Gap The Mind - 3-Bet Concepts

  • NL BSS
  • NL BSS
(21 Votes) 15261


Siete777 and Cornholio Bring Your a new series which will bring modern day poker to you with new and modern day no limit concepts.


3bet gap the mind Multicoach preflop series thematic video Theory Video

Comments (46)

newest first
  • Boomer2k10


    Hi Everyone

    Please enjoy the first episode of the new series Gap the Mind - Modern Day No Limit Concepts.

    Any comments please leave them here for the coaches
  • sanja200


  • Siete777


    Njoy the video & feel free to leave feedback, comments etc.! ;)

    Cheers Adil
  • sanja200


    nice vid but nothing new so far :)
  • Siete777


    Hey sanja.

    Thx for the feedback.

    This is a gold series, and especially the first part is only relevant for players that have preflop leaks, in this case playing too tight. Of course this is rather the case for low limit players than midstakes players.

    Still I think even a lot of nl 100 or 200 players dont 3bet >10 %. Here we show and explain why you should 3bet more.

    Beside that the further topics (there are two postflop topics beside the preflop topics here and in the next video) of the series migh be interesting even for advanced members like you. ;)

    Cheers Adil
  • Chessexpert


    Very good video. What I did not understand at 09.:17 was why you add AQ and AT to your range but exclude AJ. Can you elaborate on this?
  • Shakaflaka


    Nice video. It would also be nice to explain how you decide with which hands you 4bet/c.
  • ribpoker


    Very helpful start of the series!
    Question about 58,5%: this is for immediate profit as you mentioned. But, since in most cases of no fold to the 4-bet there will be an all-in situation preflop, it is safe to say, that Villain additionally has an equity in every case, so he'll need considerably less than 58,5% foldequity - or am I wrong with this? Then, 2.41 would be a conservative approach and could easily be rounded up to 2.5, right?
  • DeLau


    Is going broke w AQ/TT standard in CO vs MP for you guys? Haven't seen that happen much at NL100.
  • Lucker9200


    well in order to widen the 3bet bluff range we have to widen the 3bet value range aswell and since most players aren't really calling oop neither shoving hands like JJ,AQ(even QQ,AK) the value range of ours cant really include anything but KK+ in CO,BU,SB,BB vs MP/UTG situation (nl10-nl50)which leaves us without much room to put in many bluffs unless we use an exploitable v/b ratio isnt that the case for the most gold members the video is ment for?
  • LgWz


    I don't understand why you'd have such a wide 5bet value range in this situation (CO vs MP) and no 5bet bluffs at all. With AQ and TT I'd expect to be quite crushed by villain's 4b/c range. Also we need to consider that 3 betting these hands weakens our flatting range.
  • dozeer


    solid content.

    good to remind yourself about the basic frequencies and the theory behind it!
  • Dublimax


    Content is very basic and examples are for mid-stakes players (see shoving ranges).

    I would be careful who the target audience is when making a video!
  • Shevtshenko


    Expected a lot more. What's the last time you got AQ in as a favourite mpvsbu 100+ deep??
  • Siete777


    Thx for the feedback so far!

    @10,15: The video is not about defining our 3bet / broke range, thats a total different topic. Its about defining out 3bet bluff range BASED on our 3bet/broke range.

    I never said we should get in too often AQ vs mp. I agree this is v v unlikely and rarely +EV. I just gave an example of 3bet/5bet ranges compared to the overall 3bet ranges that is the 3bet/5bet range multiplied with the factor. And just to be clear: There are a lot of players where u can 3bet/shove TT or AQ with a positive EV. But I would agree that this is not the case on lower limits which is the main target of this video. So it would have been better to say CO vs BU. But then again, it does not really matter.

    @7: Listen to 9:00. I explain there that I did not include some hands we want to coldcall.

    @12: I agree! Weaking our coldcall range is not rly a big problem, since we dont talk about too many hands that I put into our 3bet range that others might coldcall. So we still have a wide coldcalling range and most importantly: we are ip. ;)

    If you listen to the last part of the video beginning in 12:00, we go into detail about possible adaptions and ways to readapt.

    @8: Do you mean 4bet/call or 3bet/5bet?

    Cheers Adil
  • GiJoe883


    Thank you ....clear...concise and to the point....

    really enjoyed this first vid....

    looking forward to followup vid(s).
  • klabautermann27


    liked the concept, but the broke range you defined should not be a guideline. but you said this in the comments anyway.

    what i missed and i hope to see in future videos:
    - calling 4bets IP
    - small 5betting vs small 4bets
    - you don't have any bluffs in your 5bet range?
    - why do you 3bet Axs instead of Axo if he doesn't call anyway?

    I mean, the biggest problem in my opinion is that your main assumption of wide UTG/MP ranges in todays midstakes games is not true at all in my opinion. Sure, there are some guys who still openraise too much in these positions. But in general I find, that midstakes regulars today don't open wide ranges anymore and I would rather see how you would adapt against that ;-)
  • Siete777


    Thx for the feedback klabautermann27!

    - "why do you 3bet Axs instead of Axo if he doesn't call anyway?"

    its a frequency (and blocker) thing, the hand does not matter too much, I agree. But its easier to explain it that way.

    - "you don't have any bluffs in your 5bet range?"

    You dont need unless you want to 3bet or coldcall way more preflop

    - "what i missed and i hope to see in future videos:
    - calling 4bets IP
    - small 5betting vs small 4bets"

    These are different topics, you will understand that we did not have the time to go further into detail. But I might work on this in future videos if its interesting for you guys.


    Regarding the rest: Plz read comment 16. ;)

    Cheers Adil
  • ribpoker


    Hi Siete,
    may I remind you of my question (#9).
    I didn't get any answer so far...
    Thanks in advance!
  • Siete777


    @9: Thx for the feedback ribpoker.

    He needs 58.5 % FE for immediate profit with a 4bet bluff. This number does not depend on how often he has a hand etc. We just analized the FE he needs with a potential bluff and based our 3bet % to make it impossible for him to 4bet bluff us.

    Also, you said:

    "that Villain additionally has an equity in every case, so he'll need considerably less than 58,5% foldequity - or am I wrong with this? Then, 2.41 would be a conservative approach and could easily be rounded up to 2.5, right?"

    If he would need less than 58 %, the factor would be lower, not higher. ;)

    Cheers Adil
  • ribpoker


    Your so right, of course!
    It would be conservative for Villain not for us (lol). So on the safe side, we could just add a little fewer hands in our 3-bet-bluffing range than we would with 2.4...
  • alterboy


    You should call this video "how to widen your 3 beting range in BTN vs CO".
    Because like every one before said, TT,JJ,AQ are not a good hand to shove preflop vs UTG / MP.

    Even AQ in BTN vs CO is a loose shove. You need to be confront to a 8% 4bet range in CO vs BTN to make a good shove. You should instead 5bet 88+ than AQ.

    So your broking range vs CO can only be TT+, AK range x 2,41, so something around 8,36%. Can be more if you want to broke 88 or 99. But it's a lot better to call for set value than 3bet IP.

    But you don't need to be balanced if the regular don't adapt to it.

    In theory, I think in small stakes et probably even medium stakes, MP vs UTG 3bet / 5bet broke EV+ range is only KK+

    3bet / 5bet vs MP can be QQ+

    and CO totally depending of vilain.

    There is less than 15% of 4bet bluff in my opinion UTG and MP.

    You should better 3bet / fold some value hand if vilain is not too nitty utg ( more than 15% RFI ) hands like : AQo,AJo,KQo and some suited aces. It does work for me. And you can have 6% 3beting range in this position versus UTG and broking only 0,9% , they re not gonna 4bet bluff enough.

    Next things, if you play small stakes, most regular doesn't check the 3bet by position, but the 3bet overall. But the more they can 4bet, the less you have to polarize.

    It is better to broke KK+ vs UTG than trying to get an EV+ 5bet shove with AKo because you re 3beting a lot.

    In fact, if you don't 3bet more than 9% vs UTG, most regular won't respond enough to it.

    Now vs CO, you can of course 3bet more in BTN vs CO and try to get action, and I think it is the only good point here. But don't overstimate AQ vs a polarized 4bet range. If you get some fold, it's good. But you will be crushed by TT+, AK calling range. Even by AQs,TT+.
  • Siete777


    @23, alterboy: Plz read the further comments, I already commented a few times that the example does not rly matter. Its about the concept behind it.

    Cheers Adil
  • alterboy



    How many bluff vilain should have in his 4beting range to make have us a balanced 3bet range ? 20% ? 30% ? 40% ?
  • Benzodiazepin


    obv we need to balance our range vs unknown frequencies. if we would know his 4bet range, there would be no need to have a balanced 3betting range (exept the case his range is also perfectly balanced) since we should rather exploit his range by in-/decreasing our oen frequencies properly.
  • Farmarchist


    Really really good video guys! Very clear, good quality.
  • MiracleRiver


    I think I'm missing something in the basic calculation. Can you please explain:

    "Villain openraises 3BB - Hero 3bets 9BB - Villain 4bets 22BB".

    "Villain invests 19BB to win 13.5BB"

    I'm assuming your BB is twice the big blind.

    I just don't get the basic calculation: How has the Villain invested 19BB to win 13.5BB? i.e.: how to you get to 19BB and 13.5BB exactly?

  • Siete777


    @28, miracleRiver:

    Check minute 3:00 again. 1 BB is one big blind.

    19 / (19 + 13.5) = 0.585 = 58.5 % needed FE für immediate profit

    Cheers Adil
  • MiracleRiver


    Thanks Adil. But I still don't understand. My questions are not about the % calculation. Rather they are much more simple:

    Q: How did you calculate that the Villain has invested 19BB? How did you arrive at this figure?

    Has not the Villain invested 3BB + 22BB = 25BB?

    Also note that in your video you use the phrase "big bets". A big bet is TWO times the size of the big blind. You should be just saying "big blind". Generally, in poker notation, "BB" is a big bet, and "bb" is a big blind. They are different. Perhaps it is just your English :-)

    Q: How did you calculate that the Villain could win 13.5bb? Is it: 0.5sb + 1bb + 3bb (Villain's bet) + 9bb (Hero's bet) = 13.5bb?

    Thanks for you help again - you video is great; but I would really like to understand it 100%.
  • Siete777


    @30, miracleRiver

    We always said big blinds, not big bets. always used BB, thats we used it in the powerpoints as well. In NL BB are usually big blinds since big bets only exist in FL.

    "Has not the Villain invested 3BB + 22BB = 25BB?"

    -> no, he 4bets to 22b, whih are 19 bb more.

  • DragotoiuRobert


    Very nice video guys, looking forward for the next parts !
  • MiracleRiver


    OK - I understand your notation now. I need to start with your beginner videos as I am new to the site!!

    But you DO say "big bets" on the video at around 4:16, and not "big blinds" :-) It's that what confused me. Have a listen.
  • Siete777


    haha, true - Sorry! That was cornholio, ill punch him for that!
  • MiracleRiver


    I least I was REALLY listening and watching your great video! Attention to detail is something you need in Poker ;-)
  • Siete777


    I agree: respect ;)

    May you have a lot of miracle rivers, u derserve it!

    Cheers mate
  • MiracleRiver


    We will all have the same number of miracle rivers over 1,000,000 hands. That is the brutal truth :-) But yes, I would like mine to be statistically weighted to the front-end if you can arrange that.
  • Cornholio


    Thank you for the Feedback!

    #33: Since my roots are FL I might say Big bet in this series sometimes by accident, i always mean big blind then.:>
  • MiracleRiver


    Cornholio: I forgive you :-) And I hope that Siete777 did not punch you too hard :-)
  • Cornholio


    He is smaller and weaker than me, so no. :)
  • navthunder3


    a great video i need to study it more.thx
  • EverSteel


    Hello Siete777 and Cornholio,
    a couple questions if you might:

    1. Why do you choose a 3bet size such as it's not exploitable by 4bets instead of using 5bets and exploiting fold to 5bet?
    2. If we consider your example, it turns out that, let's say, our 3bet range is 11.3% and our 3bet/shove range is 4.7%. Therefore the easiest adaptions for an opponent is to always 4bet. 4bet/fold is 0 EV for him, he has to 4bet/call considering the odds and hand equity. What's going on here?
  • martijnde666


    Great vid, just what is was lookig for :) gonna apply this in my 25nl game ;)
  • AggroNitt


    In dem Video "Constructing preflop Ranges" wird eine andere Formel nahe gelegt. In dem Video wird angeraten insg. 25-35% von V. openraising Range zu 3betten und die Range so zu konstruieren, dass der %Anteil der Bluffs in der 3Bet Range dem Ft3bet Wert von V entsprechen sollte.
    Sehe ich das richtig, dass ich im umkehr schluss dann auch mit 10-15% von V. openraising Range bereit sein soltle broke zu gehen, damit ich nicht durch loose 4bets exploited werden kann?
  • Siete777



    Thx for the questions and sorry for the late reply.

    @ EverSteel: thats exactly the point. We WANT to 3bet him so often, that he cant exploit us with 4bet bluffs. A 4bet bluffs is 0ev, but hes not making money with it in the long run. But imagine he 4bet bluffs too often (well tighten up a bit then) or does not 4bet us enough. We do make money then!

    Next questions was unfortunately in German. Next time English plz since this is an english video!

    @ AggroNitt: In erster Linie ist das eine Hilfestellung, wenn villain gute (!) frequenzen hat hinsichtlich seiner 4bet bluffs. Du erhöhst deinen 3bet wert, ohne, dass er das exploiten kann durch looseres 4betten. Allerdings kannst du natürlich mehr 3betten, wenn villain zuviel foldet. Als Exploit ist das so lange max. EV, wie villain eben nicht adaptet. Den Vgl. zum von dir präsentierten Konzept kann ich nur dann akkurat durchführen, wenn du mir videolink und Minute schickst.

    Cheers Adil
  • javieralberto


    Siete como respondiste en aleman te voy a hacer la pregunta en español entonces (it is a joke xD)

    Please pay attention if my math is ok. Assuming that the villain decide open raise from mp 19% and he decide to 4b bluff us 2.7% and 4b call JJ+,AK for not being explotaible folding too much (19+0.3=> 5.7 - 3(JJ+,AK)= 2.7%).
    66% of the times we won 9bb (OR fold and bu,sb,bb fold).
    the half times (near 50%) we shove and he fold our EV bb is arround 15bb --> (22+9+1.5)*0.47. The other half he 4b call and we have 43% with TT+,AQ so we lost 27(91*0.57*0.53).
    Ev overall=0.66*9+0.34*(0.47*15-0.53*27)=3.5bb (?)
    If this is true is very interesting because I don´t see people nl200 4b more than 2.7 vs co 3b for bluff
  • Siete777


    Hey Javier.

    Nice Joke. :p

    I agree with what you said. Most people dont adapt well even to higher 3bets. The moment when they begin 3betting too much or not 3betting enough they begin to lose money. Putting the pressure on them does bring EV in the long run. And I did not even talk about inducing tilt or lighter 4bet/calling as an adaption which also creates EV.

    Regards Adil