Live Poker Poker Forums

The clear concensus in live poker seems to be that there's not a ton of 3 betting preflop, and a 3bet usually means QQ+,AK in typical 1-2/2-5 casino games. But what do you guys think is the optimal pre-flop 3-betting strategy?? Ur range should be polarized right? Is it better to have a general preset polarized range or tailor your light 3bets specifically to those likely to fold, and ur value 3bets to those with wide raising ranges? How should your range change with position? Table dynamics?

Def adjust to the players. Having a preset hand range is almost always a mistake.

You should rarely be 3bet bluffing because live players don't like to fold to 3bets. Many players have tightish opening ranges and they call a reraise with almost all of that range.

Another situation that comes up not infrequently is that you might have a good, or at least competent, player on your right who is raising frequently preflop. If the players to your left are bad, you should basically have no 3betting range. (In theory, assuming this guy is competent enough to fold to 3bets, you could throw in some 3bet bluffs, but it's probably thin enough / high variance enough that you don't really need to push such an edge when there are lots of better profit opportunities.) The reason for not 3betting is that you don't want to drive out the bad players who will call very very wide against a single raise but play significantly tighter if you 3bet.

If your bankroll is limited or you don't have a lot of cash on hand, you should be passing up marginal 3betting opportunities. The main reason for value 3betting is to build a pot early so you can win a lot postflop. In live poker, you can often build pots postflop when the flop is favorable, even if it is just a single-raised pot.

There are two main reasons I 3bet live. One is for straight value. No matter how tight I play, people still call my 3bets. The second is to isolate a loose raiser with position when we are both deep. In that case, I usually have enough of a read on the player to have a game plan of what I am trying to accomplish. I could be isolating with KJ because I expect to stack him on a K or J high flop if he's just awful, or I could be isolating with KJ expecting to win a lot of pots with cbets and having some high card value as weak backup. If I don't yet have such a read, I'll probably just fold the KJ.

Define "optimal"

Define "optimal"

I find game theorie's definition of optimal to be silly, but whatever.

Pay attention to how your opponents play/think and adjust to exploit them. If they raise wide and call a lot, then 3bet for thin value. If they are huge nits who will fold a lot of their tight opening range, then 3bet bluff them. If they raise wide enough to include a lot of broadway and pair hands and will call and play fit or fold OOP, then 3bet/cbet them. Live poker is still poker.

Pay attention to how your opponents play/think and adjust to exploit them. If they raise wide and call a lot, then 3bet for thin value. If they are huge nits who will fold a lot of their tight opening range, then 3bet bluff them. If they raise wide enough to include a lot of broadway and pair hands and will call and play fit or fold OOP, then 3bet/cbet them. Live poker is still poker.

Yeah, this.

There is no magic way to play your hands that will always be the most profitable. You're going to have to figure out what your opponents are doing and then out-think them.

I agree with SJ 100%.
Opening my 3 bet range is something I've been working on this summer.

Some things I'd like to just touch on AGAIN because they're so important:

1) Your 3bets have very little FE live.
"By golly I put in a 4xbb raise, i'll be damned if I'm folding!" is what you're going to see a ton. Even with me having always having a tight image I STILL get my 3bets called (usually in more then 1 spot). So for the most part keep it to your value hands.

2) Against a loose opener you STILL want to keep it to your value hands (and of course still have position on him as well). Whereas against an unknown you might flat a hand like AQo, against someone that's opening too much 3betting is definitely for value here.

Story time:
I was playing with this guy Tuesday night, he's the perfect candidate for 3betting light (unfortunately he was 1 off to my left).

He's one of those "I think I know what I'm talking about because I use poker terms, but I misuse them and I'm actually terribad" types. He was opening stuff like A/9o from UTG.

However he was totally clueless. He had a super nitty older asian guy to his immediate left (that was a shortstack). Kid straddles, asian guy calls, LP raises (and got called by straddle kid), asian dude re-raised, then goes all in blind out of turn. Kid still called, with a 10x hand.

As SJ & Medic point out and everyone agrees with, you have very little FE live.

Correct me if I am wrong....

I do not use a polarized range live as your range certainly does not need any balance on account of unobservant opponents w zero FE and zero 4 bet range. I want to use the negative end of the polarized range in an environment where I will likely win the pot out right a reasonable amount of the time, achieve a fold OTF when called a reasonable amount of the time (often leveraging position), and benefit from balancing my range making it more difficult to play against me (generate a deseptive range). If the environment will generally require SD value, my opponents do not fold often when they hold a hand of little to moderate value and do not adapt (such as live) then I want to start with valuable hands that SD well and build pots when I have good value. I do not want to inflate the pot with weak hands and lower the SPR. For this reason I use and would suggest a depolorized range of value.

You may find that your opponents have such a tendency to SD with a wide range that your 3 bet value range can become wider, but not polarized. Perhaps this is the statement that you are looking for? Hands that are poor choices to 3 bet with in the online environment like AJ or KQ because of their inability to be called by worse and reverse implied odds may actually become hands that are 3 bet for value in the live environment because of the inverse reasoning for the online environment.

This is the most important advice> Please notes when learning / expanding it is easy to mis apply concepts and advice or suddenly take a concept to the extreme. Please do not do this with this advice and start 3 betting AJ and KQ with a resonance frequency. Examine the situation and have reason for doing it first, strong reason (not "I thought he was weak" that is just the start).

I would tailor my 3 bet strategy to opponents that fold if I ever found them, but they do not exist, they are only a myth in live games lol. Your range should never be preset, but will often hold duplication. AA is always going to be part of my 3 betting range in any environment, but AQ will only be part in very specific environments. The width of my depolorized range is dependent on the enviro.

Live poker, value, value, value.

My story time, good example:
Environment is a regular game I play, 5/10 that goes to SD a very high %.
The villain opened $55 in EP, is know to play a wide range. My read was that her open was smaller then her (and the typical) $65+ and that her motivation was that she would rather set the price on the flop and carry the initiative to the flop rather than pay a high price should somebody else R. A reasonable amount of small PP in this range.

I 3 bet in MP because :
1. I felt she was very likely to play fit or fold post OOP in a 3 bet pot w small PP, and likely to give value with draws with connectors.
2. I wanted to isolate her, my A9o is to weak vs a wide field. Folding is probably better than calling.
3. The button who is very stationy pre appeared uninterested in calling.
4. She is never folding, I will get called by worse.
5. Her bet sizing capped her range, my typically weak A9 was never going to be dominated. I was never going to suffer reversed implied odds.
6. I had position, without it I fold. Ace high will often have SD value and I will be in a position to get there should I feel it beneficial.

As you can see I had many reasons for what I did and this is the important part of the hand.

This stuff is GOLD. Thanks guys for the feedback. @Contra, props for the 3bet rationale in your example, very helpful. Can you describe the type of situation/environment where you would feel the need to generate a deceptive range, making it more difficult to play against you? I'm assuming for starters you'd be up against opponents who are actually paying attention.

Hmm... my initial instinctive answer to this was if you need a deceptive 3 betting strategy you are probably in the wrong game.

In saying this, I can see value in attacking a good player that is constantly isolating the fish and inhibiting your ability to engage the fish. 3 betting to force the reg to narrow their range a bit and allow you to engage the fish is valuable. They may only be theoretical. What money you expell mucking about must be < the ADDITIONAL money you gain from the fish.

Let me think about the deceptive range and see if I can come up with a need for one lol.

Till then perhaps SJ, Medic, Shuttle, or Jigglin have some thoughts on the need for a deceptive 3 betting range?

There is little need for deceptive ranges in live poker because most players don't use the information available to them.

Also, the immediate EV of 3betting a decent player who is frequently isolating a fish is usually lower than just flatting behind so that you keep the fish in the hand. In some sense, they may be giving you "deception" in the sense that you will have a fairly strong range overall for cold-calling, but the fish may not give you as much credit because you weren't the aggressor before the flop.