[Closed] Deep HUSNG: AKJT

Hwang says: only 3-bet if you are prepared to play against a 4-bet.

But why do you say "he raises tight" and then reraise him with AKJT? Why do you want to play a huge pot OOP against a player who is probably only raising good broadway hands, good wraps and big pairs? Your hand doesn't do well against those equity wise, and plays horribly postflop (especially against the smaller wraps), so keeping the pot small would work to your advantage.

The justification for 3-bet is if the opponent folds to a cbet after the flop very frequently. That is, he plays postflop snug, so you can easily steal pots.

The flop here is an easy contibet with top two + gutshot. I'm not sure if I'd go on and stack off with that hit, but SPR is around 5 so I suppose you have to. If opponent likes to attack missed cbets a lot, you could go for check/raise.

Originally posted by Jim9137
Hwang says: only 3-bet if you are prepared to play against a 4-bet.

But why do you say "he raises tight" and then reraise him with AKJT? Why do you want to play a huge pot OOP against a player who is probably only raising good broadway hands, good wraps and big pairs? Your hand doesn't do well against those equity wise, and plays horribly postflop (especially against the smaller wraps), so keeping the pot small would work to your advantage.

The justification for 3-bet is if the opponent folds to a cbet after the flop very frequently. That is, he plays postflop snug, so you can easily steal pots.

The flop here is an easy contibet with top two + gutshot. I'm not sure if I'd go on and stack off with that hit, but SPR is around 5 so I suppose you have to. If opponent likes to attack missed cbets a lot, you could go for check/raise.

what?

I agree with everything else

Originally posted by Jim9137
Hwang says: only 3-bet if you are prepared to play against a 4-bet.

But when I do get 4bet most of the time it's AA** and I only have about 30% equity

Originally posted by Jim9137
But why do you say "he raises tight" and then reraise him with AKJT? Why do you want to play a huge pot OOP against a player who is probably only raising good broadway hands, good wraps and big pairs? Your hand doesn't do well against those equity wise, and plays horribly postflop (especially against the smaller wraps), so keeping the pot small would work to your advantage.

Because my hand plays great preflop and it's also deceptive.. If an ace falls I can more often than not rep a set since most players think a 3bet=aces, if an ace doesn't fall and I flop 2pair or a wrap type hand they're going to
stack off much lighter because they think they're in good shape against aces.

I don't know what you mean with my hand playing terrible postflop..

I probably should have said "it plays horribly in 3-bet pot", instead of post flop. Direct examples would be flops like 864 or 923 or 332 or K54 or KT9 or other boards like that. Opponet has all the information he needs about your hand to make pretty good decisions postflop. He flops two pair or stronger, he goes allin, he flops a good draw he goes allin. He can even float hero more effectively on the small flops because hero's hand plays more or less the same way as aces do.

Equitywise, you probably have a lot better hand than bare aces. I agree. But the opponent's range by your definition is supertight, so he is going to flop good too and hero's hand is not playing very well against that range (in fact, it is a dog equity wise,). And he might even just call your 3-bet with aces with stacks of this size, and then flop comes AK2 rainbow, hero bets and he raises, what will you do?

I honestly feel there are strong reverse implied odds in 3-betting the hand against a tight opponent. But if he plays weak postflop and puts you always on aces, well, that's a good reason to 3-bet. Assuming most people do that is not a very good reason to 3-bet, imho.

As for the 4-bet, you still have the equity for a call. Ergo, if you are 3-betting to fold to a 4-bet, that's very exploitable.

Anyway, this is my opinion. I might be completely wrong, but this is how I feel today.

Originally posted by Jim9137
I probably should have said "it plays horribly in 3-bet pot", instead of post flop. Direct examples would be flops like 864 or 923 or 332 or K54 or KT9 or other boards like that. Opponet has all the information he needs about your hand to make pretty good decisions postflop. He flops two pair or stronger, he goes allin, he flops a good draw he goes allin. He can even float hero more effectively on the small flops because hero's hand plays more or less the same way as aces do.

I disagree with it playing horribly in a 3bet pot, I mean if i'm not 3betting with hands like this what am I 3betting with? I guess you could make the same arguement if I 3bet a hand like 6789 and the flop comes ATK A23 j9q or something. Perhaps i'm misunderstanding something here.

Originally posted by Jim9137
Equitywise, you probably have a lot better hand than bare aces. I agree. But the opponent's range by your definition is supertight, so he is going to flop good too and hero's hand is not playing very well against that range (in fact, it is a dog equity wise,). And he might even just call your 3-bet with aces with stacks of this size, and then flop comes AK2 rainbow, hero bets and he raises, what will you do?

(I think i've done this right)

If we put villains top of the range hands in we're nothing more than a 50:50, but if we add smaller rundowns, rundowns with gaps etc he becomes the dog.

And if the flop comes AK2 and he happened to flat aces pre then I think most of the time it's a cooler and i'm not sure if I can fold that.

Originally posted by Jim9137
..
Assuming most people do that is not a very good reason to 3-bet, imho.

Not just this reason alone but I believe it to be a very comman concept at these stakes (5-20), my hand also flops really well and has a ton of flop potential. I see no reason not to 3bet this preflop since his range very rarely dominates my hand and what I said above about hitting flops well.

As for the 4-bet, you still have the equity for a call. Ergo, if you are 3-betting to fold to a 4-bet, that's very exploitable.

I didn't know if I had the equity or not, thanks

Anyway, this is my opinion. I might be completely wrong, but this is how I feel today.

Btw i'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, I'm just trying to get a better understanding and this is great.

Well, there are cases where you don't (Like AAKK ds vs AKJT et cetera where you are crushed), but in average you do always, assuming reasonable hands.

But the thing you are doing here is more raising for value, and not for deception. But you are not ahead of villain's range (top 8% hands are 55% favorite over you), and if you are, not by large margin. If villain opened more hands, then you could 3-bet more for value.

However, the case isn't same for 9876 ds. That hand you always 3-bet for deception (and rarely for value, except when you have huge implied odds anyway with deep stacks), since it plays well postflop and is easy to get rid of if you don't hit (it's very rare you go broke on AKT board if villain picks your bluff). So you can represent hands that you don't have, and the rest of the time you typically connect the board, so you cover all your angles. AKJT, less so. If you connect you bet, but on a 854 board it's a bit iffy to bet and more or less say hey, I hope you didn't hit anything. And since villain is playing the same range as you are (assumption), he is going to hit the flop at the same time, and at times you are going to be dominated. Sometimes you'll dominate him, but the more tight he is, the more the opposite is true.

In the end, the variance will skyrocket anyway, which is not probably what you want in a sit and go.

Makes alot more sense now. I've had it in my head this entire time that not 3betting my hand would be criminal and i've been blinded by all the stuff I said above, you bring up an interesting point and valid argument which i've never really thought about before so thankyou sir.

I'll def be looking back on this thread in the future ^^