Poker Theory Poker Forums

Advice please on specific 3 betting situation:

I find recently this is happening to me a lot. I am a TAG player - 3 bet of 9%. Some sessions I may 3 bet a bit too much from the BB.

I am BB. Good reg on btn.

He opens for 2.5x, I 3 bet to 8.5x, he 4 bets to 20x.

I have AQo, or 77 - I don;t feel comfortable jamming these hands, and sometimes I will call here - flop doesnt hit me, good reg wins nice pot.

I suppose I should be jamming these hands pre flop???

Just dont 3 bet those hands vs this villian if you do then yes your plan should be to 5 bet jam.
That definately isnt my default though just because i label him a reg, i may adjust if i get 4 bet 3 times in a few orbits for example or i have a large sample on him and his 4 bet % high in this spot.

6 months ago i would have had all the stats of a reg but would only have 4 bet you with QQ+ AK in this spot, you would label me a reg because of my stats and i would snap call your 5 bet jam shaking my head in confusion when you flip AQo thinking your a maniac.

Advice please on specific 3 betting situation:

I find recently this is happening to me a lot. I am a TAG player - 3 bet of 9%. Some sessions I may 3 bet a bit too much from the BB.

I am BB. Good reg on btn.

He opens for 2.5x, I 3 bet to 8.5x, he 4 bets to 20x.

I have AQo, or 77 - I don;t feel comfortable jamming these hands, and sometimes I will call here - flop doesnt hit me, good reg wins nice pot.

I suppose I should be jamming these hands pre flop???

With AQ/77 we have around 35% versus a range of TT+/AQ (62 combos, assuming villain is 4bet/calling those for value). Villain needs to 4bet bluff a lot before we can shove those hands because we need more then 50% fold equity. Assuming villain is opening 50% OTB (663 combos) he needs to 4bet more then 20% of his opening range (134 combos) to make this a +EV shove with AQ/77.

^ Ummm I could be dumb but that doesn't seem correct. At all. Can you show me the math where you figure we need 50% fold equity?

Here's my math (OP this might help you, especially the shortcut after).

Where X is fold equity;

EV vs calling range (1-x) + EV of fold (X) = 0

[ (1-x) * (.35(120) - .65(80)) ] + [ X * 30.5] = 0

[ (1-x) * (-10) ] + 30.5x = 0

-10 + 40.5x = 0

40.5x = 10

x = .25

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A faster way to think about this is that we win 35% of a 200bb pot every time we shove. So post shove, our final stack will be 70bb when called and without a shove, our stack will be 80bb. This means that our shove actually only costs us 10bb, and thus we are actually bluffing 10 into 30.5 (which gives us the same breakeven %).

EV vs calling range (1-x) + EV of fold (X) = 0

[ (1-x) * (.35(120) - .65(80)) ] + [ X * 30.5] = 0

[ (1-x) * (-10) ] + 30.5x = 0

-10 + 40.5x = 0

40.5x = 10

x = .25

We can only win 0.35*110bbs and not 120bbs. 30bbs in pot + 80bbs villains stack
We can lose 0.65*91.5bbs and not 80bbs.

http://imageshack.us/f/440/18849033.jpg/

Please double check my calculation, thanks!

We can only win 0.35*110bbs and not 120bbs. 30bbs in pot + 80bbs villains stack
We can lose 0.65*91.5bbs and not 80bbs.

http://imageshack.us/f/440/18849033.jpg/

Please double check my calculation, thanks!

what calc are you using i have been looking for something like that for ages

what calc are you using i have been looking for something like that for ages

You can PM me your skype so I can send it to you if you like.

Assuming villain calls a shove with TT+/AQ+, we need him to fold 42% of the time to profitably shove AQ, and 37% of the time to profitably shove 77.

Assuming villain calls a shove with TT+/AQ+, we need him to fold 42% of the time to profitably shove AQ, and 37% of the time to profitably shove 77.

You're correct. I used 35% equity for both hands and rounded some numbers up. When villain folds 50% of his 4bet range we actually already make a good amount of BBs on our shove and from your percentages we are ~ breaking even.

You're correct. I used 35% equity for both hands and rounded some numbers up. When villain folds 50% of his 4bet range we actually already make a good amount of BBs on our shove and from your percentages we are ~ breaking even.

Yeah, I should have said we need villain to fold more than 42% of the time with AQ, and 37% of the time with 77.

Yeah, I should have said we need villain to fold [i]more[/] than 42% of the time with AQ, and 37% of the time with 77.

So effectively we can profitably 5bet jam AQo+ 77+ vs an 8% 4betting range.

You are correct, we are jamming 91.5 and not 80 which was where my mistake was.

<--- Needs to do more maths

i m far from a computer (hollidays) but that seem very interesting. i will work on it as soon as i come back. thanks have a nice day

u can also do it like that

200bb x our equity when called (around 70bb) = x1

90bb our shove = x2

30bb we win if he folds = x3

x2 - x1 = 90bb - 70bb = 20bb - amount we risk to win x3 (30bb)

20bb / 20bb + 30bb (x3) = 40%

and lets check it

= 40% x 30bb - [60% (200bb x 35% - 90bb)] = 12 - 12 = 0

If villain 3bets a non-linear range I will start to flat A LOT more hands. One of the best ways to make that observation is to look at the hands villain flats vs our steals.

Trying to grasp this idea, kind of confused, though; We are flatting more hands vs 3 bets depending on what he flats vs our steals, but by what criteria? We make the "observation" as to the linearity/ non-linearity based on what he flats with but does this mean if he is flatting hands a little worse than what he 3 bets, it's linear, and if he flats medium hands while 3bing the bottom of his range its non linear? Interested in examples of how we apply this? Is this covered in a video maybe?

@improva
Good post, but what about taking depolarized/polarized 3b ranges into consideration? Are you sure calling hands like KJs/KTs is correct vs depolarized 7%? There are lots of hands that dominate us!

Regarding EV calcs. With 77:
- we have 37.2% equity vs { TT+, AQs+, AQo+ }
- my Excel calcs show I need ~~ 43% fold equity to make the shove 0EV (remember about rake when we get called)