Originally Posted by Deceitful_Frank
I would NEVER 3bet with 66.
I think your biggest problem is you're thinking in absolutes. If you want to 3-bet with 76s every time you're given the opportunity, you're probably wrong. What happens when you get 4-bet shoved?
The purpose of 3-betting light isn't to raise a statistic, it's to disguise the strength of your hand in certain situations.
For instance you decide to get risky and 3-bet with a hand like 67s, and the flop comes 458 rainbow and you bet, the guy with TT might look you up because he's got you figured for AKs. Or perhaps it builds the pot on hands where it's likely to hit big on a flop. For instance you're rockin 6c7c and you hit an open-ended combo draw. Well, stacking off here is going to either net you a 3-bet pot or get your stack in with a lot of outs to big hands.
At lower stakes though, the benefits of 3-betting light seem to drop. A lot of the players aren't on the level for it to be a profitable play.
I play at a $2/$3 NL live game and the majority of the players there, I wouldn't consider advanced enough to make this play profitable.
Of course, I'm not a big fan of 3-betting light, unless of course I'm new to the table and in a rush to get my stack up to 200 BBs so I can start hunting the deepstacks.
But as far as a polarized range you 3-bet light with, I don't like it. It's always situation dependant, and with this many hands in your range you're going to be pretty transparant and start getting 4-bet a lot more often, imo, and not by hands you're ahead of.
I would suggest a scientific experiment. The next 100 times you get raised by a villain with LAG stats, 3-bet him light one out of five times (in position). See how villain reacts. Afterward, try it on TAG player (in position). Then, try it on a LAG player out of position, then a TAG player out of position.
As with all experiments, you should keep a record.
If you do the same thing every time in poker, you're going to become too easy to beat once somebody cracks your game.