$10 NLHE 6-max: Extracting Value With Quads in 3B Pot

ConDeck

ConDeck

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 14, 2015
Total posts
973
Chips
0
HH20151004 Klinkenberg #2 - $0.05-$0.10 - USD No Limit Hold'em

pokerstars Zoom Hand #141725598856: Hold'em No Limit ($0.05/$0.10) - 2015/10/04 16:26:25 WET [2015/10/04 11:26:25 ET]

Table 'Klinkenberg' 6-max Seat #1 is the button

Seat 1: <Denis888GR> ($10.07 in chips)
Seat 2: sho4499 ($11.82 in chips)
Seat 3: makicchi ($12.34 in chips)
Seat 4: ConDeck ($18.31 in chips)
Seat 5: KojackOLN ($11.22 in chips)
Seat 6: nickolarse25 ($10.07 in chips)

sho4499: posts small blind $0.05
makicchi: posts big blind $0.10

*** HOLE CARDS ***

Dealt to ConDeck [Tc Th]

ConDeck: raises $0.20 to $0.30
KojackOLN: folds
nickolarse25: folds
<Denis888GR>: raises $0.60 to $0.90
sho4499: folds
makicchi: folds
ConDeck: calls $0.60

*** FLOP *** [6h Td 3h]

ConDeck: checks
<Denis888GR>: bets $0.93
ConDeck: calls $0.93

*** TURN *** [6h Td 3h] [Ts]

ConDeck: checks
<Denis888GR>: checks

*** RIVER *** [6h Td 3h Ts] [8d]

ConDeck: checks
<Denis888GR>: checks

*** SHOW DOWN ***

ConDeck: shows [Tc Th] (four of a kind, Tens)
<Denis888GR>: mucks hand

ConDeck collected $3.64 from pot

*** SUMMARY ***

Total pot $3.81 | Rake $0.17

So obviously I know these spots don't come up that often but when they do maximising value is key and this seems to be a hand type I struggle with according to a review of various quad hands on HM2.

Other than raising the flop to get more value in the middle, which didn't really seem the best play in a 3b pot as it folds out all Ax hands that bet the turn and from the few stats I had on villain he was pretty aggressive, should I be leading this turn and river? I feel like very few tens are in my range here so any over pair bets for value when checked too here along with some Ax bluffs and maybe even underpairs. Same goes for the river, hence the check....

The sick thing is villain had AA, which is why I feel leading turn and river would have been better in this spot but wanted your guys opinion against his entire range. How do you play this hand?
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
Fold or 4-bet preflop. Calling seems pretty bad.
 
skrsh76

skrsh76

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 13, 2013
Total posts
993
Chips
0
C9, are we not set mining? Why 4bet? Appreciate if you can elaborate or refer a link for further read.
 
6

6bet me

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 13, 2015
Total posts
835
Chips
0
I disagree with c9. I think you played perfectly preflop. And if you think that the villain is aggressive, then checking 3 streets is the best approach. Generally I bet the river (since people who have hands hate betting the river themselves, in case they get raised), but if you thought that that the villain was aggressive enough to do that himself, or if you thought that the villain had air, then checking the river is the correct play.
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
Can you elaborate please?
We don't have odds to setmine (general rule of thumb is a stack to pot ratio of 12:1), an average opponent is probably 3-betting around 3-4% in this spot, and we're crushed by that range. We're going to make middle pair a lot with TT, and showing that down OOP is massively unprofitable.

Please fold this. If you really think your opponent is 3-betting the 8-9% required to allow you to continue, then 4-bet and call it off (and put that read in the opening post).
 
Thinker_145

Thinker_145

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Total posts
848
Awards
1
Chips
1
If you really think your opponent is 3-betting the 8-9% required to allow you to continue, then 4-bet and call it off (and put that read in the opening post).
What do you mean by this? If someone is 3 betting that much we should just stack off with TT?



Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 
Figaroo2

Figaroo2

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Total posts
7,363
Awards
16
Chips
13
I'm betting the river here probably around 40% pot. If he is aggressive but checks the turn the 8 on the end changes nothing so he's likely to check again on the end. The cards I'd check to are ones that he might hit or rep like a Q K or A.
Betting small might even get a call from AK on this board and still gives him room to bluff raise if he feels so inclined.
I'm happy to call the 3bet with TT, it's too strong a hand to fold against most button 3bet ranges but not the sort of hand I like to 4 bet as if I get shoved on you are pretty much priced in to call it off which isn't ideal unless the button is a proper 3bet monkey.
Yes we are going to flop a lot of 2nd pair hands but that's the nature of the hand it's always tricky to play TT post flop. Same with JJ are you going to fold jacks as well then C9?
 
S

SenorStacks

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Total posts
19
Chips
0
As played bet river. Pre-flop is fine, NL10 OOP wouldn't 4bet TT

Thing is you will never get max value out of this hand (most likely fold on turn) given the board, therefore I would maybe try a line that makes absolutely no sense in villains eyes, EV-wise would be much better than check or bet river which would be folded. I would donk-bet quite small on turn (20% of pot), when called take a long time on river and make a nonsense big overbet which might be seen as bluff as your line looks stupid and called off with A-high. Granted, chances of success would be small but would only need to work out 1 out of approx. 3 times vs getting a fold on river when betting which I think is possible depending on villain.
 
Last edited:
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
Refer to this chart. JJ, calling is a little better, since you'll make an over pair more often. Not by much though. This is a spot for nitty folds.

3-bet percentage you need to be facing in order to 4-bet/call off
* KK+: Good against any range
* QQ: vs 3% or higher (3% is AK, JJ+, 40 combos total)
* JJ: vs 6.5% or higher
* TT: vs 8.5% or higher
* 99: vs 10.5% or higher
* 88: vs 12.5% or higher
* 77: vs 14% or higher
* AKs: vs 3% or higher (AK, JJ+, 40 combos total)
* AQs: vs 8% or higher
* AJs: vs 13% or higher
* AKo: vs 5% or higher (AK, JJ+, plus 22% bluffs)
* AQo: vs 9% or higher
 
ConDeck

ConDeck

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 14, 2015
Total posts
973
Chips
0
Where did you get this chart?

Also I have 3b % of around 9, which your chart says you shoud be 4b calling off against me with 99+ AQo+ AQs+... This maybe true at higher stakes but while I do have a 4bet bluffing range (blocker combos etc against high %3b) I am rarely jamming where JJ> AQs> are going to have much of an edge. This can be said for the majority of the field I am playing against also. I have to disagree with your chart for 10NL atleast given my experience.

Also I checked my HM2 database. TT is a profitable hand for me... even the times I flat 3b OOP have an overall positive so for now I am not going to consider this a major leak, however I will keep an eye on it, this could just be due to sample size. I do agree with you in principle but heads up I am quite comfortable playing TT and JJ, even out of position and will continue to do so even in 3b pots as long as it is turning me a profit. I am quite happy with these being in my 3 bet flatting range some of the time.
 
Thinker_145

Thinker_145

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Total posts
848
Awards
1
Chips
1
Refer to this chart. JJ, calling is a little better, since you'll make an over pair more often. Not by much though. This is a spot for nitty folds.

3-bet percentage you need to be facing in order to 4-bet/call off
* KK+: Good against any range
* QQ: vs 3% or higher (3% is AK, JJ+, 40 combos total)
* JJ: vs 6.5% or higher
* TT: vs 8.5% or higher
* 99: vs 10.5% or higher
* 88: vs 12.5% or higher
* 77: vs 14% or higher
* AKs: vs 3% or higher (AK, JJ+, 40 combos total)
* AQs: vs 8% or higher
* AJs: vs 13% or higher
* AKo: vs 5% or higher (AK, JJ+, plus 22% bluffs)
* AQo: vs 9% or higher

What about sample size? That's an extremely important thing blindly looking at % can hurt a lot when your opponent just happened to be running a little hot in a few hundred hands AND had the opportunity to 3 bet his monsters most of the time. I am pretty sure 3 bet % takes a really big sample to level out.

And I assume we are talking just 100BB here?

I also believe it's important to have steal 3 bet stat because some players 3 bet much wider when defending a steal but actually be very tight in other scenarios. If the steal 3 bet is significantly higher than 3 bet then you gotta know the total 3 bet stat is inflated and not apply it literally to a non steal scenario.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
Where did you get this chart?
Hold'em Manager, back in 2008. It is the game theory optimal range to 3-bet each hand against.

Also I have 3b % of around 9, which your chart says you shoud be 4b calling off against me with 99+ AQo+ AQs+... This maybe true at higher stakes...
This is a game theory optimal range. It will be profitable no matter what your 5-bet range is. If you 5-bet everything you 3-bet with, we will have an equity edge. If you never shove, you will fold often enough to our 4-bet to profit. You can have no range in between 100% folding and 100% shoving that the 4-bet will not show a profit with.


What about sample size? That's an extremely important thing blindly looking at % can hurt a lot when your opponent just happened to be running a little hot
Sure. If you like, you can read the whole article which I posted up at the top. You also have to adjust for how people 3-bet positionally (hint: they 3-bet you more if you raise on the BTN, less if you raise UTG). The article covers standard 3-bet adjustments for positions.

And I assume we are talking just 100BB here?
Yep. 100 BB assumption.

So yeah, I feel like I post this chart, or links to this article about once a month on this forum. And keep in mind, this is just a game theory optimal range. You could likely profit more by taking an exploitative strategy. But it's a great guideline because you KNOW that decision will be profitable, and your opponent's 5-bet shoving range is very hard to estimate.
 
Thinker_145

Thinker_145

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Total posts
848
Awards
1
Chips
1
This is really helpful or at least I hope it will be lol. I always have trouble playing good LAG players at 50NL and having some blanket rules to play with would certainly make things easier perhaps at the expense of more variance.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 
Thinker_145

Thinker_145

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Total posts
848
Awards
1
Chips
1
But then again things are hardly ever so simple in poker. If we start 4 betting a LAG more often they will eventually take notice. And if they decide to tighten their 3 bet range against our 2 bet then this whole equation goes out of the window.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 
D

DunningKruger

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Total posts
1,030
Chips
0
Meh. Calling pre isn't terrible and certainly I'd be prone to call all kinds of stuff oop playing 10NL lol. Players beating these stakes sufficiently enough might be able to turn a better overall profit using a flat call in this spot than resolving this preflop, but for many players yeah they'd be better off simplifyng their game and avoiding making their life difficult by calling oop with, well, most hands really. Calling 3bets oop in general is a fairly bad leak for a large number of players in uNL games. It's preflop so lean on your HUD as much as you can in spots like this.

As far as hitting quads goes, that's something I need to get better at. Teach me how to hit top set at the very least and maybe I can figure it out from there.
 
vinylspiros

vinylspiros

PIRANHA-------->< (((º>
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Total posts
4,393
Awards
1
Chips
1
interesting chart c9.
 
ConDeck

ConDeck

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 14, 2015
Total posts
973
Chips
0
Hold'em Manager, back in 2008. It is the game theory optimal range to 3-bet each hand against.

This is a game theory optimal range. It will be profitable no matter what your 5-bet range is. If you 5-bet everything you 3-bet with, we will have an equity edge. If you never shove, you will fold often enough to our 4-bet to profit. You can have no range in between 100% folding and 100% shoving that the 4-bet will not show a profit with.
.

Thanks for the article I will read it properly when I get a bit more time. While I have an understanding of Game Theory and its application I would still consider it to be a basic understanding. The bit I am struggling with in concept here is the 4b call off factor.

As an example (let keep it at 10NL and 10bb efffective), I open 99 in the CO for 30c. The SB 3b to $1. He has a 3b% of 10% SB vs CO so according to your chart 4b 99 here to $2.50 is profitable. That I understand as he will fold often enough for this to be profitable and I this is something I would do in this spot. But to me this is a 4b fold spot surely? Or does this make me exploitable in this spot? and if it does, are there really that many players at 10NL exploiting me here? Or that have enough HH with me to notice I 4b fold to often in this spot?

My reasoning for 4b fold is as follows, although he 3b wide I would make the assumption, from my experience at 10NL, he only jams JJ+ AKo AKs (although I think a lot fold JJ here too and some even AK but we will leave them in for analysis) as I have yet to see anyone 5b bluff me at these stakes even if we consider AQ to be a 5b bluff with 2 blockers and some equity when called. We have 33% equity against this range, therefore we need to be getting 2:1 pot odds for this to be profitable, but we have to call off $7.50 more to win $12.60 which is only 1.6:1 so calling off here is a -EV play no? By 4b folding I risk $2.20 to pick up $1.40 so he only has to fold 66% of the time for this to be profitable. With a 3b % of 10 I feel as a general rule we have the 66% fold to 4b here (stats would also help).

I do appreciate your time and input, don't want it to seem like I am outright disagreeing with you... just that I am struggling to see how 4b calling off is the optimal play here.
 
Last edited:
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
It's the game theory optimal play, which will be profitable. 4-bet/fold may be the highest EV line, the most profitable line. But 4-bet/fold could be unprofitable, which 4-bet/call never will be if you're estimating his 3-bet range correctly.

But to know if 4-bet/fold is more profitable, you have to know what their 5-bet range is, and there is a LOT of uncertainty about that. Players snap and decide to fight back with 22, A5, all sorts of hands. At most, in 100-200 hands, you've seen a player 5-bet 1 or 2 times. You can't really be expected to accurately put them on a 5-bet range.
 
ConDeck

ConDeck

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 14, 2015
Total posts
973
Chips
0
Also, due to the defensive nature of a game theory optimal (GTO) play... ie. it is not that which yields the highest EV overall but that which reduces our own exploitivity and yields the highest EV only when our opponent chooses the best possible counter strategy ... should we not be looking to play an optimal exploitative strategy (OES) here rather than standard GTO? Especially at 10NL where, while there are some solid thinking regs, our opponents are rarely going to be adjusting to take the best possible counter strategy? Therefore we should be focussing on an OES strategy taking advantage of the fact that villains are (mostly) folding too much to 4b pre, never 5b bluffing and stacking off less frequently than is optimal?

I hope that made sense
 
ConDeck

ConDeck

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 14, 2015
Total posts
973
Chips
0
It's the game theory optimal play, which will be profitable. 4-bet/fold may be the highest EV line, the most profitable line. But 4-bet/fold could be unprofitable, which 4-bet/call never will be if you're estimating his 3-bet range correctly.

But to know if 4-bet/fold is more profitable, you have to know what their 5-bet range is, and there is a LOT of uncertainty about that. Players snap and decide to fight back with 22, A5, all sorts of hands. At most, in 100-200 hands, you've seen a player 5-bet 1 or 2 times. You can't really be expected to accurately put them on a 5-bet range.

Just seen that you had replied before I posted my last comment.

What you are saying may be true at higher stakes, I cannot comment as I do not have 000's of hands to make such statements. I do at micros however and I can honestly say I have never seen anyone stack of 100bb with A5, 22 etc (I know these are only examples but I mean this sort of range) to a 4b. You get the occasional open jam for 70bb with this hand range etc but this is an entirely different situation. I have genuinely never SEEN a 5b bluff or light stack off so not to say this doesn't happen but I certainly do not think it happens enough to make a difference long term causing 4b folding to be a sub-optimal play. So while you are correct with the ammount of times I see a particular player 5b is minimal... I can make general statements about the entire player pool, especially given that zoom is a tighter game in general and the lack of information works both ways, they also have limited information on you.
 
Last edited:
Thinker_145

Thinker_145

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Total posts
848
Awards
1
Chips
1
It's kinda like set mining with 100BB. As long as you made a sufficient 3 bet it is +EV to never fold but if you have a really good read on a certain player then you don't always need to pay off set miners.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 
ConDeck

ConDeck

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 14, 2015
Total posts
973
Chips
0
It's kinda like set mining with 100BB. As long as you made a sufficient 3 bet it is +EV to never fold but if you have a really good read on a certain player then you don't always need to pay off set miners.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

Not following you here?
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
You're both saying the same things.

And this isn't a high stakes thing. At 25nl, regs will start spazzing when you steal their blind 60% of the time, and 4-betting them a ton. It's good to know what hands you can just 4-bet/call with.

And while you say their just examples, 22 and AQ, that is part of their 5-bet range. When you're 4-betting a lot their range is like AK, JJ+, and some percentage of spazzes. Game flow affects their range a ton. And this is the whole point of playing LAGGY against regs, they adjust poorly.
 
Thinker_145

Thinker_145

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Total posts
848
Awards
1
Chips
1
Not following you here?

I am saying that just because it's +EV to call off in a particular situation doesn't mean that it cant be even more profitable to fold it.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 
Top