$4 NLHE Full Ring: 3B from SB vs Button Steal?

AugustWest

AugustWest

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Total posts
608
Awards
1
Chips
1
Villian Stats (VPIP/PFR/AF): 23/17/3

Button Steal stats were 83%[6].

1} Was the "resteal" ok?
Not sure what range to put them on, but figured it was kinda wide at first, so 3B..
2nd barrel was probably not a good idea....


Merge $4.00 No Limit Hold'em - 7 players

UTG+1: $4.29
MP: $3.82
CO: $5.95
BTN: $9.49
Hero (SB): $4.36
BB: $2.14
UTG: $9.82

Pre Flop: ($0.06) Hero is SB with T A
4 folds, BTN raises to $0.12, Hero raises to $0.32, 1 fold, BTN calls $0.20

Flop: ($0.68) 9 9 5 (2 players)
Hero bets $0.34, BTN calls $0.34

Turn: ($1.36) K (2 players)
Hero bets $0.68, BTN calls $0.68

River: ($2.72) 5 (2 players)
Hero checks, BTN bets $8.15, Hero folds

Final Pot: $2.72
(Rake: $0.13)
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
I'm with baudib, just call preflop.

Also, I don't like c-betting & barreling this board. There are just a ton of pairs in his calling range, and they're not giving up to two barrels on this board. His floats get there on the turn. You've bluffed at the pot twice (preflop, flop c-bet) and he's essentially told you he has something. Continuing to throw money at the pot is probably a losing option.
 
AugustWest

AugustWest

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Total posts
608
Awards
1
Chips
1
Thanks guys. I'm always c-betting too much these days.......
 
remus_ny

remus_ny

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Total posts
153
Chips
0
just flat pre. bad cbet, bad turn bet.
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
I'm fine with betting flop and turn.

3-betting pre is bad because you're taking one of the best hands in your calling range and turning it into a bluff.
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
3-betting pre is bad because you're taking one of the best hands in your calling range and turning it into a bluff.
FWIW, this is a non-reason for calling pre. But it's par for the course for Baudib to provide bizarre balance & "your range" oriented advice. Why do we even have to have a calling range? There are TONS of situations in poker where you have ZERO calling range (think tournaments). Saying "oh, this is one of the best hands we call with, so we shouldn't 3-bet" makes no sense. In fact, if your opponent was going to being calling 3-bets a huge amount, this is EXACTLY the type of hand you'd want to add to your 3-bet range (well, maybe more AQ/KQ type stuff, but ATs is close & fine if villain is calling 3-bets with JTs and QJ). We just don't have the reads for that type of play here.

You don't 3-bet because this hand is crushed in flop playablility (the equity you have when you get all in on the flop) by the range of hands that play 3-bet pots. You're either out kicked when you flop and ace, or you stack off to an overpair when you flop a T. The suitedness of the hand also lends to calling, because you can hit more flops & give up less to his c-bets.

I'm just so annoyed by reggy people like Acky (he does this all the time, in addition to other logic sins), baudib giving advice like this.
 
Deco

Deco

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 7, 2009
Total posts
2,544
Chips
0
Why do we even have to have a calling range?

Villain needs both us and the SB to fold 81% of the time to make a profit with any two cards and zero equity, villain having zero equity is never the case so to stop him making money from us and to exploit a wide stealing frequency we must defend something like 30% of hands.

We cannot just 3bet 30%, even against morons with huge F3B%s the highest I'll go is 20%, against someone who will adjust. This figure becomes even more unreasonable when villain min raises and he only need us to fold 71% of the time and my very conservative knocking off of 10% to account for his non-zero equity needs us defending 40%. Not to mention flatting becomes less expensive whilst 3betting lays us the same odds when min raised.

The reason we flat stronger hands than we 3bet bluff is because as long as we're not against a fish we like to keep our 3betting range polarized, folding ATs to a 4bet is a tragedy, folding A8o I couldn't care less.
The same applies to our 4bet/3betflatting ranges. You wouldn't 4bet JTs vs a light 3better.

Saying "oh, this is one of the best hands we call with, so we shouldn't 3-bet" makes no sense. In fact, if your opponent was going to being calling 3-bets a huge amount, this is EXACTLY the type of hand you'd want to add to your 3-bet range (well, maybe more AQ/KQ type stuff, but ATs is close & fine if villain is calling 3-bets with JTs and QJ). We just don't have the reads for that type of play here.

Your using ranges here. In order of strength are hands are:

3bet (value) -> Flat -> 3bet (bluff).

If villain F3B is high I agree and I move it up to my 3bet value range but as you said we do not have the reads so I knock it back to my flatting range.
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
We cannot just 3bet 30%, even against morons with huge F3B%s the highest I'll go is 20%, against someone who will adjust.
All the other stuff you said was painfully obvious, so I'll just address this point.

You have arbitrarily decided to draw that line at 20% for the people who fold the most. And haven't really given a reason for why it should be 10%, 20%, 0%, whatever.

What I'm getting at isn't a poker thing, it's a debate/logic thing. It's like someone asking "why does my drink get cold when you put ice in it" and you responding with "the ice removes heat from the drink, duh". Its a non-explanation.

Essentially, the opening post asked "Why can't I 3-bet ATs from the blinds?" And Baudib responded with "Because we call with it." It's not a reason for calling, 3-betting, or anything really.

What you need to provide the OP with is a real reason for saying "Oh, we can 3-bet AQ for value, but everything else isn't good enough against this villain". And that reason pertains to flop equity in 3-bet pots, ect. ect.

I might be crazy in many other ways, and I might've spent too many years on debate team. I usually don't type out long responses either, because I'm usually on my tablet. So I probably don't explain myself as much as I should anymore. So this may just be me hastily writing things. But yeah, I'd like to see better advice given is what I guess I'm getting at.
 
Deco

Deco

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 7, 2009
Total posts
2,544
Chips
0
Well hopefully for OP my explanation will have expanded on what baudi was saying.

You have arbitrarily decided to draw that line at 20% for the people who fold the most. And haven't really given a reason for why it should be 10%, 20%, 0%, whatever.

Honestly I draw it here because players better than myself draw it here or usually less. I'd be open to the idea of 3betting 30%-100% of hands if someone proved it worked I've yet to see a winning reg with these sort of figures vs a button open even if they would be deflated somewhat by not always being against players who fold too much.

I mean it when I say I'm open to the idea as the 63% fold rate we need to make a profit from any two cards isn't a big ask but again it's simply not done and there must be a rational for this. Although if I were to do something like this I'd still keep a flatting range and merely take the top of my folding range and 3bet it.
 
Deco

Deco

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 7, 2009
Total posts
2,544
Chips
0
There was an old HEM article where they datamined the win rates of a large sample of players. The 3betting results did not appear to favour large 3betting figures even if the top range doesn't come close to the numbers we speak of here.

c75fc50fcacb0198323081d4c55c328e.png


The sample is out of date but I'd imagine in todays games 3betting a super wide range would be less profitable if anything as people 4bet much wider now than then.
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
First, my "why do you need a calling range" was meant to get baudib to think about his advice some. But this is fun, so let's keep going.
There was an old HEM article where they datamined the win rates of a large sample of players. The 3betting results did not appear to favour large 3betting figures even if the top range doesn't come close to the numbers we speak of here.

c75fc50fcacb0198323081d4c55c328e.png


The sample is out of date but I'd imagine in todays games 3betting a super wide range would be less profitable if anything as people 4bet much wider now than then.
Clearly you and I are getting different conclusions from this data set. I see:

1) This overall 3bet rate may not apply to steal situations. Typically, 3-bet rates when facing a btn open are 1.5x a normal preflop rate. So if we convert these to steal situations, the highest WR category is from 7.8-9.3%.

2) The win rates remain about the same above 5.2%. I think the real takeaway from that data set is that fish are passive preflop, and that's as far as I'm willing to go.

3) "This hand is in our 3-bet range because it's profitable on average" is still not an explanation. Knowing flop equity, how often you're dominated, how often you'll be able to continue on flops, ect are the underlying reasons for a hand's profitability in a 3-bet (or raised) pot. That's the underlying issue. We're trying to teach new players to play, so they would be best served by knowing why ATs or KJo is a bad hand to three bet an unknown at 4nl with. Rather than just saying "it's the best hand we call with" or "we need to be 3-betting 6% to be in the profitable group".
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
Agree here though, seems a no brainer to cbet the flop and barrel the nut best turn card, well played.
Why is it a no-brainer to barrel this turn? Villain's floats got there, and I doubt he folds QQ-TT to a 2nd barrel. We get like AQ and maybe 88 to fold.

Assuming his non-float range on the turn is: {88-QQ, 25 combos}
And we'll say he floats AK & AQ equally {32 combos}.

If he folds AQ and 88 (half the time), then he folds 19 out of 57 combos. 33%. If he never folds like most 4NL players do, or spazzes over your turn bet with AQ once in a while then we're in negative EV territory.

Clearly the turn barrel is borderline at best, no?
 
acky100

acky100

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Total posts
3,523
Chips
0
UGH i wrote an essay but when i pressed reply i was logged out.

short version:

- flop misses both of our ranges, but our range is quite a bit stronger here so by default im gonna consider betting more often

- half pot cbet on flop has to work 1/3 of the time, villain can fold this much quite easily if he continues with all pairs but folds some of the big cards he calls pre with, i still said he'd float with some big aces (i gave him a reggy range of big suited cards and most pairs but excluded 22-44 and some SC'ers which people do call a lot, and would help my case. I also included some obvious KQo,AQo stuff)

- villain will 4bet QQ+ and AK enough that AK should really be massively discounted imo, villain has reggy stats, no way im giving that 16 or even 8 combos.

- without equity we need 1/3 folds, we have 6 overs to top pair to bail us out and can class cards like J,Q,K as outs most of the time as it's pretty bad for someone to call a lot of them pocket pairs to a second barrel on them cards (the K in particular only hits his range like 6% or something when i worked it out, the more floaty is the more wary i'd be of a Q though but probably still firing it just because of all them pairs and i still have equity)

something like that
 
Deco

Deco

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 7, 2009
Total posts
2,544
Chips
0
First, my "why do you need a calling range" was meant to get baudib to think about his advice some. But this is fun, so let's keep going.Clearly you and I are getting different conclusions from this data set. I see:

1) This overall 3bet rate may not apply to steal situations. Typically, 3-bet rates when facing a btn open are 1.5x a normal preflop rate. So if we convert these to steal situations, the highest WR category is from 7.8-9.3%.

2) The win rates remain about the same above 5.2%. I think the real takeaway from that data set is that fish are passive preflop, and that's as far as I'm willing to go.

3) "This hand is in our 3-bet range because it's profitable on average" is still not an explanation. Knowing flop equity, how often you're dominated, how often you'll be able to continue on flops, ect are the underlying reasons for a hand's profitability in a 3-bet (or raised) pot. That's the underlying issue. We're trying to teach new players to play, so they would be best served by knowing why ATs or KJo is a bad hand to three bet an unknown at 4nl with. Rather than just saying "it's the best hand we call with" or "we need to be 3-betting 6% to be in the profitable group".

The hands were just to show that super high 3bets %s are unlikely to be money printers because if they were we'd see a clear trend when looking at reltaivly tiny 3bet%s. When 30% 3bet%s are no longer a great idea we need a flatting range.

I get what your saying in terms of describing preflop ranges to beginners but people rarely post specificly asking for preflop advise, it's just something that comes up on many many hands so it's reasonable to not give a full explanation of preflop ranges each time or I'd be typing my preflop essays on a daily basis if not more.

Now if someone posted specificly on a preflop spot then I'd agree a detailed preflop reply is necessary.
 
c9h13no3

c9h13no3

Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Total posts
8,819
Chips
0
UGH i wrote an essay but when i pressed reply i was logged out.

short version:

- flop misses both of our ranges, but our range is quite a bit stronger here so by default im gonna consider betting more often

- half pot cbet on flop has to work 1/3 of the time, villain can fold this much quite easily if he continues with all pairs but folds some of the big cards he calls pre with, i still said he'd float with some big aces (i gave him a reggy range of big suited cards and most pairs but excluded 22-44 and some SC'ers which people do call a lot, and would help my case. I also included some obvious KQo,AQo stuff)

- villain will 4bet QQ+ and AK enough that AK should really be massively discounted imo, villain has reggy stats, no way im giving that 16 or even 8 combos.

- without equity we need 1/3 folds, we have 6 overs to top pair to bail us out and can class cards like J,Q,K as outs most of the time as it's pretty bad for someone to call a lot of them pocket pairs to a second barrel on them cards (the K in particular only hits his range like 6% or something when i worked it out, the more floaty is the more wary i'd be of a Q though but probably still firing it just because of all them pairs and i still have equity)

something like that
Maybe the bad regs are better at 4NL these days, but I don't think we can discount QQ+/AK that much and then add QJs type hands as well. Plus, he likely doesn't float the worse QJ stuff, so they'd be discounted anyways.

Our 6 outs are also totally suspect, especially the tens against JJ+ and people who hit the kings.

If you read NLHE Theory and Practice, Ed Miller outlines pretty standard barreling spots. They are:

1) Single raised pot.
2) Flops where speculative hands call.
3) A non draw completing turn.
4) A scary turn card.

Really the only criteria that are met is 2 and 4. The king hits a lot of floats, and it's a 3-bet pot so ranges become much stronger.
 
Deco

Deco

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 7, 2009
Total posts
2,544
Chips
0
1) Single raised pot.
2) Flops where speculative hands call.
3) A non draw completing turn.
4) A scary turn card.

Really the only criteria that are met is 2 and 4. The king hits a lot of floats, and it's a 3-bet pot so ranges become much stronger.

The king really doesn't hit many floats its only really kq and alot of people wouldn't float that.
Villain floating this flop alot is what makes the turn barrel good.
For every kq there will be loads more aq, aj, back door straight and flush draws not to mention weaker pocket pairs we can fold.
 
Deco

Deco

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 7, 2009
Total posts
2,544
Chips
0
if the turn barrel had been sized bigger and the board had bricked but not paired I'd be tempted to check call the river as we'd be laid great odds and beat all but 2 flush draws.
 
B

baudib1

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Total posts
6,635
Chips
0
If villain calls 3bets with A2o and 54dd then by all means 3-bet ATdd for value.
 
acky100

acky100

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Total posts
3,523
Chips
0
If you read NLHE Theory and Practice, Ed Miller outlines pretty standard barreling spots. They are:

1) Single raised pot.
2) Flops where speculative hands call.
3) A non draw completing turn.
4) A scary turn card.

Really the only criteria that are met is 2 and 4. The king hits a lot of floats, and it's a 3-bet pot so ranges become much stronger.

Ed miller is a great player and writer but this was wrote in 2006 and is just a basic outline which essentially means "barrel vs weak ranges on cards that miss their range" - it's true, and sound logic. The SRP condition is moot though. If we're not cbetting this flop then i just can't see us cbetting anything that isnt a made hand on the majority of flops. I also dont think you can worry about the T and A because when we hit a T and he has JJ thats such a small part of his range.
 
acky100

acky100

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Total posts
3,523
Chips
0
If villain calls 3bets with A2o and 54dd then by all means 3-bet ATdd for value.

buttons stealing 83%, if he doesn't call with a worse range (equity wise) then he's folding a ridiculous amount where the EV of 3 betting > calling out the sb
 
Deco

Deco

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 7, 2009
Total posts
2,544
Chips
0
buttons stealing 83%, if he doesn't call with a worse range (equity wise) then he's folding a ridiculous amount where the EV of 3 betting > calling out the sb
6hand sample.

3betting ATs in a vacuum being a more +EV move does not make it the better option.
If we're against someone who we can profit 3betting any two cards (folds ~65% of the time) then we should come up with more hands to 3bet from the top of olur folding range not from the top of our flatting range.
 
Top