3-bet/4-bet question

[grnydrowave2]

The way I understand it, you should be 3-betting a polarized range if you think the opponent is likely to either 4-bet or fold, and he won't call very often. The sample size here doesn't give us a clear idea, but villain does appear to be this type of opponent.

The top part of your polarized range should be strictly for value. So if you want to include AQo in it, you should be willing to 5-bet/shove if he 4-bets. Otherwise, your 3-bet is a bluff and you might as well be doing it with 93o.

If your hand is not good enough to 5-bet/shove, but still playable against villain's open, then flat call.

Now think about the range of hands that are not good enough to flat call. The very top of this range should be 3-bet as bluffs. If Q9s is the weakest hand you are willing to flat with, then 3-bet Q8s. Add as many hands as you feel you can get away with, but start from the top down.

If you think the opponent has more of a tendency to call 3-bets, then your range should be depolarized. Just 3-bet strong hands for value and don't include any bluffs.

All this is stuff I have only learned recently, so if I got anything wrong, feel free to correct me.

[thelorax]

The top part of your polarized range should be strictly for value. So if you want to include AQo in it, you should be willing to 5-bet/shove if he 4-bets. Otherwise, your 3-bet is a bluff and you might as well be doing it with 93o.

It seems like the number of times he flats our 3b is substantial enough, and contains a wide enough range, to make 3bing for Value in this spot +EV even though we may fold to a 4b.
thoughts?

[kfaess]

The way I understand it, you should be 3-betting a polarized range if you think the opponent is likely to either 4-bet or fold, and he won't call very often. The sample size here doesn't give us a clear idea, but villain does appear to be this type of opponent.

The top part of your polarized range should be strictly for value. So if you want to include AQo in it, you should be willing to 5-bet/shove if he 4-bets. Otherwise, your 3-bet is a bluff and you might as well be doing it with 93o.

If your hand is not good enough to 5-bet/shove, but still playable against villain's open, then flat call.

Now think about the range of hands that are not good enough to flat call. The very top of this range should be 3-bet as bluffs. If Q9s is the weakest hand you are willing to flat with, then 3-bet Q8s. Add as many hands as you feel you can get away with, but start from the top down.

If you think the opponent has more of a tendency to call 3-bets, then your range should be depolarized. Just 3-bet strong hands for value and don't include any bluffs.

All this is stuff I have only learned recently, so if I got anything wrong, feel free to correct me.

Nice post man, seems really solid.

Correct me if I got this wrong, but I think it needs to be emphasized that the strategy you outlined applies to someone who is primarily only 4bing or folding (such as a decent and somewhat conservative reg who is oop vs your 3b). In other words, I think it can be ok to 3b AQ and fold to a 4b when you're facing someone who is going to call lots of 3bs and 4b occasionally (mostly for value) because you get a lot of value when he flats your 3b.

[grnydrowave2]

It seems like the number of times he flats our 3b is substantial enough, and contains a wide enough range, to make 3bing for Value in this spot +EV even though we may fold to a 4b.
thoughts?

If that is the case and he is calling 3-bets a substantial amount, then yes, depolarizing is the better play and AQo should be 3-bet for value. That means he'll be 4-betting very rarely, and when he does it means we ran into the top of his range and should fold.

Nice post man, seems really solid.

Correct me if I got this wrong, but I think it needs to be emphasized that the strategy you outlined applies to someone who is primarily only 4bing or folding (such as a decent and somewhat conservative reg who is oop vs your 3b). In other words, I think it can be ok to 3b AQ and fold to a 4b when you're facing someone who is going to call lots of 3bs and 4b occasionally (mostly for value) because you get a lot of value when he flats your 3b.

More or less, but I would change it to "someone who is mostly 4-betting or folding". If the opponent will sometimes call 3-bets, but not terribly often, then I still think it's correct to polarize. That's why we take the hand-strength of the bottom of our polarized range into consideration, rather than 3-bet bluffing random hands. Not many people will do one thing or the other 100% of the time. We base the decision of polarize vs. depolarize on what the opponent is doing most frequently.

As you said (and as I repeated above), it is correct (imo) to depolarize against opponent who is mostly calling 3-bets rather than 4-betting. On the occassion that you do get 4-bet, you can fold the bottom of your 3-bet range and the play is still +EV overall.