Question about PF raises for spenda.

Ok, I was watching your sample video on Grinderschool, and you said it is standard for you to raise 4xbb+1bb per limper. This I understand, I do it as well no need to explain that aspect.

My question is this: I'm sure you do adjust, so how do you adjust your PF raise sizing depending on the table? If the table is really loose, do you increase your raise sizes (this is what I think I should do, but not sure), or do you decrease it. (This seems wrong to me just because smaller raises would let others get in the pot cheaper, but I just want to be sure.)

Ok same question, but opposite table conditions. Table is playing weak/tight PF do you increase your bet sizes, or decrease, or stay the same?

I understand how to adjust my opening hand ranges with regards to position, and table conditions. I just want to make sure my thinking is correct behind this.

Thanks,

Dustin

I probably just adjust my ranges, i.e. at the looser table I just open a tighter range and at the tighter table I open a wider range.

If I wanted to take it a step further (I don't do this btw) I could certainly open slightly larger at the loose table with my tighter range and slightly smaller at the tighter table with my wider range. You can probably think of some good reasons (besides the very first thing that will pop into your head) for why this is a good adjustment.

Anyone calling on the tighter table is going to have a narrow range of cards against your wider range so more likely to be behind preflop,so that you have less money invested to see the flop and make a decision then about how to continue.
With the loose table, you are opening a tighter range against a wider range, so increasing the preflop bet will extract more value now and on later streets from more likely weaker hands

OMG ppl are starting to think like me.

scary trend....

Thanks for the replies. See I wasn't sure if it was a good or bad idea. I guess it doesn't really matter either way. It probably is common sense, but it's good to know I was along the right path of thinking lol.

going a step further I do adjust my raise sizes in later position because of what keith said. With a wider range typically playing against tighter ranges I combat the loss in equity with pot control and a high blind steal success rate.

You can make similar adjustments to your 3bet sizing as well based on your opponents calling frequencies and range. For example, I will 3bet bigger IP (and with a wider range) against somebody that is incapable of folding a PP or small SCs preflop, and will cbet a lot of flops since they'll be giving up so often.

why would you 3bet bigger, it sounds like you should 3bet a lot more often, but not bigger.

Because the extra bbs i make when they c/f the flop more than make up for the slightly bigger cbet I have to make.

nope

think deeper

Not sure which answer Spenda is looking for, but I have a couple thoughts.

You are looking to leverage the advantage of position - I don't think it's necessarily wrong to think that you can do that by either raising bigger or playing wider ranges - but if you choose a combination of the two you can't go as far in either one of the directions. So, raise the same playing twice as many hands, raise a little bit more playing 50% more hands, or raise a lot more raising the same amount of hands could be the option - where I think the wider range likely to be the more profitable.

The question also is if you leverage position by playing bigger pots. One of the advantages of position is that you get the information advantage and (as Spenda said in this thread) can take pot control lines etc easier. The bigger the pot, the less value position has as all the creative options that require position are no longer possible.

Another factor is that the bigger the raise the more opponent hands you'll fold pre-flop. He'll continue to a big 3bet only with the very strongest of hands, and those he would continue with to a small 3bet are folded pre-flop. So by betting big you manipulate your opponent to only play his strongest hands against your self-admitted wider 3-betting range.

Yes, some villains won't notice or adjust to bet sizes, but I think we're talking about the principle here, not how to exploit ridiculously weak players.

I'm agreeing with most of erpels answer as it but the point about folding the weaker hands so leaving in only the stronger opponents hands can then be expanded by adding that not only are you playing a wider range against a narrow range , you are giving them a lot more value now and post flop as their post flop pot sized bets will get ever larger on each street than if you had kept the pot smaller with your preflop raise.
Also as you are only keeping in the strongest hands , what are you going to do if they come back over the top of you preflop .As your playing a wider range against a very narrow range in this scenario, fold is probably the best option and the extra that you raised was money down the drain.
Does the fact that the raise was bigger make it more profitable/likely for the very narrow range to come back over the top in this situation.My gut feel is to say yes unless they are thinking to keep you in the hand and make more value over several streets post flop.

TBH I'm not sure what Spenda's driving at here unless he's assuming that the villain will adjust correctly (or at all) or that somebody else at the table will start 4 betting me. Erpel/Keith, you make good points, but i was specifically refering to a villain that WON'T fold the weaker part of their range to bigger 3 bets and plays fit or fold postflop. Exploiting shit players is still something that should be considered!

But Spenda, feel free to unwrap your onions in public...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith_MM

I'm agreeing with most of erpels answer as it but the point about folding the weaker hands so leaving in only the stronger opponents hands can then be expanded by adding that not only are you playing a wider range against a narrow range , you are giving them a lot more value now and post flop as their post flop pot sized bets will get ever larger on each street than if you had kept the pot smaller with your preflop raise.
Also as you are only keeping in the strongest hands , what are you going to do if they come back over the top of you preflop .As your playing a wider range against a very narrow range in this scenario, fold is probably the best option and the extra that you raised was money down the drain.
Does the fact that the raise was bigger make it more profitable/likely for the very narrow range to come back over the top in this situation.My gut feel is to say yes unless they are thinking to keep you in the hand and make more value over several streets post flop.

---

If we are in position with a weaker hand and have raised, we have the initiative in the pot and (against loose but weak opponents who check fold the flop too often) will take down the pot with a continuation bet most of the time.

If our opponents play back at us we can just fold. It may seem like a 'waste' of chips, but think about it. You got caught dipping into the cookie jar once, and the other 5 times (or whatever) you got away with it. Plus your image at this point would be strong and bold and no one will want to screw with you without a hand, so when you get played back at, it will be easy to know where you are at because unless your opponents are tricky, they have a hand this time.

I'm not so sure how well this will fare out at micro's (most players are too loose postflop at $2NL and $10NL for this to work often), but at $50NL and $100NL I'm sure this image of forcing your opponents to play big pots oop against you is very profitable. It doens't matter if you're a 60/40 dog. Your opponent will only hit the flop 1/3 times, you'r going to make $ off c-betting, and you'll make even more money when your JTs or whatever mediocre hand your raising strong with turns a straight and cracks that limpers big pair that he's playing back at you with because he limped pf, and check called your c-bet.

This doesn't really have to do with bet sizing, I was just trying to illustrate the point that isolating limpers and raising weaker hands while in position is profitable. You can make your bets bigger if you're getting lots of fold equity because you'll make more $. If your raising more hands preflop it also makes you alot harder to read, and this is where you take control of the table. People won't play back at you without a hand, simple as that. Again at micro's this might not be that important, but at $25NL at least there are alot of weak-tights or loose-weaks who will slowly piss their chips into your hands if you take control of the table. Sorry if this is slightly off topic about the bet sizing, but I noticed that this thread started to include more about raising weaker ranges etc, so I decided to give my 2 cents on it since it's what I'm working on right now. Plus you pay more attention to your opponents if your not just laying around waiting for AA, and you'll be less willing to stack off with AA when you get it because you were actually involved during the interm.

Always remember that just because you're flop-river equity against your opponents range is the underdog, if you have position, (against the right opponents) you can make them fold the best hand most of the time because they aren't hitting more than 33% of the flops. And when they do hit and you also connect with a suited connector or whatever trash hand you might have, they will pay you off when they have their top pair. By raising more preflop you're getting harder to read. Can we all see why nitting it up is so exploitable?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kettleofish

TBH I'm not sure what Spenda's driving at here unless he's assuming that the villain will adjust correctly (or at all) or that somebody else at the table will start 4 betting me. Erpel/Keith, you make good points, but i was specifically refering to a villain that WON'T fold the weaker part of their range to bigger 3 bets and plays fit or fold postflop. Exploiting shit players is still something that should be considered!

But Spenda, feel free to unwrap your onions in public...

---

I posted a reply about exploiting shit players before this one.
I discussed how raising into fit-fold limpers is profitable regardless of whether you are slightly behind or not because they fold too much. IMO if opponent is calling 3-bets too often only to fold the flop too often, 3-bet slighty larger (like 4x instead of 3x) to get more money in pf, and instead of betting 3/4 the pot, bet 2/3 (or instead of 2/3 slightly less etc.

I think it would be most profitable to 3-bet the largest amount pf your opponent will call his weaker range to check-fold flop. Then for your c-bet, make it as small as your opponent will fold to, that way when he does have a hand and he plays back, you're saving chips when he picks off your c-bet, but taking down the pot otherwise.