theory: fix this player

below is a basic outline for a player.
fix him, find his leaks, ask questions as to why he plays this way and cooperate to make the best player possible out of him.
I hope everyone participates


a play style:

opening ranges:
Utg: 22+,ATs+,KQs,QJs,ATo+,KQo
MP: 22+,A2s+,KTs+,QTs+,JTs,T9s,98s,ATo+,KTo+,QJo
CO: 22+,A2s+,K9s+,Q8s+,J8s+,T8s+,97s+,86s+,76s,65s,54s ,A2o+,K9o+,QJo
BTN: ATC

3bet range:
vs UTG and MP: QQ+,AKs,75s,65s,76s,64s,53s,AKo (4.5%,2.5% value, 2% bluff)
vs every other position: TT+,ATs+,KJs+,AJo+,K

note: 3bet range vs UTG and MP is polarized while vs all other positions it is merged.

4bet continuation range vs UTG and MP- AA,KK
4bet continuation range vs all other positions- QQ+, AKo, AQs+Qo

Stipulations:
1) when 1 or more fish in the blinds assume every position is the next. As such UTG becomes MP and MP becomes CO etc.
2) when 1 or more nits are in the blinds CO= BTN.



postflop:

1) anything under 1 Pair and above BDFD+ 2Over shall be viewed as a semi bluff, anything under bdfd + Two overs is viewed as complete bluff.

2) Bet sizing will depend on villain with two considerations:
a) if fish then: value bets will be 75%, semi bluffs 65% and bluffs 60%. (relative to pot)
b) if reg then: based on flop texture, 60% dry, 80% wet.

3) bluffs/semi and value will all be 3 barelled.

4) b\f all bluffs and semi

5) 1 exception is AxXx FD that will be 3bet shove vs raise

6) When calling pre and facing Cbet on flop always raise TP2ndK\Nfd\ or oesd + FD .

7)Always call 1 street with two overs.

8) when not PFR and facing a c\r always min+3bb 3bet\fold unless shoved on once by villain.

9) A 3bet( when pfr) post flop will be called or raised with at least 2p+

10) stipulations for c\f:
a. when oop: PP with 2 overs or two cards with two overs
b. when IP: with a pp with 3 overs or two cards with three overs.

All questions and comments are welcome.

note that this players views anything that is not a made hand a semi bluff, also note that the only none made hands this villain will stack off with is AxXx NFD. correct? incorrect?

UTG looks pretty standard though in MP I think any suited ace is a little loose.

I would definately tighten up those mediocre suited queens, jacks and ace-rags from the CO. IMO a lot of guys play too loosely from the CO.

ATC from the button is just ridiculous.

He should polarise his 3bets IP vs the CO too IMO but I like 3betting just for value when OOP.

My 4bet strategy is somewhat incomplete thus far so...

My postflop strategy is so situation dependent that I won't comment.

Recently I have started to use VPIP and PFR over a hundred hands or so to estimated villians 3bet and fold to 3bet tendancies and adjust my ranges accordingly. This is useful when you have limited history and are in a 3bet pot. Perhaps you could even 3bet with 22-55 vs a very tight player whose fold to 3bet is likely to converge to 85%+... if only you had a couple thousand hands on him!

not sure how you can just give a polarised and merged range just because of the position the person opens in, it really depends on the player, right?

@decietful please comment mainly on the player and exactly how you would change him. once you start with sentences such as: "oh I do this and that." it really derails the conversation because naturally people are more interested in you than they are in this fantasy player.

also please insert your own MP, CO, and BTN ranges as you disagree with the above with an explanation for why you think they would be more optimal and vs who.

@bgomez: UTG and MP ranges are generally far tighter than CO and BTN, as such, people are far less likely to err to the side of calling 3bets IP or OOP and make 3betting a merged range rather pointless where you can get much more value flating KJs.
Its not rare for someone not to know what to do in the CO with AJo when faced with a 3bet, UTG its pretty cut and dry for most.

please post corrections where you see fit.

I think not.

well... in the blinds vs a steal attempt a merged range is definately best as villians are FAR less likely to fold given that they have position, plus the know that you know they could be stealing. IMO re-stealing a polarized range is big leak. I have found these guys only fold about 50% of the time.

Now if the open has come from UTG or MP, or if villian is isolating a limper or two then a polarized range could be best though I have not thought about this too much.

In general I don't think you can go far wrong with a merged 3bet range OOP.

LOL, but then you are dipping your toes in to 25NL and I am seriously considering dropping back to 5 for a month or two so what do I know!

You say how "oh I do this and that." derails the conversation yet you want my ranges in EP, MP CO and OTB. forgive me but it seems you are contradicting yourself somewhat!

I think I already gave my alterations for CO and MP, I prefer to 3bet with small suited aces as if you open with them in earlier position I feel the hands that call you often dominate you and you are not going to hit 8 or 9 outer draws that often.

I would choose a standard 30-35% range to open from the button and adjust it to best suit those you have to left to exploit their weaknessess. LOL there are so many dynamics I could be here all night listing them.

Also you need to a strategy to open up when the table becomes 5 or 4 handed. Most players have no clue how to adjust their play in these situations giving you ample opportunities to profit.

I think you have got this backwards. When restealing we should be doing so with a polarised range. This way we are oop with either a monster or a pure bluff and it is far easier to play. When IP however we can 3 bet with a merged range and we have initiative and position, making a medium strength hand easier to play.

Perhaps...

Though we don't need to be in the pot with a monster or nothing, A half decent hand all the time will do very nicely when he is opening 30% of hands and staying in with half of them!

No.

So you think it is easier to play medium strength hands oop?

What am I actually saying no to?

Not sure... that we shouldn't 3bet IP with a merged range? why not?

- 6 max or FR?

- What play level? There's not much point worrying about defining a 3 bet/4 bet range at 0.01/0.02

- even after above, opponent and table reads count are more important than all the details you've listed, imo. Or are you trying to program a bot?

I think its well known that a polarised range IP is best against most villians.

It really depends on the villian but your default should definately be polarised untill you have enough history to be sure how he responds to being 3betted.

Also, IMO the later position you are in, the more polarised it should be. If I 3bet a guy with position and I myself am only in MP then its pretty much just for value. QQ+, AK, AKs or perhaps JJ if his overall fold to 3bet is low or I have reason to believe it could be low (his VPIP is high)

I think we are talking 6max here... 5-25NL

Of course. Though I generally start witha standard default play and then use stats, reads dynamics, stack sizes, table image etc to make subtle adjustments to ranges, plays etc.

I guess it just depends

You think it is well known that a polarized range IP is best so that's what you think is best to? Why is it best?

When we 3 bet with a polarized range IP we are giving up any chance of taking a hand to showdown in a medium sized pot. We are either getting stacks in or giving up on our hand which is a bad thing as being IP gives us so much more control over the way the hand plays out and the size of the pot.

When we 3 bet with a polarized range oop we can either c bet and hope to get stacks in with our good hand or we can just check/fold the flop as we made sure that our 3 bet bluff would have been outright profitable in this pot against this player...

@NineLions: i am not programming a bot, this is supposed to be an excercise in thinking, for myself and everyone who wishes to join in.

often people take excercizes the wrong way and its a little saddening. No, one has offered a real correction so far except for decietful who stated that prf ranges should be tightened.

Also i agree with opponenet and table reads however I think a basic understanding from which to branch off is very important. I would be more than happy for everyone to start making stipulations to this player so he knows how to react to a nit, a lag, etc.
if we achieve through this excercize the optimal player how awesome would it be?

for example, on the subject of 3betting:
remove half of the bluff range vs someone with less than 10 pfr.
that would be a great addition possibly.
That's what i was hoping for.

on a last note this is completely irrelevant probably below 50nl, maybe for 25nl.

You still need to define the level of competition, imo. I've got hands at $2 to $100 tables in the last year and I don't use the same hand range or plays at different levels.

Its best to 3bet a polarised range IP because people only tend have much stronger holdings when they call or 4bet when OOP.

You want to 3bet with strong value hands that do well vs the hands that they will call you with and these hands must not easily be dominated so there might be a cut off at say QQ-JJ or AKo,AQs... again depending on villian. You also include a dynamic range of semi bluff hands such as connectors or small PPs that either whiff and can be mucked without too many difficult decisions or hit mosters or big draws you can play fast and capitalise on with fold equity.

If villian opens wiht a raise from EP you can 3bet him with 76s and if his fold to 3bet % is high enough you can make instant profit right there even if you auto fold if he calls or 4bets you. Then every once in a while you can hit a moster hand that won't be dominated my the strong hole cards he is still in with.

No!

This is a tight player. Tight players tend to fold more to 3bets so you should INCREASE your semibluff not reduce them!

Like this...

http://www.cardschat.com/f46/memorable-hand-193058/ (http://www.cardschat.com/f46/memorable-hand-193058/)

Stu feels I didnt play this hand too well but it illistrates the point and I feel the principle behind my initial 3bet was sound.

Responses in bold

Like most things in poker I guess it depends. We should not be 3 betting a merged range at all against a very tight continuing range as we will often be dominated and find ourselves in reverse implied odds situations. We should however be 3 betting a merged range IP against a looser continuing range, this way we have control of the pot and can continue with a smaller pot when we hit our hand.

I am still not sure why you would want to 3 bet a merged range oop though as this puts us in difficult spots with much less control of the pot...

I would think you generally don't want to 3bet a merged range regardless of position. You wind up sacrificing much of the value in the middle-strength hands by 3betting them.

So...I guess I would suggest OP player just goes with a polarized 3bet range in all situations. The overall 3bet value should increase somewhat against CO/BTN ranges (like 7% of hands instead of 4.5% against UTG/MP).

I probably drop QJs from UTG range and possibly KQo/ATo as well. At least, assuming this is a more micro-stakes profile. If it's a higher stakes profile I would replace them with SCs to begin polarizing the UTG open range.

I also really don't like 3 barreling all bluffs/semis that don't get played back at. However, I can't think of a decent 'general metric' by which to reduce the number of barrels fired as it's so situation dependent.

That is all for now (I need to stop tinkering around on the interwebs and actually play today).

Wheeeeee. Good thread.