# BU vs BB/SB

• Silver
Joined: 16.12.2009
BU raises ,7 to win ,35(NL25 standard steal) - He needs to win this 67%(?) of the time for it to remain a profitable move. What range do I need to defend to ensure he doesn't abuse the shit out of me? Trying to figure this out with Equilab but can't seem to get my head around it, please do help.
• 19 replies
• Black
Joined: 06.04.2008
1-0.67=0.33
• Silver
Joined: 16.12.2009
Originally posted by getdotacom
1-0.67=0.33
That's what I thought. But how am I supposed to construct a 33% defend range that isn't filled with bluffs? Won't I get creamed by 4bets?
• Silver
Joined: 24.03.2008
Well you should factor in that you are getting 3/1 on your money and you actually conect with the flop 1 in 3 times. So theoretically you could defend any two, but because you at a positional disadvantage playing really trashy hands would be -EV.

What you also need to factor in is not just the size of the steal bet, but what is the frequency they steal? There is a big difference between someone who raises \$0.70 who steals 10% of the time and someone who raises \$0.70 but steals 50% of the time.

Originally posted by Guthans
Originally posted by getdotacom
1-0.67=0.33
That's what I thought. But how am I supposed to construct a 33% defend range that isn't filled with bluffs? Won't I get creamed by 4bets?
Who ever said BU v BB is ALWAYS 3bet or fold? It is ok to call from the BB to keep villains range wide
• Bronze
Joined: 29.01.2010
so btn raise 0.7

0.7/(0.7+0.35) = 0.67

1-0.67 = 0.33

The chance of one guy folding is = (1-x)

So the chance of both the sb and bb folding is (1-x)(1-x)

Therefore the chance at least one guy isn't folding is:

1-(1-x)(1-x) = 0.33

x2 - 2x + 0.33 = 0

x = 0.18

So you need to defend 0.18 from each position...

edit: you should 3b more from sb, and call more from bb. And when you 3b because btn has position calling becomes a more appealing option, so you need to think more about postflop playability than if you 3b btn v co for example.

This is the way I approach it at least... (I defend wider than 0.18, but I think thats the minimum)
• Silver
Joined: 16.12.2009
Originally posted by holmeboy
so btn raise 0.7

0.7/(0.7+0.35) = 0.67

1-0.67 = 0.33

The chance of one guy folding is = (1-x)

So the chance of both the sb and bb folding is (1-x)(1-x)

Therefore the chance at least one guy isn't folding is:

1-(1-x)(1-x) = 0.33

x2 - 2x + 0.33 = 0

x = 0.18

So you need to defend 0.18 from each position...

edit: you should 3b more from sb, and call more from bb. And when you 3b because btn has position calling becomes a more appealing option, so you need to think more about postflop playability than if you 3b btn v co for example.

This is the way I approach it at least... (I defend wider than 0.18, but I think thats the minimum)
Good post, thanks.
When you say playability, does that mean you try to avoid 3betting hands with blockers over hands with playability(if I understand correct) like 910s?
• Bronze
Joined: 08.09.2011
Actually shouldn't we examine the situation from the BU perspective? Because BU made his decision with two players left to act and the profitability of his action is dependent on the situation when he made his action and not after the SB has folded.

From the BU perspective he is looking for a situation where the probability of both SB and BB folding is greater than .67. To find find the probability of a situation that involves more than one sequence we need to multiply the probability of each sequence with each other. In other words we are looking for what SB fold to BU steal multiplied with what BB fold to BU steal equals .67
if SB and BB fold equal amounts they have to fold at least .819 of the time because .819 x .819 = .67. This would suggest we only need to defend 1-.819 = .18 like holmeboy showed.

However it is not very likely that SB and BB fold equal amounts. Usually SB folds more and BB less. From experience I find it very unlikely that there are lots of players that fold more than .90 in SB vs BU steal. Therefor if we assume that all SB fold .90 or less to BU, the BB should not fold more than .67 / .90 = .74 or in other words we should not defend less than 1 - .74 = .26

ex if SB folds .88 to BU and we fold .74 to BU and .88 x .74 = .65 therefor we know his open pre flop was unprofitable. But this does not stop BU from making profit by calling/4bet bluffing our resteal or cbet bluffing us out when we defend passively.

And like jonnyjm said this calculation does not take into account BU stealing range and assumes BU needs an fold equity of .67. Therefor we still need to adjust to villains range and OR size.
• Bronze
Joined: 29.01.2010
Maybe playability was a bad choice of words... In one coaching I remember hearing it described as 3 betting wider for value, rather than 3b bluffing.

But basically I'd take out the bottom of my 3b bluff range; hands like T7s, 96s, A2s-A5s etc. And add more combinations of AQ for example.

edit: Some nice points from Hypno. I only worked it out assuming sb/bb defend the same, but like mentioned, this is rarely the case.
• Silver
Joined: 16.12.2009
So I made a range. This is a defence range, from both SB and BB - I'll be 3betting more from SB than BB, and flatting more from BB.

I'll be flatting AJ,AQ,KQs,KJs, 77+, 3betting AK+ JJ+ for value - Stacking with QQ+AK+ - 3bet folding JJ I guess? - 3bet for bluff = JT+,QT,K10,AT,KJo,QJ+,KQo, 87s,98s,910s,T8s,J8s,Q8s,J9s,Q9s,K9s,A9s,A2-5s,22-66 - I think that was all, 22% range.

Is anything really out of line? If so, where is my thinking wrong?
Obviously my range is really weighted towards bluffs, wont I get abused?
• Bronze
Joined: 29.01.2010
Its kind of unbalanced lol. Obv this is ok against someone who is folding to a lot of 3bets but a decent opponent will abuse you. Maybe construct a more balanced range and then in game you can add a few extra bluff combinations depending on the opponent...

And I don't like 3b folding JJ.... Either call it pre or 3b/5b it.

I don't really want to comment too much because I'm not really qualified... I only play nl20/nl50. So if I do it could become more of 'the blind leading the blind situation'

edit: just messed around on equilab quickly. A defence range focused more towards 3betting might be something like:

• 3b/5b: {TT+, AQ+}...
• 3b/f: 93
• calling: {99-66, AJs-ATs, KTs+, QTs+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, KQo}

I'll stop now lol.
• Black
Joined: 06.04.2008
Ohh, sorry, I misread your post for the first time, I thought it's SB vs BB.
I wouldn't bother to develop balanced range against BU steal because most of regs won't have balanced range as well. Against 60%+ minraise I think we can profitably defend ~25% from sb and even something like 70% from BB. Some total trash hands like Q4o can be better than -100bb/100 against players who raise extremely wide and then play poorly postflop. Then tighten up accordingly to different sizings and steal %. Against 3x 40% open we should be defending only something around 20% (which actually is much closer to GTO IMO).
• Silver
Joined: 16.12.2009
New calling range BB vs BU: - JJ-77, AQs-ATs, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, AQo-AJo, KQo=7,69%
3bet/fold range: 22-66,ATo, KTo-KJo, QT-QJo, JTo, 87s-T9s, J9s, Q9s, K9s, A9s = 11.01%
3bet/5betjam range: QQ+ AKo+ = 2,56%

Whole defence range BB vs BU = 22+, A9s+, A5s-A2s, K9s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo =20,97%

This is pretty damn balanced, should be good, right? Anything I missed?
• Bronze
Joined: 29.01.2010
Originally posted by getdotacom
Against 60%+ minraise I think we can profitably defend ~25% from sb and even something like 70% from BB. Some total trash hands like Q4o can be better than -100bb/100 against players who raise extremely wide and then play poorly postflop.
Off the top of my head I thnk we only need to win 22% of the time if we call BB against a minraise, so I like that point. I think I'm defending ~40% from BB...
• Silver
Joined: 16.12.2009
Now, how would a balanced SB range look like? Defence vs BU, that is. Feels harder to get it well balanced.
• Silver
Joined: 16.12.2009
Originally posted by Guthans
Now, how would a balanced SB range look like? Defence vs BU, that is. Feels harder to get it well balanced.
And how would a BB vs SB defend range look? I mean.. how do I make the range? If I'm supposed to defend 27,7% of my range - thats alot of crappy hands?
• Black
Joined: 06.04.2008
Originally posted by Guthans
New calling range BB vs BU: - JJ-77, AQs-ATs, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, AQo-AJo, KQo=7,69%
3bet/fold range: 22-66,ATo, KTo-KJo, QT-QJo, JTo, 87s-T9s, J9s, Q9s, K9s, A9s = 11.01%
3bet/5betjam range: QQ+ AKo+ = 2,56%

Whole defence range BB vs BU = 22+, A9s+, A5s-A2s, K9s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo =20,97%

This is pretty damn balanced, should be good, right? Anything I missed?
This isn't balanced since u're 3betting like 14% of your range, but defending only 2.5 against 4bets. It should be close to 50/50 bluff/value depending on how often u will 5bet jam, min5bet or just call a 4bet. It's hard to have such a range with decent 3bet %, but as I said - we don't need that range unless BU is opening balanced range, but that's maybe 1 player out of 20.

In general I think u'r calling range is way too tight, even against 3x 40% open. I think TT+ should be a 3bet against that, same about AQ. Then hands like KTo,QJo and maybe even T9o is a call. Also we can defend a little bit more SC's by calling and 3bet some Axs, PP's and 1gappers.

It's much easier to defend SB vs BB IMO. We're IP and HU, we can easily defend 33% or maybe even more. I prefer calling a lot instead of 3betting.

SB vs BU is hard to play in many cases. We can call something like AT-AJ,KQ,99-77 and some suited broadways. I don't like calling much wider because we will get squeezed very often. Then 3bet some SC's,PP's and some suited Ax. Definitely we should be defending less here than in BB, maybe even 2 times less.
• Silver
Joined: 16.12.2009
Originally posted by getdotacom
Originally posted by Guthans
New calling range BB vs BU: - JJ-77, AQs-ATs, KTs+, QTs+, JTs, AQo-AJo, KQo=7,69%
3bet/fold range: 22-66,ATo, KTo-KJo, QT-QJo, JTo, 87s-T9s, J9s, Q9s, K9s, A9s = 11.01%
3bet/5betjam range: QQ+ AKo+ = 2,56%

Whole defence range BB vs BU = 22+, A9s+, A5s-A2s, K9s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, ATo+, KTo+, QTo+, JTo =20,97%

This is pretty damn balanced, should be good, right? Anything I missed?
This isn't balanced since u're 3betting like 14% of your range, but defending only 2.5 against 4bets. It should be close to 50/50 bluff/value depending on how often u will 5bet jam, min5bet or just call a 4bet. It's hard to have such a range with decent 3bet %, but as I said - we don't need that range unless BU is opening balanced range, but that's maybe 1 player out of 20.

In general I think u'r calling range is way too tight, even against 3x 40% open. I think TT+ should be a 3bet against that, same about AQ. Then hands like KTo,QJo and maybe even T9o is a call. Also we can defend a little bit more SC's by calling and 3bet some Axs, PP's and 1gappers.

It's much easier to defend SB vs BB IMO. We're IP and HU, we can easily defend 33% or maybe even more. I prefer calling a lot instead of 3betting.

SB vs BU is hard to play in many cases. We can call something like AT-AJ,KQ,99-77 and some suited broadways. I don't like calling much wider because we will get squeezed very often. Then 3bet some SC's,PP's and some suited Ax. Definitely we should be defending less here than in BB, maybe even 2 times less.
Alright, I understand. I balanced it vs the times he'd be calling over 4betting, and my equity against such a range. But I realize that it needs balance before that, and any equity postflop is bonus. However, as you said, I've started 3betting alot to abuse that they don't defend well, so it's supposed to be abit unbalanced at NL25 - thanks for clarifying.

TT+ & AQ 3bet/5b Jam? Isn't that gonna get expensive fast?

Thanks for the help btw.
• Bronze
Joined: 29.01.2010
When we get 4b we need to defend ~40% of our 3b range. So against aggressive opponents I think jamming AQ/TT is ok. Obv if they are 4betting a tight range and never bluffing then its more profitable to fold them...

edit:

btn opens 2.5bb, we 3b 8bb, btn 4bs 20bb:

17.5/(1 + 2.5 + 8 + 17.5) = 0.586

1 - 0.586 = 0.414

so its ~41% but I think if we're calling a 4b then we need to defend more, maybe thats where getdotacom is getting 50/50 from?
• Black
Joined: 06.04.2008
When we get 4b we need to defend ~40% of our 3b range. So against aggressive opponents I think jamming AQ/TT is ok. Obv if they are 4betting a tight range and never bluffing then its more profitable to fold them... edit: btn opens 2.5bb, we 3b 8bb, btn 4bs 20bb: 17.5/(1 + 2.5 + 8 + 17.5) = 0.586 1 - 0.586 = 0.414 so its ~41% but I think if we're calling a 4b then we need to defend more, maybe thats where getdotacom is getting 50/50 from?

Your sizing is pretty big, it's 2.5x, but usually u will see something like 2x-2.2x. And, yeah, u should defend a little bit more when u call 4bets. Also we should take into consideration our value range when we're called. It's maybe not the case when we 5bet jam only some stronger hands, but let's say we were to 5bet jam 22-55. Everything is OK when our opponent 4bets, but when he starts calling a lot we actually can't count these hands as value hands because we will flop very poorly. If we added a bunch of bluffs, we will flop even worse. For these reasons we should have something around 50/50 or maybe even more towards value, depending on our overall range.
• Bronze
Joined: 29.01.2010
Thanks for the explanation!