HJ/CO/SB various strategy

black1diamond7

black1diamond7

Rising Star
Joined
Mar 5, 2021
Total posts
3
Awards
1
hi guys
i have been wondering if 3bet/fold from HJ/CO/SB is better or flatting from those positions
what are the advantages and disadvantages of each
cheers
 
akmost

akmost

Rising Star
Loyaler
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Total posts
1,867
Awards
2
GR
Under no circumstances I am an expert, what I have read is that we can flat more frequently the suited broadways instead of 3bet them because they flop well. If you want to 3bet / fold some of those broadways better choose the off suited because by folding you won't throw away much equity.

Generally this is a huge topic of discussion and GTO wise I don't know what is the optimal. For example some suited AXs , KXs , QXs , something like K6s are also good hands for 3bet / folds because we have blockers in our hand. Other than that against super aggressive open raisers we can widen our range and for board coverage we can start 3bet some 45s , 8Ts etc. Unfortunately I don't have access to charts for balance plays.

Hope I helped a little bit and maybe some more experienced players write their strategy!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Phoenix Wright

Phoenix Wright

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Feb 18, 2020
Total posts
2,586
Awards
4
hi guys
i have been wondering if 3bet/fold from HJ/CO/SB is better or flatting from those positions
what are the advantages and disadvantages of each
cheers

Naturally, it would depends on the hand. Purely going by position, I feel that HJ and CO would play similarly as they are in position, but SB would be the "odd one out" because post-Flop they would be first to act (typically a disadvantage due to lack on information on what the opponent does).

I'm sure GTO charts and percentages exist, but I'd personally decide much more off of situational factors such as table image or playstyle. For instance, say I have the SAME hand in question in HJ, CO, or SB (exact hand doesn't matter - just something I'm deciding to 3-bet or fold) then I might adjust based on who my opponent(s) in the hand are. Some players I'm confident I can outplay postflop, so I should be more inclined to flat and see more Flops with - conversely, same hand against a regular (reg), I'd be more inclined to 3-bet.

As for pros and cons of each decision, in each position, it is probably subtle in comparison: unless you are playing at a high level where GTO is more of a must to prevent being exploited. At least at the levels I currently play (cardschat freerolls and homegames, baby! :cool: ), I'm not likely to encounter a necessity to playing GTO strategies all the time. :D
 
H

Hermus

Rock Star
Joined
Sep 6, 2018
Total posts
261
Awards
1
The optimal strategy changes based on table dynamics. Cold-calling leaves you with a capped range, susceptible to getting squeezed, and gives the remaining players better odds to call behind. The upside is you'll get to see cheap flops with speculative hands, and potentially induce calling mistakes from weak players.

In most circumstances (blinds, bet-sizes, ranges and rake), solvers do very little cold-calling and the EV gain from complicating a pre-flop range by allowing cold-calling is just not worth it (this even holds for the BU btw the only exception being the big blind). If you're not a computer, defaulting to 3-bet or fold strategy against competent players is the safest option.

Cold-calling becomes significantly more profitable if the remaining players left to act are weak passive players, as you'll be less likely to get squeezed, you'll get to see more flops against weak players, and you'll win more post-flop because you'll likely have a skill edge. So consider cold-calling if the remaining players don't 3-bet enough, call too much pre-flop, and play passively post-flop.
 
Top