What's your fold to 3bet %?

Just curious what percentage ppl are folding to 3bets.

since moving to 200NL, i see the huge difference in game dynamics.

I swear, every time their is a PFR, they will flip a coin, heads they will 3bet to 26, tails they will 3bet to 22, if somehow lands in corner of the coin and its neither heads nor tails, thennnnnnnnn they will either fold or just call. my 4bet range shot up close to 4% now over 10k hands ish.

could you post some hands with short writeups on each? would be awesome.

my fold to 3 bet is 81% over 200nl and 400nl.

69% but my 4 bet is 4.5%. I am trying to get my fold % up to 75% without effecting my 4bet.

My fold to 3-bet is ridiculously low. Its a real leak of mine.

Why are you guys folding to threebets really little? Your throwing away money.

43% over last two months.

50%, which is probably a tad too low. I 4bet 15%. What can I say, I'm lagtarded.

buncha leaks ITT

I fold to 3bets 65% ..

I 4bet 13.2%

I need to lower both of these numbers!

lol im a nit compared to everyone here.

Fold to 3bet: 65%
4bet: 12.2%

so close griff

77%, but I play micros.

Mine is crazy low @ 56%

Just spotted a big leak, cheers OP

fold to 3b3t%: 64%

4bet%: 11%

edit: wow I actually just looked again since the start of the month.

3bet% 7.5
3bet call 24%
Fold to 3bet 55%

that makes my 4bet% 21

i dont 4bet since ive found they always have it

Originally Posted by jyms

edit: wow I actually just looked again since the start of the month.

3bet% 7.5
3bet call 24%
Fold to 3bet 55%

that makes my 4bet% 21

check your raise 3bet stat in HEM, 4betting 21% cant be right.

Originally Posted by Da GOAT

i dont 4bet since ive found they always have it

haha!

My god people, I normally dont like giving general advice but i dont see any reason why your fld to 3bet% isnt 75%+. 65% is pretty low, 55% is ridiculously low.

But we can outplay them on future streets! amirite gais!

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

But we can outplay them on future streets! amirite gais!

absotootly

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

My god people, I normally dont like giving general advice but i dont see any reason why your fld to 3bet% isnt 75%+. 65% is pretty low, 55% is ridiculously low.

You've definitely said this in other threads before. I completely agree with with this, for like lower stakes games where 3-betting light isn't THAT rampant, but how do you get away with this at our higher stakes games?

I feel like I pound on ppl that fold to >75% 3bets nonstop, and if they call and I don't have anything legit I mostly just c/f. Do you feel you make up for this, by ppl not adjusting enough and not c/f'ing enough?

wud love some analysis on your thoughts isf why 75%+ is good.

Wow... my fold the 3bet is only 57%, with a 4bet of 11% and this is at full ring.

Is it really a leak if your almost never calling 3bets oop and it usually like, I make it $3 from button, bb makes it $10 and Im only calling $7 with at least 100bb stax in pos.???

I completely agree with ISF.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we are 4-betting 11% of the time, wouldn't that mean we are 4bet bluffing way more often than we are 4betting for value?

My 4bet% is at only ~5% and I do bluff once in a while and 4bet JJ+, AK most of the time for value.

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

But we can outplay them on future streets! amirite gais!

This is my problem. I'll "outplay them postflop on non-scary boards", but in reality almost all the time play fit or fold postflop.

Originally Posted by JL

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we are 4-betting 11% of the time, wouldn't that mean we are 4bet bluffing way more often than we are 4betting for value?

Not necessarily, there are lots of ppl that 3bet waaay too much and shove light enough that I'm 4bet calling off 88+. Really depends on villain though obviously.

Originally Posted by bjsaust

Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla

But we can outplay them on future streets! amirite gais!

This is my problem. I'll "outplay them postflop on non-scary boards", but in reality almost all the time play fit or fold postflop.

I would say it's everyone's leak in this thread!

Originally Posted by JL

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we are 4-betting 11% of the time, wouldn't that mean we are 4bet bluffing way more often than we are 4betting for value?

This should always be the case.

fwiw, I think 75% fold to 3bet is absurd. I think 60-65% is reasonable.

edit: This should always be the case as long as villain is folding more than 1/2 the time. Given that most villains' stack off range is 3% (JJ+,AK) or less you should 4bet bluff players 3betting 6% much less than those 3betting more. I think 8% is a good cutoff.

Originally Posted by zook

Originally Posted by JL

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we are 4-betting 11% of the time, wouldn't that mean we are 4bet bluffing way more often than we are 4betting for value?

This should always be the case.

fwiw, I think 75% fold to 3bet is absurd. I think 60-65% is reasonable.

edit: This should always be the case as long as villain is folding more than 1/2 the time. Given that most villains' stack off range is 3% (JJ+,AK) or less you should 4bet bluff players 3betting 6% much less than those 3betting more. I think 8% is a good cutoff.

So then it would be +EV to 5bet jam ATC against these players until they adjust, assuming they only call the 5bet jam with JJ+, AK.

I think folding to 75% of 3bets is completely reasonable.
I think defending against 3bets and defending your blinds go hand in hand. They are both overrated.
If you raise preflop and get re-raised, it is much better to err on the side of folding too often, rather than calling too often. When you fold, you lose only 3-4bbs. However, when you call or 4bet, you put your entire stack at risk.
If you aren't an excellent player and don't have good reads on your opponents, calling/4betting too often could become a massive leak

Originally Posted by JL

So then it would be +EV to 5bet jam ATC against these players until they adjust, assuming they only call the 5bet jam with JJ+, AK.

Yeah this would definitely be +ev. A small 4bet is much cheaper though.

Originally Posted by zook

Originally Posted by JL

So then it would be +EV to 5bet jam ATC against these players until they adjust, assuming they only call the 5bet jam with JJ+, AK.

Yeah this would definitely be +ev. A small 4bet is much cheaper though.

Do you mean a small 5bet?
If you do, then you can't possibly 5bet and then fold, so I don't see how it could be cheaper.

Sorry, I misread your first reply, I thought you wrote it would be +EV to 4bet jam ATC as hero. Didn't realize you meant 5bet jam as villain. Of course villain can adjust to our greater bluffing frequency, but then they're risking their stack when we're risking less than 1/3 of ours. There's a reasonably unexploitable 4bet bluffing frequency that someone calculated here awhile ago (renton maybe?) and it was close to 3:1 bluffs to value. I say reasonably b/c if they really start 5bet jamming ATC then you have to reduce your bluff frequency, but as I said, that's super exploitable b/c they're risking so much more on their bluff than you are.

Originally Posted by zook

...as I said, that's super exploitable b/c they're risking so much more on their bluff than you are.

For 100 BB they really aren't. Considering the equity they have when called, they're risking somewhere between 30% and 35% of their stack. With your 4-bet you're risking around 25% of a stack.

Originally Posted by zook

Originally Posted by JL

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we are 4-betting 11% of the time, wouldn't that mean we are 4bet bluffing way more often than we are 4betting for value?

This should always be the case.

fwiw, I think 75% fold to 3bet is absurd. I think 60-65% is reasonable.

If 75% is exploitable, it's less so than 60%.

Originally Posted by bode

check your raise 3bet stat in HEM, 4betting 21% cant be right.

After a monster session last night my stats for the month.




I definitely still call too much, I must really call a ton vs only certain opponents though.

Factors to decide how much to call a 3bet or 4 bet.

1. How much your opponent is threebetting you.
2. How big they are threebetting you.
3. How much you are opening from whatever position preflop.
4. How passive/aggressive op is post flop (for 4betting how good he is postflop as well).

Normally #1, especially at low stakes, is pretty low.

Originally Posted by zook

Originally Posted by JL

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we are 4-betting 11% of the time, wouldn't that mean we are 4bet bluffing way more often than we are 4betting for value?

This should always be the case.

fwiw, I think 75% fold to 3bet is absurd. I think 60-65% is reasonable.

edit: This should always be the case as long as villain is folding more than 1/2 the time. Given that most villains' stack off range is 3% (JJ+,AK) or less you should 4bet bluff players 3betting 6% much less than those 3betting more. I think 8% is a good cutoff.

Its absurd to make this big of a generalization. If your opponent is 3betting AA only, you should only play AA, so I guess your fold to 3bet% is something like 99% against this guy, right? Just because your folding a lot doesn't mean someone is doing something about it.

Mine is 75%, and I think I don't fold enough. I think a lot of this depends on your games and your selection of said games. I think that Im folding 90% oop and maybe 60 IP, but this is something Im still working on. My 4 bet is 5%, but again most of this is oop, and I am raising 20%+ from utg - btn. If you can seat select well, which includes getting the nits on your left, you can feel confident folding 85%+ to 3bets.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

My god people, I normally dont like giving general advice but i dont see any reason why your fld to 3bet% isnt 75%+. 65% is pretty low, 55% is ridiculously low.

Glad you clarified. The way your first post was worded thought you were scolding everything for folding 65% of the time and should be calling more. I totally agree with ISF on this one. If you small stakes guys feel you need to call 35% or more 3-bets your game selection needs work.

mine is 60.87%...

is that good/?

Originally Posted by Galapogos

If you small stakes guys feel you need to call 35% or more 3-bets your game selection needs work.

Thats not true, at least not always.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Originally Posted by Galapogos

If you small stakes guys feel you need to call 35% or more 3-bets your game selection needs work.

Thats not true, at least not always.

I was generalizing off your generalizing.

I just found that HEM and PT fold to 3 bet stats are drastically different. PT3 counts every time you fold to a 3 bet when action is on you regardless if you made the original raise that was 3 bet or not. HEM only counts times you fold after YOUR raise gets 3 bet.

Originally Posted by thizzSantaCruz

I just found that HEM and PT fold to 3 bet stats are drastically different. PT3 counts every time you fold to a 3 bet when action is on you regardless if you made the original raise that was 3 bet or not. HEM only counts times you fold after YOUR raise gets 3 bet.

hmmm.. interesting.. so people's fold to 3bet stat is over-estimated with PT3 then? If this was the case, this would definitely change the stats quite a bit!

HEM says 64%, PT3 says 73%, which definitely seems more accurate

Originally Posted by Galapogos

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Originally Posted by Galapogos

If you small stakes guys feel you need to call 35% or more 3-bets your game selection needs work.

Thats not true, at least not always.

I was generalizing off your generalizing.

lol nice

LOL at PT3's way of calculating fold to 3b%

ISF if you use PT3 that would make a lot more sense...

Originally Posted by zook

LOL at PT3's way of calculating fold to 3b%

ISF if you use PT3 that would make a lot more sense...

hmmm yeah i do explain this.

Things just got interesting.

Originally Posted by bode

HEM says 64%, PT3 says 73%, which definitely seems more accurate

but PT3 OVER-estimates... so the HEM one is actually more accurate...

thizzSantaCruz should get some kind of award for this realization!

Now every time someone posts a hand and says "villain folds to xx% of 3bets," we will have to ask "PT3 or HEM?"

And i'm sure this isn't the only stat that's different between the two programs.

Originally Posted by griffey24

Originally Posted by bode

HEM says 64%, PT3 says 73%, which definitely seems more accurate

but PT3 OVER-estimates... so the HEM one is actually more accurate...

thizzSantaCruz should get some kind of award for this realization!

ha im down.

I have both and from what I remember this isn't the only stat they calculate differently. Too bad I forget what they are but pretty sure its a few.

Originally Posted by griffey24

Originally Posted by bode

HEM says 64%, PT3 says 73%, which definitely seems more accurate

but PT3 OVER-estimates... so the HEM one is actually more accurate...

thizzSantaCruz should get some kind of award for this realization!

hmm, it just seems like i fold to way more than 64% of 3bets, but i guess not

BUMP.

I Recently moved up to 100nl and there is def alot more 3 betting there then at 50nl. My fold to 3bet% is 81% (pt3). My last session i think i got 3bet 15 times, and i folded like 13. Thats like 40bbs almost. I dont see how folding this much to 3bets can be profitable. Should i be 4 betting more..or wat. I think its a leak but im not sure. HALP.

Originally Posted by AnTman_69

BUMP.

I Recently moved up to 100nl and there is def alot more 3 betting there then at 50nl. My fold to 3bet% is 81% (pt3). My last session i think i got 3bet 15 times, and i folded like 13. Thats like 40bbs almost. I dont see how folding this much to 3bets can be profitable. Should i be 4 betting more..or wat. I think its a leak but im not sure. HALP.

It depends, is it the same guy or is it just pretty much spread out equally amongst the guys at the table. What could be happening is people are now 3-betting you with a wider range for value than you are used to. In which case a 4-bet bluff might not be the best plan as they'll be willing to get it in lighter.

Keep in mind, one failed 4-bet bluff is nearly 40bb itself.

So don't do it because you're at 100NL, do it because a certain player could be getting carried away.

i think folding to 3bets 75%+ is wayyy too high "in general" vs solid players at 400nl+. Pretty much a sure way to get assraped by good regs.

although i agree at 200nl and lower, 75% is quite reasonable for the reasons ISF mentioned before.

Mines 78% but i use PT3...

Why would it be off?

68% at 100NL (HEM)

Originally Posted by Massimo

Mines 78% but i use PT3...

Why would it be off?

ryan pointed it out earlier in the thread, but PT3 calculates it any time you fold to a 3bet, whether you were the original raiser or not while HEM calculates it only the times that you were the raiser and got 3bet, which obv makes more sense.

if thats true PT3 is retarded, and ISF/MAX can finally lower those 75%+ nonsense to 65 which makes alot more sense

Originally Posted by Galapogos

Keep in mind, one failed 4-bet bluff is nearly 40bb itself.

Wat? You should never 4bet a standard 3bet to more than 30bb, my standard is less than that even. If you're 4-betting to 40bb then you're getting 2.33:1 to call a shove and should always call.

Originally Posted by Alexos

if thats true PT3 is retarded, and ISF/MAX can finally lower those 75%+ nonsense to 65 which makes alot more sense

I believe thizz that PT3 is retarded in its 3bet calculation method and that was the source of so much confusion itt.

Originally Posted by Alexos

if thats true PT3 is retarded, and ISF/MAX can finally lower those 75%+ nonsense to 65 which makes alot more sense

Alexos, you mean lowering to 65% PT3 way (which would be to ~75% HEM way), right?

Originally Posted by zook

Originally Posted by Galapogos

Keep in mind, one failed 4-bet bluff is nearly 40bb itself.

Wat? You should never 4bet a standard 3bet to more than 30bb, my standard is less than that even. If you're 4-betting to 40bb then you're getting 2.33:1 to call a shove and should always call.

I was just making a point.

Originally Posted by jimmy44

Originally Posted by Alexos

if thats true PT3 is retarded, and ISF/MAX can finally lower those 75%+ nonsense to 65 which makes alot more sense

Alexos, you mean lowering to 65% PT3 way (which would be to ~75% HEM way), right?

isnt it the other way around, 65% in HEM means 75% in Pt3?

Originally Posted by Alexos

Originally Posted by jimmy44

Originally Posted by Alexos

if thats true PT3 is retarded, and ISF/MAX can finally lower those 75%+ nonsense to 65 which makes alot more sense

Alexos, you mean lowering to 65% PT3 way (which would be to ~75% HEM way), right?

isnt it the other way around, 65% in HEM means 75% in Pt3?

yes

Ops ... thanks!

Okay 65% HEM 75% PT3

i fold around 70-ish%. Works for me.

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Okay 65% HEM 75% PT3

Great because I just can't get much lower than 65% because these guys are just plain bad at 3betting way too much from the blinds when I know I am miles ahead and want to see flops.