Poker Forum
|
Over 1,247,000 Posts!
|
|
|
>
>
3bet or flat with hands like AJ+, and KQ?
|
|
|---|
|
DJJunkPauds
|
06-20-2008, 06:15 PM
Post subject: 3bet or flat with hands like AJ+, and KQ?
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 301
|
|
For a while I toyed with Sauce123's idea of 3betting whenever my hand is in the top half of villains positionally adjusted range. I started 3betting hands like AJ/KQ and sometimes AT (and sometimes a lot more against certain villains). After a little while of doing that someone on FTR (I forget who, sorry) pointed out in a hand history post that it's much better to flat with say AQ, because if we're going to 3bet, villain may as well have 100 PFR% - it's what they call your 3bet with that's important, and what they fold. The guy's point was you 3bet someone with 15 PFR% you're just eliminating all the hands you have great implied odds against. Now when you flop TPGK you're behind or chopping, so you're basically playing for fold equity, in which case you might as well do it with a suited connector or J6o even.
Now this guy (really sorry I don't remember who you are) made a pretty good argument there, but still I see lots of people with high post counts here and on other forums saying that you should 3bet button opens from the blinds with AJ+/TT+ (most qualify this as player dependent), and most of them say you should do this IP as well.
Oh, actually here is that thread: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...41.html#696977
So whilst I see Galapagos' point, and I do play that way, when I have AQ in the BB, and there's a raise which includes AT+/QJ/KQ, I get this jarring feeling about calling OOP. If we hate being out of position in this spot so much that we decide to play for fold equity, why do we need AQ to do this? AQ isn't very versatile post flop. It's either top pair or ace high. If we have top pair and our cbet in a 3bet pot gets called, eh, we're beat a big percent of the time. Probably in worse shape than if we had bottom pair and a BDFD (we 3bet preflop with suited connectors for example).
Or maybe you feel so good about flopping TPTK against the PFR that you don't give a shit about position? Generally when I call preflop (or even on the flop a lot of the time) I like to have a vague chance of being able to take the pot away when I miss, and that's pretty unachievable profitably without position.
I guess my overall questions are: why are lots of people telling me to 3bet when I'm ahead of their 2betting range (I'm thinking of sauce123's guide in particular here)? What about this idea of flatting with with these types of hands OOP?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
Galapogos
|
|
06-20-2008, 11:03 PM
Post subject: Re: 3bet or flat with hands like AJ+, and KQ?
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Loser's Lounge
Posts: 2,323
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DJJunkPauds
I guess my overall questions are: why are lots of people telling me to 3bet when I'm ahead of their 2betting range (I'm thinking of sauce123's guide in particular here)? What about this idea of flatting with with these types of hands OOP?
|
It all depends on how your opponent plays. If he's 4-betting or folding, don't 3-bet a good hand for value that you don't want to stack off with. Instead, 3-bet hands you want to go all in with and 3-bet trash a smart amount.
If he's calling light pre and post, widen your 3-betting range.
If he's calling light to hit a monster or fold, polarize your range like you would against the first guy. A smart amount of 3-bet bluffs that you can drop easily post flop, but scoop the pot on the flop a lot of the time with.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sauce123
I don't get why you insist on stacking off with like jack high all the time.
|
|
|
Galapogos
|
|
4-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Loser's Lounge
Posts: 2,323
|
|
Also, just wanted to include this awesome post on 3-betting. A lot of people need to read this: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...d.php?t=146036
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sauce123
I don't get why you insist on stacking off with like jack high all the time.
|
|
|
freechus9
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: IN UR BOX HAXXING UR FILEZ
Posts: 1,000
|
|
Solidness
|
|
My sig is too much for you to handle.
|
|
DJJunkPauds
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 301
|
|
I like to break things down to basic one-sentence principles that can be considered at the table.
I've gone away and thought about this for a day, and here is how I'm understanding things:
1. We 3bet for value with hands that will be ahead of specific-villain's range when we *both* consider ourselves to have hit.
For example, a villain who is raising then calling our 3bets with AQ/AJ/ATs/KQ/QTs+/22-JJ. The flop is Q72r. If we stack off by the turn when we have TPTK no matter what the turn is, we'll have an equity edge on a big pot.
2. We 3bet light an amount that is a fraction of our value range against specific-villain - the more fold equity we are getting, the bigger the fraction.
Imagine a guy who we can profitably 3bet AT+/KJ+/TT+ exclusively for value, but who is also calling with a huge amount of fit-fold hands. That's to say that he's an extremely loose raiser, calls our 3bets very loose, but as a product of of his high amount of fit-fold hands, is effectively weak-ight on the flop. Here we're getting a good bit of PF FE, and a butt load of flop FE, so we'll be 3betting light almost as much as for value. This sounds to me like the same thing as isolating a limper with a 2bet, except we're isolating a 2bettor with a 3bet. Am I right?
So what's a smart amount then? I've read a few people say that against someone who drips fold equity, when we are in a good situation (position, stack size) we might want to put in 2 light 3bets for every 3 value 3bets. Sound about right?
3. If you can have an equity edge when you both hit by calling, but not by 3betting, or you wish to nut-camp (small pairs, weaker SCs) and are getting the right odds to do so, call.
4. If your hand isn't applicable to 1, 2, or 3, fold.
That's as much as I can nutshellize it. Any holes here, or mistakes?
Here's a few different guys, and how I might play against them:
-Villain raises lots, and calls our 3bets lots. He's not going away on the flop much either. This guy I'm 3beting with lots of value hands (big aces, KQ, etc). I might throw in the occasional bluff so he knows I don't always have a hand, but I'm doing this a tiny amount of the time compared to the amount I'm doing it for value.
-If I 3bet this next villain he's going to want to get it all-in preflop occasionally, but usually fold, and he's next to never calling. This guy I'm 3betting for value with the intention of getting it all in, but I'm also bluffing him lots, almost as much as I'm doing it for value, because of the excellent FE. This guy doesn't have to be a nit with his raises, he just has to be a nit with how he deals with our 3bets preflop. If he was a nit though, I might consider flatting with AK, etc.
-This villain calls our 3bets dominated a lot, and fit-folds a lot. We 3bet lots for value, and almost as much on a bluff.
So this brings me to what hands we should be bluffing with. If I have to see a flop, I'd like a suited connector. You can flop all sorts of stuff with it, even if you don't completely own the flop. Bottom pair+gutshot+BDFD, and other goofy stuff that is good for a bluff cbet. If we get called on the flop, there are a lot of cards that give us the right odds to shove the turn. Small pairs basically need a set, and that's it.
There's a hand ranking order in terms of show down value, with AA at the top, and 32o at the bottom, so is there a hand ranking order in terms of what's best to bluff with? If so, is JTs at the top, with 72o at the bottom like I'm thinking?
If I decide that it's right to value 3bet a guy with JJ+,AJs+,KQs,AQo+, and that I should be 3betting him light roughly twice for every three times I do it for value, should I be doing it with QJs,J9s+,T8s+,97s+,87s,76s,65s,54s, because the second range contains approximately 2/3 the amount of combos as the first? Or does it not work like that, and instead you just pick random crap roughly 2/3 as often as you've value 3betting him lately? Maybe it does work like that, but you think the hands I've picked aren't the best for light 3betting? If that's the case, hand ranking in terms of best to bluff 3bet with, anyone?
I'm still not sure about being in the blinds with a hand that we would call with IP. We have AQ in the blinds, decide that if we 3bet we'll be behind when we both connect, so we just fold, because we don't like calling OOP, even though we'd be ahead if we flatted?
Where am I wrong, or way off?
|
|
|
|
DJJunkPauds
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 301
|
|
I'll just add that your contributions to my game are greatly appreciated Galapagos, thanks. Pretty sure I earned my new monitor on the value of the info you and others have given to me for free.
|
|
|
|
bjsaust
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ballarat, Australia
Posts: 5,842
|
|
Only if you read FTR on the new monitor...
|
|
Just playing to improve.
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,339
|
|
Here's a thought.
Almost no one is flatting AK to a 3-bet. How is this exploitable?
|
|
|
|
DJJunkPauds
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 301
|
|
Never been sure what people mean by flatting. I always took it to mean when someone raises, someone else re-raises, and the first player just calls. If you mean that, well: KQ goes up in strength as a 3bet for value, as does AQ+. Basically we're never dominated by 3betting them, having them call without AK, and us both flopping top-pair with our high card.
Is this what you meant?
|
|
|
|
DJJunkPauds
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 301
|
|
Also, Axx Kxx flops go up suitability for cbets I guess.
|
|
|
|
bode
|
|
Straight Flush
Join Date: May 2006
Location: slow motion
Posts: 4,270
|
|
flatting just means flat calling, meaning almost everyone is 4betting/shoving with AK pre.
|
Quote:
|
eeevees are not monies yet...they are like baby monies.
|
|
|
Latest Poker News
|
|
Bbickes
|
06-02-2012, 08:10 PM Merge Network 6.0 Looks to Retain Current Player Base
|
|
In an effort to perhaps keep players from moving to the new Revolution Network setup by the former Lock Poker, Merge Network has taken drastic steps to respond to their player base's requests to impro ...
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:04 AM.
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
