Gameplan in BB vs CO 3X openraise.

If you have no read on your opponents open range I would recommend something like 10% 3bet and 16% call, which is good against a perhaps 30% CO open.

These are not perfect ranges or what I personally play, but a very solid guideline to start off with.

If you know how wide he opens his CO you should adjust. Wider open: 1) more 3bet value 2) looser callls and 3) more and weaker 3bet bluffs. Tighter open just the opposite.

Internet, so this is vs 30% open from co right? Also is there any perticular reason you wouldnt 3bet AJs there?

Shouldn't we 3b/5b a polarized range? Bottom of 99+ AQ+ shouldn't do very well against his 4b/c range co vs bb, so why don't we 3b/5b AK JJ+ and balance with small pairs, flatting 99, TT, and AQ? Is it because they do too well against his call 3bet range and we have a profitable shove once he 4bets?

I think this is the point. AQ is nuts vs his 3betcalling range. TT/99 should play well, too. So it's good to have them in a 3betrange. But 3bet/folding them and shoving some "trashhands" instead doesn't make sense.

One more point is that I don't want to give villain the opportunity to bluffcatch (good regs won't do, but I think we all saw some kind of fancy shovecalls). If you have some history going bad regs like to take just any pair to 4bet/call, or they talk themselves into a call with AJ ("he could be bluffing with Axs").

This is the thing I want to avoid. Instead of losing with 44 against 66, because he was driving crazy I like beating him with 99:D

If we talk just about good villains, just listen to lnternet's next post:D
He'll give a good answer I assume.
But in NL100-400games nowadays the point I mentioned plays a role.

Just remember a hand were I shoved my AQ in such a spot. Villain didn't show hand right after being All-In. It was run it twice and the board didn't hit me both times. The feeling when the money went to my place was just incredible (he had AJ)

Internet, how would your range vs a minrase from CO look like? Assuming 30-35% open.

lnternet you're my hero!

I guess I'm not as good as you so I'll start off with a bit tighter range and see how that goes. I also wonder why the 3bet/bluff% = 3bet/broke%. In the gap the mind series siete told us we can approx use the formule 3betrange% = (3b/broke%) * 2.41. So we can 3bet more as a bluff than for value.

Hmmm normally I don't flat those small suited Ax preflop. Don't we have too much kicker problems then? Or should I work on a better check/Raisingplan because those hands are fine to x/r on mant boards?

Sooo is this fine to start when you're not super sure about your postflop game?

And how would you advice to improve playing with marginal hands on different flops? Just practice with flopzilla?

Or are Axs really clear calls?

I've also dropped 22-55 cause we are OOP without implieds , no playability.. I probably can't play them +EV.

@ Famarchist: Why do you want to 3B small Axs??

Originally posted by Dublimax
@ Famarchist: Why do you want to 3B small Axs??

Well I'm not sure about this but I feel like it's tough to play hands that are always dominated?

Axs make nice hands to c/r with

Originally posted by ZioMio
Internet, so this is vs 30% open from co right? Also is there any perticular reason you wouldnt 3bet AJs there?

You can 3bet KQ and AJ for value for sure. But they are close-ish, not performing much better with 3bet than with call. You can even 3bet KJ and AT and called that merged value, esp if you choose a smaller 3bet sizing. I would still stick to a polarized approach even when doing that though which means you will need to defend 4bets with those hands as well. Which I don't see a problem with but most people are not comfortable calling 4bets with AT/KJ (or jamming).

Originally posted by LgWz
Shouldn't we 3b/5b a polarized range? Bottom of 99+ AQ+ shouldn't do very well against his 4b/c range co vs bb, so why don't we 3b/5b AK JJ+ and balance with small pairs, flatting 99, TT, and AQ? Is it because they do too well against his call 3bet range and we have a profitable shove once he 4bets?

No, Im sorry, you are just wrong.

vs loose stackoff: 99+, AQs+, AQo+
35.6% AQo
37.46% 99

better than AQo:
Hand range with equity greater than 36.00 %:
99+,AQs+,AKo

vs tight stackoff TT+, AKs, AKo
31.19% 99
30.63% AQo

better than 99:
Hand range with equity greater than 32.00 %:
TT+,AJs+, KQs,AKo

better than AQo:
Hand range with equity greater than 31.00 %:
55+,AJs+, A5s, KQs, QJs, AKo

So vs loose stackoff its not even close.
Vs tight stackoff you might prefer 55>AQo or A5s>AQo, but you have to consider that AQ also blocks nuts as opposed to 55 and A5, and that AQ plays a hell of a lot better if the 3bet gets called than both 55 and A5.

Originally posted by toche94
Internet, how would your range vs a minrase from CO look like? Assuming 30-35% open.

Against same 30% open, but now minraise instead of 3bb raise.

3bet value does not change (top 5%)
cold calls are widening a lot (35%, top5%-top40%)
3bet bluff size does not change, but now its the next worse hands to the calls (5%, top40%-top45%)

Some people make the mistake of increasing the value region because of a smaller size. This makes only limited sense.

Again this is just tight-solid default. you can go looser on all ends if you are comfortable.

Originally posted by Farmarchist

Originally posted by Dublimax
@ Famarchist: Why do you want to 3B small Axs??

Well I'm not sure about this but I feel like it's tough to play hands that are always dominated?

Domination is a very poor concept here. You are playing against a 30% range. Sure, you perform poorly vs some of those, but you also perform well vs others. Axs is a very strong holding in NL, don't be afraid. (I realize the last part is not very analytical, but I think you have a mind set problem here, which I am trying to fix with that statement :))

Originally posted by Farmarchist
lnternet you're my hero!

I guess I'm not as good as you so I'll start off with a bit tighter range and see how that goes. I also wonder why the 3bet/bluff% = 3bet/broke%. In the gap the mind series siete told us we can approx use the formule 3betrange% = (3b/broke%) * 2.41. So we can 3bet more as a bluff than for value.

I don't know the series by siete.

The 50-50 approach is very straight forward. I believe it makes sense to structure a polarized 3bet range in a fashion that the value part continues to a 4bet and the bluff part folds to a 4bet. With usual 4bet sizing the 4bettor is risking around 1:1 on a 4bet bluff, which means I want approximately 1:1 3bet value to 3bet bluff. This way I know exactly how to defend to 4bets and don't fold so much to 4bets that I am bluffable while also not defending so much that my opponent can get away with never 4bet bluffing.

If you play a higher bluff ratio you will have to continue some of your intial bluffs to a 4bet. Which is not a problem or anything, but you need to make sure not to play a fold to 4bet of 55%+. I assume siete was suggesting 3bet/shoving Axs and low pairs which were part of the 3bet bluff region?

I think siete just assumed that most ppl 4bet to a bigger amount and therefore they need it to work more often --> we can have more bluffs than 1:1.

I also think the loose stack-off range is very unlikely, and I would expect most people to stack off with the tight stack-off range, if not even tigther than that (I'd expect most people to flat JJ, and some even QQ). That means I'm unhappy to 3bet AQ and get it in. That doesn't mean we can't still 3bet AQ for value, if we assume he instead flats a lot of 3bets, but I don't think that consideration is big enough for me to prefer it over a call preflop. But that's just how I feel about that, most people still tend to automatically 3bet AQ for value.

very interesting thread - booked

only thing (regards to the posted default with the mentioned parameters):

a.) dunno bout having 99 in your 3b-valuerange vs. 30% or in your coldcallrange .
3betting should ne all right, i prefer it likely slightly in my coldcallrange vs. 30%

b.) rly doubt tbh that for most ppl coldcalling 22-55 vs a 3x-Co-raise (bout 30%) will show longterm a profit. (some ppl amde here already some db-checks in the past).
Mb for very strong players like you are, it might show a profit, but think that for most ppl this will be not the case..... vs. a 3BB-raise...

Agree with IronPumper and IFS, which is why I 3b/5b small pairs (I prefer flatting the initial raise instead of 3b/5b with Axs).

I'd be happy to run some filters and check what a CO vs BB stack off range looks like on average but I'm not sure how to do it. From experience at my games I expect regs to 4b/c JJ+, AK. Of course I see the occasional AQ, AJ, 88 but it's rare.

Also not sure how often people slowplay premiums on average (should also matter imo, if people sometimes call KK+ but always 4b AK then 5b jamming small pais is even better).