Skip to forum
Notifications
Clear all

3BP deep stack bluff

7 Posts
3 Users
1 Reactions
465 Views
BunBun00
Joined: 13.09.2023

UTG opens T♣:J♣:J♦:A♥:, SB 3bets, call
240bb eff
9♠:5♠:A♣:, checks through
8♥:, x, UTG Bet100, call
6♦:, x , Bet75
Normally in SRP I would check back turn as I have decent SDV and decent equity, getting x-r would be bad. But vs a 3bettor he's going to have a such a big range advantage, that my TP loses SDV. On the other hand should I really try to bluff a strong range? Although he did check twice so his advantage is not as big.

Anyway I pot turn trying to leverage my stack. OTR I would bet50 for lower straights/bluffs and B100 for nut straights/bluffs. So I made a mistake sizing wise. Although B50 is probably better sizing, considering I don't block any pair straights like :9x::6x:, targeting non straights as I don't think low straights are folding to ever to regardless of sizing. What do you think? too aggressive?


Reply
Quote
6 replies
Coach
Kyyberi
Joined: 09.07.2010

Solver likes to pot-fold on the flop. But versus common SB 3bet ranges, that looks like a trap with AA+fd. Or he has some kind of Axxx that probably is not folding.

I would definitely check back the turn, as you are probably quite ahead or quite behind. But you have a free shot to 6 outer nuts. Not sure why we want to pot, I don't think we get anything better to fold to one bet once he chooses passive line. And AJ is not enough to valuebet imo.

If you do pot the turn, then you have to follow through on the river and hope he can fold his set/2pairs/Axxx.


Reply
Quote
BunBun00
Joined: 13.09.2023

Originally posted by Kyyberi
Solver likes to pot-fold on the flop. But versus common SB 3bet ranges, that looks like a trap with AA+fd. Or he has some kind of Axxx that probably is not folding.

.

Wow, interesting. I would have thought the strategy would be way more passive considering his range advantage. I thought we would check 80%-100% range. Why is solver potting here?

Originally posted by Kyyberi

I would definitely check back the turn, as you are probably quite ahead or quite behind. But you have a free shot to 6 outer nuts. Not sure why we want to pot, I don't think we get anything better to fold to one bet once he chooses passive line. And AJ is not enough to valuebet imo.

.

I figured I'm behind way more often behind than ahead. This is rush/cash, so his range imo is mostly AA,AKK,AQQ,A-rundowns. I lose to all of them. 6 outs isn't really enough to check back with. Also when I block the :Ax: doesn't make it less likely he has :Ax::Ax: and more likely he has :Ax:xxx? By having :Ax: it's 25% less likely he has :Ax::Ax:, it's also less likely he has :Ax:, but still more likely than :Ax::Ax:.

Hindsight, I agree I think check back turn and give up. If he has the perceived tight range, I shouldn't try to bluff him.


Reply
Quote
Coach
Kyyberi
Joined: 09.07.2010

Umm... Any amount of equity is enough to check back. The thing is that when he takes check, check line with Axxx, he probably doesn't fold it to one bet.

Checking back is not giveup. As he haven't bet for 2 streets, there is good chance he will check river and you get to showdown if you miss the river. And you beat some of his hands.

Solver checks only 5% from SB here, which drops to 3% with AAxx or Axxx. Hands like non-hitting double pairs (QQJJ, KKQQ etc) are higher in checking, and they just check-fold. Solver also wants to have pot range, as it's defined in the sim. So it needs to have pot-fold range.

Even solver doesn't like checking in SB's shoes, so in reality I would be really causious when tight 3bet range oop checks Axx flop. It's often either giveup (and they don't understand ranges) or trap.


Reply
Quote
Mascherano95
Joined: 09.10.2010

I would fold against the 3bet, I think it's also a fold from solver perspective even. Anyways, most ranges are too AAxx-heavy so it is very likely this should be a fold pre. (ofc I dont know SB's 3betting range but usually it is too tight).

His check is weird, he should be cbetting a high frequency, this probably means he missed. I would bet vs the missed cbet, we block the Ace and he has virtually no check-shoving range if he sticks to hand-values (only :8x::7x::6x: in :s makes an equitywise solid semi-bluff to be specific lol).

Turn is definitely a Check-back, your SDV that has potential to improve picked up decent draw equity which wants to be realized. The worst thing would be running into 2pairs' shove now, we'd have to fold massive equity.

Well, the river bet is fine I guess. It's a very scary card and the T♣: is better than nothing. We would rather have a :7x:, it be the main blocker but unblocking :s is also nice. I would kinda pot it to make sure he folds, we can move some undecided 2pairs to a fold and it also makes sense cause we'd value-bet straights only which is more top-heavy (-> uncapped and polarized stuff want to size it up).

Edit: If you barrel loose here for whatever reason the 75% sizing is perfectly fine though.


Reply
Quote
Coach
Kyyberi
Joined: 09.07.2010

100bb deep solver seems to mix with call or fold to 3bet, depending a bit on the sim. But 200bb deep IP it turns to a call.


Reply
Quote
Mascherano95
Joined: 09.10.2010

Originally posted by Kyyberi
100bb deep solver seems to mix with call or fold to 3bet, depending a bit on the sim. But 200bb deep IP it turns to a call.

ok it is a call then


Reply
Quote