What do solid TAGs call 3-bets with in position (6max)?

So while we were talking about 3-betting in a HA thread, I figured I'd raise this question. Here goes:

You're playing 6-max, $0.1-$0.25 or $0.25-$0.50 NLHE (since that's about the median stakes I think most players around here play).

A regular player at this limit running 20/14 opens on the button for 4xBB's.

We're in the big blind (assume we have an unknown image), and we 3-bet to 14xBB's. What is our villain flat-calling our raise with?

This is stolen from another forum, so I'm kinda curious what range you put our button-raising villain on when he flat calls.

AK off or QQ-1010...

Depends on stack sizes. He might play that way with a small pair or suited connectors if both of you had enough chips behind that he would be well paid if he hit.

Assuming 100 BB stacks. Der.

c9h13no3 said:

Assuming 100 BB stacks.

Click to expand...

Borderline, then. He would be mathematically incorrect to call with the hands I described, but not by much and might do so anyway if he thought you could be bullied off the pot on a later street.

daxter70 said:

AK off or QQ-1010...

Click to expand...

^ this, I think. Maybe AKs / AQs as well.

OzExorcist said:

^ this, I think. Maybe AKs / AQs as well.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't QQ/AK 4-bet?

c9h13no3 said:

Wouldn't QQ/AK 4-bet?

Click to expand...

QQ for sure, AK depends on particular opponent (I for one like to call a 3-bet with AK IP). But even so that range described above is RIDICULOUSLY tight. Assuming he is a solid TAG, his ATS here has to be at least 25%. So given the range described above, which constitutes 2.3% of hands, plus AA/KK which is another 0.9%, he's only continuing with 3.2% of all hands, which make up a whopping 12.8% of his range. Do you honestly think he's folding 87% of a time to a 3-bet?

Something like this might be a little more realistic :

JJ-88,AQs-AJs,KQs,QJs,JTs,T9s,98s,87s,76s,AQo+,KQo

ATM I'm playing 100nl 6max with stats of 20/18/3, my calling range otb varies a lot depending on how I'm running and villains etc. But it may be something like 88-TT, 89s+ upto KQs.

Most of the time I'm 4 betting JJ+, AK here all day long, maybe AQs. Occasionally I may mix it up and flat with these hands, but very occasionally.

BTW just a caveat, I dont call too much tbh.

dsvw56 said:

JJ-88,AQs-AJs,KQs,QJs,JTs,T9s,98s,87s,76s,AQo+,KQo

Click to expand...

That's a pretty wide range... You think he's calling with that many suited connectors? In my experience a good player isn't calling too many 3-bets.

The point I'm trying to get at is what kind of hands should we be 3-betting preflop against a solid player who steals a regular %.

While hands like KJ/KQ are ahead of their stealing range, they don't fair well against a TAG's calling range.

So should our range be really polarized to monsters & implied odds hands?

On a related note, against light 3-bettors, I've started toying with just calling with AA/KK. The pot is big enough that I can still get it all in on three streets and I'm in position. Very effective against people who 3-bet light but fold to a 4-bet.

F Paulsson said:

On a related note, against light 3-bettors, I've started toying with just calling with AA/KK. The pot is big enough that I can still get it all in on three streets and I'm in position. Very effective against people who 3-bet light but fold to a 4-bet.

Click to expand...

But don't we want to 4-bet bluff light 3-bettors? If we flat call with QQ+ and show it down, that pretty much wrecks any attempts we have at 4-betting as a re-re-steal.

For 10$ NL, I'll admit, it doesn't matter. I've only ever made 1 4-bet bluff the whole time I've been playing those limits (it worked too ). But at higher limits, I could see it being worked into my game more often.

c9h13no3 said:

But don't we want to 4-bet bluff light 3-bettors? If we flat call with QQ+ and show it down, that pretty much wrecks any attempts we have at 4-betting as a re-re-steal.

Click to expand...

Two points:

1. 4-betting light is not really necessary as a strategy up to and including $200NL. I don't know when/if it becomes a big deal, but not at the levels I've played. If people 3-bet you light too often, they're going to get themselves in trouble simply by 3-betting light too often and ending up losing their investment when you have a big hand.

2. In position, I'm going to call a 3-bet more often than I'm going to 4-bet. It's more important for me to retain the possibility of having AA in my range when I call the 3-bet, than it is for me to make sure they know I can have it when I 4-bet.

On top of this, also, lies the fact that pocket aces are rare, getting them on the button even rarer, and someone 3-betting me with them once I open with them on the button rarer still. Although it's happened a few times in the past few weeks, it's not often enough that I think people are going to start noticing too soon.

c9h13no3 said:

That's a pretty wide range... You think he's calling with that many suited connectors? In my experience a good player isn't calling too many 3-bets.

The point I'm trying to get at is what kind of hands should we be 3-betting preflop against a solid player who steals a regular %.

While hands like KJ/KQ are ahead of their stealing range, they don't fair well against a TAG's calling range.

So should our range be really polarized to monsters & implied odds hands?

Click to expand...

It might be a little wide, it was like 3a.m. and I wasn't paying all that much attention. Still, much more realistic than whatever was outlined before.

And yes, your 3-betting range should be polarized. 3-betting medium strength hands essentially turns them in to bluffs.

dsvw56 said:

Still, much more realistic than whatever was outlined before.

Click to expand...

elaborate...

daxter70 said:

elaborate...

Click to expand...

dsvw56 said:

But even so that range described above is RIDICULOUSLY tight. Assuming he is a solid TAG, his ATS here has to be at least 25%. So given the range described above, which constitutes 2.3% of hands, plus AA/KK which is another 0.9%, he's only continuing with 3.2% of all hands, which make up a whopping 12.8% of his range. Do you honestly think he's folding 87% of a time to a 3-bet?

Click to expand...

jhfdjhgf

dsvw56 said:

QQ for sure, AK depends on particular opponent (I for one like to call a 3-bet with AK IP). But even so that range described above is RIDICULOUSLY tight. Assuming he is a solid TAG, his ATS here has to be at least 25%. So given the range described above, which constitutes 2.3% of hands, plus AA/KK which is another 0.9%, he's only continuing with 3.2% of all hands, which make up a whopping 12.8% of his range. Do you honestly think he's folding 87% of a time to a 3-bet?

Something like this might be a little more realistic :

JJ-88,AQs-AJs,KQs,QJs,JTs,T9s,98s,87s,76s,AQo+,KQo

Click to expand...

so a TAG is gonna come in raising with 109s 98 87 and callin a repop with it??

i play tight, and if i raise with QQ here and get reraised, i flat call to see the flop and what it holds..(particularly the A or K huh?)

if i came in for a standard raise with 56s 109s or even QJ/J10 s/o, and get repopped for that amount, u gotta seriously think ur beat and u gotta hit the flop just right, like 25% of the time. to me that would be just spewing off $$ unless the reraiser is just a total maniac and u can outplay him on the flop but most maniacs and CS are calling u down with A hi...oh well

Well considering I play a slightly tighter style than outlined in the OP, I play like 17/14, and my 3-bet calling range on the button is similar to what I outlined. Obviously it varies greatly depending on the opponent. I already admitted what I said before was probably too wide facing an unknown opponent, but my problem with your range is that it constitutes way too little of the total raising range, making a 3-bet virtually un-exploitable.