
As you said, I doubt the average unknown would be able to turn his hand into a bluff here. Plus he looks like a recreational limping in pre so I'm not feeling bad about folding.
Not much more you could do here.

Well playd i agree.

Why so small 3bet pre? I pref. ~$6.5

Originally posted by Zotyibacsi97
Why so small 3bet pre? I pref. ~$6.5

Yeah, I guess it could be bigger, but I thought that the raise size is allready big (although too small from what it should have been vs 1 limper when OOP, except he is making the smaller size because of an incredibly good and aggressive reg behind ) and I had position on iso-raiser, so decided to 3bet a bit smaller.

When you mentioned that, I noticed that some competent regs at 100NL and above started to 3bet with very big sizings, like 3,5 IP vs 3bb open and 4x OOP vs 3bb open, but not sure what's the theory behind i.e. is it profitable and why? I guess the population read is that the fold equity is relatively higher than vs smaller sizes so average profit from 3betting is higher.

is it profitable and why?

Because you are oop and you give to good pot ods to defend vs your 3bet wild and also profitable.

I 3bet 6x 200bb deep oop

Originally posted by LemOn36
I 3bet 6x 200bb deep oop

I 3b 3x ip to 3.5x oop but there is a limper in the pot to, but 6x can be good to (it's deepends on ranges)

Originally posted by LemOn36
I 3bet 6x 200bb deep oop
Got that! But what's the reason of 3betting 3,5x vs 3bb open raise IP 100bb deep (and 4x OOP) as default?
Should solid regs adopt those fancy strategies at NL50 and why (not)?

Originally posted by Alleen86

Originally posted by LemOn36
I 3bet 6x 200bb deep oop
Got that! But what's the reason of 3betting 3,5x vs 3bb open raise IP 100bb deep (and 4x OOP) as default?
Should solid regs adopt those fancy strategies at NL50 and why (not)?

yes, but at higher limits become more -ev if you don't adopt. I recommend go deep into pio.
The reason is what i say before:

Because you are oop and you give to good pot ods to defend vs your 3bet wild and also profitable.

But care, you need to change your ranges a bit (you can't start 3beting 4-5-6x with a 3x 3beting range)

Originally posted by Zotyibacsi97

Originally posted by Alleen86

Originally posted by LemOn36
I 3bet 6x 200bb deep oop
Got that! But what's the reason of 3betting 3,5x vs 3bb open raise IP 100bb deep (and 4x OOP) as default?
Should solid regs adopt those fancy strategies at NL50 and why (not)?

yes, but at higher limits become more -ev if you don't adopt. I recommend go deep into pio.
The reason is what i say before:

Because you are oop and you give to good pot ods to defend vs your 3bet wild and also profitable.

But care, you need to change your ranges a bit (you can't start 3beting 4-5-6x with a 3x 3beting range)

So, if I understand well, people at higher limits defend more and more solid vs 3bets, thus make your life tougher when you 3bet, especially OOP, so our adaptation is to 3bet tighter ranges, but with bigger sizings.

As ranges are concerned, I supose that 3bet ranges should be more and more linear because people are calling more vs 3bets then at lower limits. We should go polar only if villain folds too much vs 3bets (we then add some speculative hands to our 3bet ranges as bluffs and probably reducing a 3bet size in those cases makes sense) and if villain 4bets alot, because we are losing value when we 3bet hands that are ahead of villain's open range, but have to fold vs 4bets. Does this make any sense?

I just woke up. But at the moment I'm not sure if it makes sense to start 3betting significantly tighter range when villains defend more. Then we just let villain open a wider range profitably. And of course our range must be balanced so he can't start exploiting us by just folding a lot vs 3bets? And to balance a bigger 3bet sizing our 3betting range should be more bluff heavy. But I do agree that it is wise to start 3betting more linear when villains start calling a lot.

So adding more bluffs and 3betting smaller is the opposite of what I think we should do. Have to think about that more after a cup of coffee

Originally posted by la55i
I just woke up. But at the moment I'm not sure if it makes sense to start 3betting significantly tighter range when villains defend more. Then we just let villain open a wider range profitably. And of course our range must be balanced so he can't start exploiting us by just folding a lot vs 3bets? And to balance a bigger 3bet sizing our 3betting range should be more bluff heavy. But I do agree that it is wise to start 3betting more linear when villains start calling a lot.

So adding more bluffs and 3betting smaller is the opposite of what I think we should do. Have to think about that more after a cup of coffee

Since we didn't hear you yet, supose it was not just a coffee!

:f_biggrin::f_biggrin:

Yea I indeed started celebrating 1st of may already and now I have a hangover. Kinda was relying on that LemOn will wake up here and tell what he thinks.

I do believe that bigger bet sizes should have more bluffs in the range to balance properly but that might not work 100% like that in the real world.