[NL2-NL10] *bb k8

    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      Poker Stars $5.00 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players - View hand 2103034
      DeucesCracked Poker Videos Hand History Converter

      SB: $5.09 - VPIP: 16, PFR: 11, 3B: 1, AF: 2,1, Hands: 264, cb:67, sb/bu open:20%; Fto3b:2/3
      Hero (BB): $16.43 - VPIP: 21, PFR: 16, 3B: 4, AF: 2,0, Hands: 104126
      UTG: $3.18 - VPIP: 28, PFR: 10, 3B: 7, AF: 5,5, Hands: 39
      MP: $5.07 - VPIP: 16, PFR: 16, 3B: 6, AF: 0,0, Hands: 38
      CO: $5.00 - VPIP: 17, PFR: 8, 3B: 9, AF: 0,8, Hands: 84
      BTN: $12.55 - VPIP: 28, PFR: 20, 3B: 5, AF: 3,8, Hands: 132

      Pre Flop: ($0.07) Hero is BB with K :diamond: 8 :spade:
      4 folds, SB raises to $0.15, 1 fold

      If this was K :diamond: 8 :diamond: , I would have 3bet, easy.
      But offsuit.. I have great FE because I'm IP, so I think 3b>>>fold here.
  • 13 replies
    • kymupa
      kymupa
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.10.2009 Posts: 22,364
      Hello,

      Just fold this even if it was suited against this guy.

      We shouldn't 3bet random hands - we should build a good balanced 3bet range.

      Best,
      Plamen
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      Well, I'm just relying on my FE here. He has the widest opening range here, and I have a blocker.
      He folded 2/3 times, and I have biggest FE here, so this should be a +ev situation to 3b.
      AS LONG AS I dont put in any money if I get called, on any board, under any circumstances.
    • kymupa
      kymupa
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.10.2009 Posts: 22,364
      Well, we should try to be balanced here - not just 3bet random hands.
      So, we have to build a good 3betting range - value and bluff, and if we have enough value hands, we can go down to K8.
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      Originally posted by kymupa
      Well, we should try to be balanced here - not just 3bet random hands.
      So, we have to build a good 3betting range - value and bluff, and if we have enough value hands, we can go down to K8.
      Kxs and Axs are good semibluffing hands, arent they?
      Here I might call with premiums because of the big FE, only 3betting a semibluffing range. Axs and Kxs have suited value and high card value+have blocker, which makes them pretty good.
      K8s is the top of my folding range, which makes it a pretty good 3betting hand.

      I mean, against this guy I might 3b only AA, and these hands.
    • kymupa
      kymupa
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.10.2009 Posts: 22,364
      If we only 3bet AA and bluffs we are definitely losing value here.

      We have to build up our 3betting range with this ratio - bluffs:value 1.5:1.
      We can differ from this ratio if we have reads - for example we can include more bluff hands if he folds a lot ot we can include more value hands if he calls a lot.

      In this situation, we don't have much information about his fold to 3bet so we can't really change our range too much.
      I would usually 3bet JJ+, AK here for value which are 40 combos. This mean that we should have approximately 60 combos of bluffs.
      Now when it comes to the bluffs, we have to chose those hands that are just after the hands we are going to call with.
      So, lets say, we feel comfortable defending against this guy A9s-AQs. This means that we can bluff with A8s-A2s which are 28 combos. We can add some offsuit aces as well in order to reach 100 combos. We can chose the suited kings, but usually Ax has better equity.

      So now when we have this range, we can change it according to our future stats on him.
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      Why do you think this 40% value-60% bluffs is ideal?
    • kymupa
      kymupa
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.10.2009 Posts: 22,364
      Because with this ratio we are hard to be exploited.

      Lets say villain raises to 3bb. We 3bet him to 10bb and he decides to 4bet to 24bb. In this spot he is investing 21bb to win 13, which means he needs us to fold 62% fold the time, and we are going to fold in 60%.
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      Originally posted by kymupa
      Because with this ratio we are hard to be exploited.

      Lets say villain raises to 3bb. We 3bet him to 10bb and he decides to 4bet to 24bb. In this spot he is investing 21bb to win 13, which means he needs us to fold 62% fold the time, and we are going to fold in 60%.
      How are we making any money then? :P
      If we play optimally, and not exploitively, we are not making any money. That is why it's optimal. We dont care what the villain does, because our strategy is optimal, thus ev=0.

      If we use this 40:60%, we basically dont care what villain does, dont we=this is optimal?
      How are we making money here then?
      OR these are too vague questions
    • kymupa
      kymupa
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.10.2009 Posts: 22,364
      It is a quite clear answer here - we make money when the opponent folds or calls us with weaker hands.
      If we are well balanced it would be hard for the opponent to make money, not for us.
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      Originally posted by kymupa
      It is a quite clear answer here - we make money when the opponent folds or calls us with weaker hands.
      If we are well balanced it would be hard for the opponent to make money, not for us.
      Hmm, quite nice thoughts there kymupa!
      Although this only applies until villain is kind of unknown, right?
      E.g.: if villan has a Fto3: 80% under big sample, I think we should actually only 3b BLUFF, not for value, because EV(calling AA and playing HU)>EV(3betting)
      We dont need to balance there, because villain folds so much.
    • kymupa
      kymupa
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.10.2009 Posts: 22,364
      Well, this is actually not true.

      If villain folds a lot we should be inclined to bluff more but calling AA makes no sense unless villain folds something like 95%+.

      If he folds a lot we should be inclined to 3bet less for semi-value (hands like AJ/AQ or so) and more as a bluff.
    • Imimba1
      Imimba1
      Bronze
      Joined: 12.12.2011 Posts: 2,897
      Originally posted by kymupa
      Well, this is actually not true.

      If villain folds a lot we should be inclined to bluff more but calling AA makes no sense unless villain folds something like 95%+.

      If he folds a lot we should be inclined to 3bet less for semi-value (hands like AJ/AQ or so) and more as a bluff.
      I think I know the answer, but why?
    • kymupa
      kymupa
      Bronze
      Joined: 22.10.2009 Posts: 22,364
      Basically, because when villain folds a lot we want to reduce our value range and widen our bluff range.

      Of course, since he is only going to continue with his top range, we want to beat his top range, so we are going to start reducing our value range from the bottom.
      If we 3bet JJ+, AK for value in this spot, we should first start calling JJ/AK, then QQ/KK, and right after this (if he continues with AA only for example) to get rid of the aces.

      Of course, this is only said if we don't know anything about villain's postflop tendencies.