need so clarification.

[acg123]

ok someone answer this.

our UTG opening range is 44+,ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,76s,65s,AJo+,K Qo

villians 3bet range vs. UTG opens is 99+,AQs+

pokerstove says
UTG 34.756%
Vil. 65.244%

over 1k hands says villan cbets 50% of the time in 3b pot in position as aggressor.

ok my question is, is it really profitable for UTG to call a 3b OOP with his entire opeing range??

check my math.
$100NL 100bb stacks 6max
UTG opens $3
MP 3bets to $9
folds around UTG calls.
pot is $9+$9+$1.50(blinds)
$19.50
now this is maybe where I am wrong, assuming villain cbets 50% of the time for say 2/3 pot. say $13 even say $14 for simplicity sake 50% of the time he checks and the other he bets $14. that avrages to $7 on the flop.now the implied odds from our preflop call come into play. technically after we raised to $3 it cost us $6 more to win a pot of $13.50(we didn't call yet) + the $7 implied odds bet we know villan to do would be $20.50 to $6 or 3.4 to 1. which means we only need 29% to call the $6 preflop correct? maybe im overthinking it..help me out here lol

[MadMojoMonkey]

That UTG range looks ridiculously spewey to me. You're opening 44-77 and AJo and weak SC's and ... and ...
Hey, if this is 4-handed, it makes sense. You said Villain is MP, though. So this is what? 6-max?

Can we get a 6-max player to talk about UTG ranges?

is it really profitable for UTG to call a 3b OOP with his entire opeing range??

It depends on a lot of things. Most importantly, on how much of an edge UTG think he has against Villain post flop, OOP.

Even if it is profitable, it's almost certainly not the most profitable line.
Why don't you consider a 4-bet?

check my math.

When Hero faces a call for 6bb into a pot of 13.5bb, then Hero's pot odds are
6bb/19.5bb = 30.8%

According to your equity calc., Hero has 34.8% equity. If this call would close the action for the entire hand, then it would be a +EV call.

The rest of the stuff you're talking about completely disregards what the flop is, and assumes you play your entire range the same on all flops, so the math is bogus. Even still, since you have more hand equity than pot odds going to the flop, you do not need implied odds.

[jyms]

That looks more like my CO opening range than my UTG opening range

[Vinland]

I dont think you can just do simple pokerstove equities to see if you can call....Its not an all in situation and you have to face further bets on subsequent streets AND you are OOP so you shouldn't call with your entire range.

[acg123]

Even if it is profitable, it's almost certainly not the most profitable line.
Why don't you consider a 4-bet?
Well now that you mention I forgot to remove my 4bet range in the calculations. But the reason this even became a question is lately when I 4bet strong hands villain folds, and when I 4bet light I get shoved on. I'm losing money in 3bet pots OOP. So I'm exploring my options. That utg range is also not concrete, its my basic range averaged out, if the game is playing tight, I'll probably open this range. If it is playing loose I'll tend to tighten it up. This is just an estimation.

When Hero faces a call for 6bb into a pot of 13.5bb, then Hero's pot odds are
6bb/19.5bb = 30.8%
Why do you add-in the amount your calling when that money isn't in the pot yet?

According to your equity calc., Hero has 34.8% equity. If this call would close the action for the entire hand, then it would be a +EV call.
This is what I needed to hear, the example I've given is over-simplified and more factors are needed to get a accurate answer.


.

A

[acg123]

So I guess this is all about me thinking " well if I figure in the cbet into the pot odds the way I did then basically I get to see turn 50% of the time and that makes the $6 call a +EV play". Or no?

[MadMojoMonkey]

when I 4bet strong hands villain folds, and when I 4bet light I get shoved on

Unless Villains can see your cards, you're making connections that just don't make sense. If you only 4-bet AA, then you would still expect a certain %age of shoves, another %age of non-shove raises, another %age of calls, etc...
Also, it sounds like you are generalizing all villains into a single player here.

That utg range is also not concrete, its my basic range averaged out, if the game is playing tight, I'll probably open this range. If it is playing loose I'll tend to tighten it up. This is just an estimation.

It's way too wide for even your widest adjustment (Say it out loud: "13% from UTG is spew"). You're losing so much money with those small PP's and SC's. These are hands that play well IP, and that are 0EV at best from OOP.
Something like this: { 88+,ATs+,KJs+,QJs,AQo+ } should be your baseline, which is 7% of hands. You should definitely be willing to fold some of those hands to a 3-bet.
I play FR mainly (but that's my MP2 range, which is the same distance from the BTN as UTG in 6-max), so grain of salt with the specifics in there, but I think it's obv. you are getting yourself into bad situations by over-valuing hands OOP. They're only confusing you and distracting you from the major lesson of the micros: learn to identify fat value (as opposed to thin value) and V-bet the shit out of it.

Why do you add-in the amount your calling when that money isn't in the pot yet?

Read this:
spoonitnow's Mathematics of EV Thread

[MadMojoMonkey]

So I guess this is all about me thinking " well if I figure in the cbet into the pot odds the way I did then basically I get to see turn 50% of the time and that makes the $6 call a +EV play". Or no?

NO. This is fish-think.

[BorisTheSpider]

That UTG range looks ridiculously spewey to me. You're opening 44-77 and AJo and weak SC's and ... and ...
Hey, if this is 4-handed, it makes sense. You said Villain is MP, though. So this is what? 6-max?

Can we get a 6-max player to talk about UTG ranges?

Yeah, it's pretty loose. 6max v FR through, all you need to really think about is what you'd play from UTG+3 if the first 3 players all folded, since you're then playing 6max.

As a default barring any particular factors favouring a looser open like a big fish in the blinds, I'd open like 99+, ATs+, K9s+, Q9s+, J9s+, T9s, 98s, AJo+, KQo and I consider that quite loose. A typical tightish UTG range at 6max might be like TT+, AJs+, KJs+, QJs, JTs, AQo+, KQo.

Aside from the range to open though, I'm more interested in commenting on "is it really profitable for UTG to call a 3b OOP" to say that it's probably _never_ profitable to call a 3bet OOP. Maybe if you're very very good at playing postflop, but really I think if you're 3bet OOP you should either 4bet planning to stack off if necessary, or fold.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Yeah, it's pretty loose. 6max v FR through, all you need to really think about is what you'd play from UTG+3 if the first 3 players all folded, since you're then playing 6max.

I did that with the range I suggested, but I feel you're over-simplifying the difference between FR and 6-max.

The added pressure of the blinds coming around more frequently means that ranges have to open up a bit more than a simple "FR conversion" of "pretend UTG, UTG+1, and MP1 have folded".

[BorisTheSpider]

I did that with the range I suggested, but I feel you're over-simplifying the difference between FR and 6-max.

The added pressure of the blinds coming around more frequently means that ranges have to open up a bit more than a simple "FR conversion" of "pretend UTG, UTG+1, and MP1 have folded".

Point taken. I'd never actually thought about that before - I haven't played FR in a long time, but yeah, I guess the added blind pressure does contribute to the looseness of a 6max game, so your MP2 range should still be somewhat tighter than my UTG and the ranges we each posted seem consistent with that.

[jyms]

I wouldn't be looking to loosen up all my positions at 6 max though. UTG is still UTG. If I loosen up it's with button ranges and blind steals, some of the cutoff too but I'm thinking more about steals and 3betting loose openers.

[acg123]

Unless Villains can see your cards, you're making connections that just don't make sense. If you only 4-bet AA, then you would still expect a certain %age of shoves, another %age of non-shove raises, another %age of calls, etc...
Also, it sounds like you are generalizing all villains into a single player here.

here I think its just the way ive been running. it seems like everytime lately the villians have had my number no matter the situation. but in perspective it seems to be just variance. I was generalizing because I don't really have a specific opp type in mind. Just how my opening range stacks up to a villians 3b value range.

It's way too wide for even your widest adjustment (Say it out loud: "13% from UTG is spew").

LMAO

You're losing so much money with those small PP's and SC's. These are hands that play well IP, and that are 0EV at best from OOP.
Something like this: { 88+,ATs+,KJs+,QJs,AQo+ } should be your baseline, which is 7% of hands. You should definitely be willing to fold some of those hands to a 3-bet.

point well taken. I won a lot more money before I started "balancing" my range with SCs. I think for the time being im going to remove those from my UTG and MP ranges for awhile to see if my winrate changes. should be interesting.

I play FR mainly (but that's my MP2 range, which is the same distance from the BTN as UTG in 6-max), so grain of salt with the specifics in there, but I think it's obv. you are getting yourself into bad situations by over-valuing hands OOP.
They're only confusing you and distracting you from the major lesson of the micros: learn to identify fat value (as opposed to thin value) and V-bet the shit out of it.

makes sense.



Read this:
spoonitnow's Mathematics of EV Thread

a

[acg123]

I wouldn't be looking to loosen up all my positions at 6 max though. UTG is still UTG. If I loosen up it's with button ranges and blind steals, some of the cutoff too but I'm thinking more about steals and 3betting loose openers.

well I don't play a set range in any game. I adjust based on the table dynamics. if the table is playing loose with moderate to heavy 3 betting then ill tighten up and wait for "fat value" as mojo said. If the table is playing tight and somewhat straightforwardly then ill open up my ranges and go after some pots. the range I showed at UTG is my range over thousands of hands averaged out between these games.

[acg123]

I think if you're 3bet OOP you should either 4bet planning to stack off if necessary, or fold.

ok so where does the line get drawn of whether it is even profitable to open certain hands because if you get 3bet you have to fold? or then do you think that if you cant 4bet the hand then you shouldn't even be opening with it? what percentage of hands can we actually fold before we start losing money just by opening the action? I don't know if im wording my question right.
an example answer is " we can open x% of hands UTG and fold X% of that range and still be profitable

[MadMojoMonkey]

There's no point in asking for advice if you're going to be defensive when you get it. It's better for your learning process if you ask questions to understand why we have suggested what we did, than for you to back-pedal and justify something we have criticized.

It's way too wide for even your widest adjustment (Say it out loud: "13% from UTG is spew").

LMAO

I'm not sure why you're laughing. I am seriously suggesting you do this.

the range I showed at UTG is my range over thousands of hands averaged out between these games.

If that's your 'average' range, then that means that plenty of the time, your range is actually even wider than that. Many of us have commented that the range you posted is too wide, even for an adjustment. So clearly, being even wider is even worse.

You should be adjusting your ranges to exploit table dynamics, but you're over-widening your OOP range here. As jyms pointed out, you only want to open up a slight bit from EP, and a little bit in MP, and then you open up a lot from the CO and BTN.

You're getting involved in far too many hands OOP. I'm sure you've heard that "position is power" in NLHE, but you have failed to let that fact work its way into your pre-flop habits. You need to start folding a ton of hands UTG/MP that you would almost always play from CO/BTN.

Also, you need to stop thinking about villain's range as though it's the same for all villains. You can't just assume that different people 3-bet the same range. TAG's are likely to be similar, and LAG's are likely to be similar, but the extreme donk-fish that is so common at the micros is going to do very strange things.

[BorisTheSpider]

ok so where does the line get drawn of whether it is even profitable to open certain hands because if you get 3bet you have to fold? or then do you think that if you cant 4bet the hand then you shouldn't even be opening with it? what percentage of hands can we actually fold before we start losing money just by opening the action? I don't know if im wording my question right.
an example answer is " we can open x% of hands UTG and fold X% of that range and still be profitable

Well that depends how much you're getting 3bet. If people even notice that you're playing a 4bet or fold strategy (which is doubtful), then they start 3betting you with a wider range, then your 4bet value range can widen, and you can get it in with more hands, so it shouldn't greatly affect your UTG opening range - if someone is 3betting you like a monkey, you can probably be willing to stack off with at least the top half of it, if not more. (Provided that your UTG range is strong enough, and doesn't consist of like 15% of hands).

The main point though is that any concern that someone is going to exploit a 4bet-or-fold tendency pales into total insignificance compared with the money you'll bleed playing 3bet pots OOP.

[BorisTheSpider]

well I don't play a set range in any game. I adjust based on the table dynamics..

I don't believe you're adjusting. What can you be adjusting if you don't know what your default range is? What can there be to adjust?

[acg123]

There's no point in asking for advice if you're going to be defensive when you get it. It's better for your learning process if you ask questions to understand why we have suggested what we did, than for you to back-pedal and justify something we have criticized.





I'm not sure why you're laughing. I am seriously suggesting you do this.

whoa! not criticizing at all I was laughing because I did it the exact moment I read it. really meant no disrespect I appreciate all advice given. like I said I am going to take your advice I think I have been wayyy to loose OOP. my game is suffering substantially as my swings have gotten absolutely vicious. +/- 30BI on any give week playing 2-4 hours a night. 4 tabling.




If that's your 'average' range, then that means that plenty of the time, your range is actually even wider than that. Many of us have commented that the range you posted is too wide, even for an adjustment. So clearly, being even wider is even worse.

You should be adjusting your ranges to exploit table dynamics, but you're over-widening your OOP range here. As jyms pointed out, you only want to open up a slight bit from EP, and a little bit in MP, and then you open up a lot from the CO and BTN.

You're getting involved in far too many hands OOP. I'm sure you've heard that "position is power" in NLHE, but you have failed to let that fact work its way into your pre-flop habits. You need to start folding a ton of hands UTG/MP that you would almost always play from CO/BTN.

Also, you need to stop thinking about villain's range as though it's the same for all villains. You can't just assume that different people 3-bet the same range. TAG's are likely to be similar, and LAG's are likely to be similar, but the extreme donk-fish that is so common at the micros is going to do very strange things.

I see what you mean, like I said Im going to tighten up in earlier positions and keep my game the same in CO and BTN as im already playing wide in these positions. thanks for your advice and help. I appreciate it.

a

[acg123]

Well that depends how much you're getting 3bet. If people even notice that you're playing a 4bet or fold strategy (which is doubtful), then they start 3betting you with a wider range, then your 4bet value range can widen, and you can get it in with more hands, so it shouldn't greatly affect your UTG opening range - if someone is 3betting you like a monkey, you can probably be willing to stack off with at least the top half of it, if not more. (Provided that your UTG range is strong enough, and doesn't consist of like 15% of hands).

The main point though is that any concern that someone is going to exploit a 4bet-or-fold tendency pales into total insignificance compared with the money you'll bleed playing 3bet pots OOP.

excellent point I didn't think of. makes a lot of sense being OOP sucks. lol

[acg123]

I don't believe you're adjusting. What can you be adjusting if you don't know what your default range is? What can there be to adjust?

well if the game is loose I will dump the SCs and non-connected broadways, also pairs up to 88. I will open with 88+,ATs+,KQs,QJs,JTs,AQo,KQo

if game is playing tight lots of folding, players are "fit-or-fold" or do a lot of calling preflop only to fold to cbet then I will play closer to the range I described. 13.4% roughly.

[Pelion]

Not that it's really the point of this thread, but if we are talking 6 max then this is a pretty standard UTG open range, and isn't crazy loose at all. My default UTG open range is a little looser than this.

UTG in 6 max is in no way the same as UTG in FR. In 6 max, we have position on 2 players and are out of position to 3 players. In FR, we have position on 2 players and are out of position to 6 players. This is a massive difference.

In response to the actual question, you haven't really considered at all that the 50% of hands he cbets with are likely to contain most of his equity. You have given yourself implied odds, when actually you are likely to be facing reverse implied odds when he bets the flop and you don't have a lot of nut hands in your preflop/flop range. This effect gets worse if he can bet more than one street.

[MadMojoMonkey]

ok so where does the line get drawn of whether it is even profitable to open certain hands because if you get 3bet you have to fold? or then do you think that if you cant 4bet the hand then you shouldn't even be opening with it? what percentage of hands can we actually fold before we start losing money just by opening the action? I don't know if im wording my question right.
an example answer is " we can open x% of hands UTG and fold X% of that range and still be profitable

This all depends on a large number of factors, mainly the specific villain's range and bet size. The single most important skill for you to have at a poker game is the ability to put villains on ranges. This should be your primary focus. The way you play your own cards is a function of villains' ranges and pot odds.

We're not being rude or difficult when we fail to answer your questions here. The problem is that you're looking to generalize aspects of the game that simply can not be generalized. Without knowledge of odds and ranges, we cannot tell you how to play any hand "properly". We can only tell you that you're probably too loose or too tight or too passive or too aggressive. We simply can not give you more specific advice without more specific information.

I mean if you said:

Villain 3-bets A% of hands, will continue with B% of hands, and will fold (A-B)/A = C% of hands. Hero is facing a call of D into a pot of E.

At what % of folds, F, does Hero become exploitable against these pot odds? What is the range of value hands, G, that Hero should continue with? With what range of hands, H, should Hero be happy to fold such that H/(H + G) = F?

You see how much the ranges and odds matter there? This doesn't even consider a 4-bet, or post flop play.

Please read this:
spoonitnow's Mathematics of EV Thread

[Pelion]

Unless Villains can see your cards, you're making connections that just don't make sense.

While this is probably true, blockers have a fairly large effect on the EV of 4bet bluffing as well. e.g. AQ is likely to be a much better 4bet bluff hand than 67s (in spots where we can't value call/raise it) because it makes it less likely villain has AA/QQ/AK etc. Likewise Ax, Kx type hands are usually going to be better than middle card hands.

Also, based on admittedly small sample size, I feel like I get more folds when I insta 4bet AA than when I think for a little and 4bet bluff A2s.

[acg123]

While this is probably true, blockers have a fairly large effect on the EV of 4bet bluffing as well. e.g. AQ is likely to be a much better 4bet bluff hand than 67s (in spots where we can't value call/raise it) because it makes it less likely villain has AA/QQ/AK etc. Likewise Ax, Kx type hands are usually going to be better than middle card hands.

Also, based on admittedly small sample size, I feel like I get more folds when I insta 4bet AA than when I think for a little and 4bet bluff A2s.

lol very true I don't think I realize things like that sometimes or don't take them into consideration after debating for 6-7 seconds whether to 4bet where if I have AA it takes 0 seconds to know im 4betting.

[MadMojoMonkey]

@ Pelion: You make some excellent points.

I wonder if you're encouraging thin value behavior in someone who has yet to fully grasp fat value, though.

[Pelion]

@ Pelion: You make some excellent points.

I wonder if you're encouraging thin value behavior in someone who has yet to fully grasp fat value, though.

Perhaps. I have no real idea what level OP is at. I'm teaching my gf to play at the moment though and her open range from UTG (at 2NL where no one 3bets and fish pay off every time) is like 22+/AQ+/KQ if that helps.

[acg123]

This all depends on a large number of factors, mainly the specific villain's range and bet size. The single most important skill for you to have at a poker game is the ability to put villains on ranges. This should be your primary focus. The way you play your own cards is a function of villains' ranges and pot odds.

We're not being rude or difficult when we fail to answer your questions here. The problem is that you're looking to generalize aspects of the game that simply can not be generalized. Without knowledge of odds and ranges, we cannot tell you how to play any hand "properly". We can only tell you that you're probably too loose or too tight or too passive or too aggressive. We simply can not give you more specific advice without more specific information.

I mean if you said:

Villain 3-bets A% of hands, will continue with B% of hands, and will fold (A-B)/A = C% of hands. Hero is facing a call of D into a pot of E.

At what % of folds, F, does Hero become exploitable against these pot odds? What is the range of value hands, G, that Hero should continue with? With what range of hands, H, should Hero be happy to fold such that H/(H + G) = F?

You see how much the ranges and odds matter there? This doesn't even consider a 4-bet, or post flop play.

Please read this:
spoonitnow's Mathematics of EV Thread

I do, thank you and I think I understand where I went wrong. let me try again

ok so villain 3 bets 99+,AQs+ 3.3%
our UTG opening range is 44+,ATs+,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,76s,65s,AJo+,K Qo
now say in this situation we DO NOT have a 4bet hand.( 4bet range is QQ+,AQs+,AKo
so our range is actually
JJ-44,AJs-ATs,KTs+,QTs+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,76s,65s,AQo-AJo,KQo
what portion of our range should we be folding, and what portion should we be calling?
I think this example will net a much better result. hopefully..

[Cobra_1878]

Not that it's really the point of this thread, but if we are talking 6 max then this is a pretty standard UTG open range, and isn't crazy loose at all. My default UTG open range is a little looser than this.

UTG in 6 max is in no way the same as UTG in FR. In 6 max, we have position on 2 players and are out of position to 3 players. In FR, we have position on 2 players and are out of position to 6 players. This is a massive difference.

In response to the actual question, you haven't really considered at all that the 50% of hands he cbets with are likely to contain most of his equity. You have given yourself implied odds, when actually you are likely to be facing reverse implied odds when he bets the flop and you don't have a lot of nut hands in your preflop/flop range. This effect gets worse if he can bet more than one street.

Wow, I must be playing way too tight UTG. Was looking at some of my stats last night and it seems I lose the most money from UTG...with my range being super tight is that possibly why or am I just going to lose more by widening my opening range?

My current UTG range would be something like 88+, ATs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo.

[BorisTheSpider]

Wow, I must be playing way too tight UTG. Was looking at some of my stats last night and it seems I lose the most money from UTG...with my range being super tight is that possibly why or am I just going to lose more by widening my opening range?

My current UTG range would be something like 88+, ATs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo.

You can loosen that up a little, but I think the originally posted UTG range is loose. Remember you don't want to be playing OOP postflop which is often what you'll end up doing UTG. You can loosen up UTG situationally when there's a big fish in the blinds, especially at 6max where there's every chance you get to the flop heads up IP against the fish.

[Savy]

Perhaps. I have no real idea what level OP is at. I'm teaching my gf to play at the moment though and her open range from UTG (at 2NL where no one 3bets and fish pay off every time) is like 22+/AQ+/KQ if that helps.

I actually think at 2nl tables are loose enough that we should take away some hands like 22 and add some AJ, KJs type hands.

[Pelion]

Wow, I must be playing way too tight UTG. Was looking at some of my stats last night and it seems I lose the most money from UTG...with my range being super tight is that possibly why or am I just going to lose more by widening my opening range?

My current UTG range would be something like 88+, ATs+, KQs, AJo+, KQo.

Is this 6max?

I don't see how playing too tight could ever be the reason for losing money from a non-blind position. Take it to the extreme. If you only play AA, would you expect to be losing from that position? You never have any forced outgoings and could literally shove preflop every time. You probably wouldn't win enough to cover your blinds, but you'd be positive from UTG (and a losing player overall).

If you are losing while playing a tight range then you are probably just struggling to play a tight range OOP. If that is the case then you probably need more work on playing good hands OOP before throwing in more marginal hands OOP.

If I were losing with that strong a range I'd be tempted to look at where my winnings come from. Am I getting folds with all of my strong hands and only getting action with TPTK when I valuetown myself vs a set? If this is the case then I probably want to play more hands which flop enough equity to push hard and allow people to fold to my not so strong hands. The Axs, 89s, KTs, type hands do this pretty well for me.

From UTG any suited broadways, most suited connectors and Axs are fair game for me. (Opening all SCs AND all Axs is too loose as a default - but choosing one of these groups is fine). If I'm getting 3bet and having to fold a lot then I will drop some of these. If I am being allowed to see flops and having people fold a lot on flops/turns/rivers then I will start to add in more of these hands. If I am really running over a nitty table then I will open any suited broadways, any SCs higher than 45s AND any Axs for semi-bluffability.

Which starting hands you should chose all depends on whether your money is coming from fish calling, or nits folding.

[Pelion]

I actually think at 2nl tables are loose enough that we should take away some hands like 22 and add some AJ, KJs type hands.

I play all of those :P. I would never drop baby pairs at 2NL. You have HUGE implied odds, rarely get 3bet, and still often win with a cbet.

[Savy]

Depends on the type of table really, too many tables have people who are just never folding pre or post in which case we should definitely drop them. But ye I suppose that's for the adjustments 101 lesson.

[Cobra_1878]

Is this 6max?

I don't see how playing too tight could ever be the reason for losing money from a non-blind position. Take it to the extreme. If you only play AA, would you expect to be losing from that position? You never have any forced outgoings and could literally shove preflop every time. You probably wouldn't win enough to cover your blinds, but you'd be positive from UTG (and a losing player overall).

If you are losing while playing a tight range then you are probably just struggling to play a tight range OOP. If that is the case then you probably need more work on playing good hands OOP before throwing in more marginal hands OOP.

If I were losing with that strong a range I'd be tempted to look at where my winnings come from. Am I getting folds with all of my strong hands and only getting action with TPTK when I valuetown myself vs a set? If this is the case then I probably want to play more hands which flop enough equity to push hard and allow people to fold to my not so strong hands. The Axs, 89s, KTs, type hands do this pretty well for me.

From UTG any suited broadways, most suited connectors and Axs are fair game for me. (Opening all SCs AND all Axs is too loose as a default - but choosing one of these groups is fine). If I'm getting 3bet and having to fold a lot then I will drop some of these. If I am being allowed to see flops and having people fold a lot on flops/turns/rivers then I will start to add in more of these hands. If I am really running over a nitty table then I will open any suited broadways, any SCs higher than 45s AND any Axs for semi-bluffability.

Which starting hands you should chose all depends on whether your money is coming from fish calling, or nits folding.

Yeah it's 6max. I'm not sure how to find my win rates using PT4, can only find bb/Hand when searching for hands by position and not sure if that's any good?

I agree that I am probably struggling playing OOP, in fact I'm definitely struggling. I'm not comfortable with it at all and have tried numerous things to try and change it up but haven't found a solution yet.

[Pelion]

@ Savy

But that's exactly what I mean. If they are never folding pre or post then we have massive implied odds. See a cheap flop and stack someone.

I have 22-99 running at +350bb/100 in my last (admittedly brief) stint at 2NL after restarting this year. 22-55 show +310bb/100.

I wouldn't drop these hands if you paid me (less than 400bb/100)