sup everyone, im new here and kinda new to online poker so i might say a lotta knewbish stuff.
when i first starting playing online i did the critical and common mistake of playing the same stakes as live, and it really didnt end well.
one of the most obvious mistakes i made, i cant believe i was profittable in live, was not adjusting my played hands to my position. the 2nd mistake, after studying the link between position and hand strength was studying opening hand charts and realising that they dont immediately translate into calling ranges. i wud only 3bet premiums too.
anyway, now im trying to get my head around 3bet ranges and while doing a little bit of research came across gto. the example says that if you bet pot and the opponent folds more than half the time you show profit.
but then when i thought about it in a 3betting scenario i had some ideas but i think i might be getting confused. i think 70% fold is an average fold to 3bet stat (again im kinda new so maybe this is wrong).
so if u are playing 5c/10c, a dude opens in early mid position to 30c and you 3bet to 90c and he folds 70%, you are risking 90c to win 45c. you only need folds 2/3 of the time. so wouldnt 3betting his entire range be profitable.
of course i dont do this, but its obviously wrong, but looking at the stats i cant see how.
i was thinking about a good value 3betting range as being opponent's fold percentage to 3bet times their pfr. so if someone folds to 3bet 30% and has a pfr of 40% in a position, i could raise the top 12%. he would call or rr with 28%. but thats only against a loose pfr.
i read a short guide by sauce (i think) that said 3bet a players top 50%. which is a lot. but that was back when huds didnt show 3b%.
its a really confusing concept, sometimes i think that 3b with a 29% range vs a 30% range is theoretically profitable. that can't be right.
also what about 3bet bluffing. i read one guy saying that you should 3bet bluff with hands just under your calling range. but i wouldnt like to 3bet a hand like qjo when i could easily be dominated. in harrington's book he says you should 3b bluff with hands with potential, like medium sc, pairs and suited aces, which i like the idea of. but then there would be a big range between ur 3b bluff range and call range. i once saw that small italian pro (forgot his name) reraising with 34s. i really like the idea of that. really disguised. i was also thinking that you could easily vary your 3bet bluff range looking at the suits. like i cud 3bet 98s-54s only if they were clubs or black or something. that way you could show up with a big range, but systematically limit the number of 3bet bluffs.
what do you guys think?
tldr; im a noob, take my money