General Discussion Poker Forums

Is there a general consensus at what raise size and SPR (100bb stacks) a player is "committed" to calling a 3bet OOP with a pocket pair or calling a 4bet OOP with a suited connector? For the 3bet, if we assume there's a size between 9bb (where calling to set mine is unprofitable) and 5bb (where calling with anything is mandatory) after raising 3x OOP at what point is it EV neutral to call PPs? Likewise, if we assume there's a 4bet size between 17bb (I'm not certain whether or not this commits villain's range to calling or not honestly) and 25bb (where it's assumed villains push or fold) vs. a 10bb 3bet at what point is it EV neutral to call with a SC?

Can any one help me with this?

As per jk3a, I like the 15-1 rule. In other words, you should have 15-1 odds (including implied odds) in order to call with a PP in order to set mine.

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking for the second question. But unless you're really deep, it's just not going to be profitable to call 4bets with suited connectors (or most anything else), especially OOP.

Basically, I'm trying to see how small I can 3bet or 4bet to either still have fold equity or to get my opponents to call me OOP. I figure there's some value in reducing my risk vs. reward on my bluffs and/or forcing them to play OOP with out the initiative at an SPR they're not familiar with.

I'm just not really sure how to compute that mathematically.

Your questions are a bit too general. Let's use extreme examples:

Say you have a billion hands on someone and over these his 3B% is 0.5% (basically AA and only AA). For 100BB stacks I'll call ATC no matter if IP or OOP. Then I (check)/ship any flop on which I have a hand that beats Aces.

Conversely a player with a similar sample but a 3B of 100% will have way to loose a range to call profitably pre with speculative hands.

Also I recommend you to make yourself a bit more familiar with commitment and poker math in general. It seems that you have some catching up to do in that department. A good start is WoT's math series, but this season two math based serieses are running aswell (albeit a bit more advanced)

Say you have a billion hands on someone and over these his 3B% is 0.5% (basically AA and only AA). For 100BB stacks I'll call ATC no matter if IP or OOP. Then I (check)/ship any flop on which I have a hand that beats Aces.

ATC seems like quite a stretch. you only flop 2p with an unpaired hand 1/50 times and trips less than that. with connectors again you still flop a straight less than 1/50 as well, and with 2 suited cards the odds of flopping a flush are worse than 1/100.

added all up, you're going to flop one of these hands about 5.5% or 1/17. and again, thats if you have a suited connector, not something like AJo, which is going to be crushed by AA even worse.

final edit: this also doesn't count the times you flop well but lose to counterfeit, chops, 2-outers, etc.

Extreme examples are kind of pointless, what I'm trying to do is figure out how much equity and stack depth villains need in order to make speculative calls OOP vs. a balanced, distributed 3bet range so I can play in position vs. them with the initiative post flop more instead of watching them play the 4bet/fold game vs my 3bets.

Villains fold everything but the top 5% of hands or so to a 9bb re-raise and call their entire range to a 5bb re-raise, so we're looking for a 3bet size that turns them into a fit/fold fish OOP that either retains some fold equity or maximizes the amount of dead money they'll put in the middle to set mine us.

FWIW, they start spazz calling at like 8bb, but I honestly don't know at what point I'm giving them the odds to call me with a wide range of low tier hands on my 3bet.

I'm not going to make a lot posts in this thread since the OP is super general.

100bb deep you do want most villains to go into 4-bet or fold mode. You have position. That is a HUGE advantage in high variance situations - you get to jam over their 4-bet.

That said you will find some people from AU, NZ, ES and IT who likes them really small 3-bets as a default game plan. And truth be told it can be little wierd in the beginning and I also do it from time to time myself - just to mess around a little.

You're question becomes a lot more interesting when you are say 150bbs deep. People can call with a lot more hands because of stack sizes and 4-bet bluffing becomes much more relevant than 100bb deep.

I have interest in 4betting sizes too.

It seems like the standard to 4bet to 25bb ish when 3bet to 10, 100bbs deep. However, when I do this @50NL, it is pretty common to get flatted, so I raised the size to 27ish, and they still flat IP. It happens especially when I figure someone has a depolarized range, and I 4bet with a very polarized range. They just don't seem to be able to let go of AQ type hands which they 3bet for value.

Would the adjustment be to just raise my size even more and not 4betbluff?

Agree and disagree, at 400NL+ villains are going to have a balanced 4bet/fold range for 5bet bluffing to be profitable, but at 200NL- villains are going to either have a 4bet shove or a 4bet commit range that diminishes the value of the last bet, wait for a hand or just leave the table before they bother to get into the 3bet/4bet/5bet games. I figure, if we can 3bet smaller and turn them into set miners or induce them to play post-flop, OOP with out the initiative our position increases in value by making them play in situations they're unfamiliar with.

I've seen a couple other regs doing this to about 7.5bb vs 3bb in BB vs SB confrontations vs. aggro SBs and they just destroy their villains post flop, and considering a 3bet is still to like 23.5bb the 3bet/4bet/5bet game isn't really going anywhere no? It just seems like 3betting 1BB to 1.5BB smaller puts them into a damned if you do, damned if you don't spot where they're going to screw up by calling too much on top of the normal shenanigans.

Agree and disagree, at 400NL+ villains are going to have a balanced 4bet/fold range for 5bet bluffing to be profitable, but at 200NL- villains are going to either have a 4bet shove or a 4bet commit range that diminishes the value of the last bet, wait for a hand or just leave the table before they bother to get into the 3bet/4bet/5bet games. I figure, if we can 3bet smaller and turn them into set miners or induce them to play post-flop, OOP with out the initiative our position increases in value by making them play in situations they're unfamiliar with.

I've seen a couple other regs doing this to about 7.5bb vs 3bb in BB vs SB confrontations vs. aggro SBs and they just destroy their villains post flop, and considering a 3bet is still to like 23.5bb the 3bet/4bet/5bet game isn't really going anywhere no? It just seems like 3betting 1BB to 1.5BB smaller puts them into a damned if you do, damned if you don't spot where they're going to screw up by calling too much on top of the normal shenanigans.

You are missing the point that you can shove a much wider range than they can 4-bet call with.

Right, but how does the 3bet/4bet/5bet game change when the 3bet size is appr. 8.5 to 7.5 and the 4bet size is appr. 25.5 to 23.5? The frequencies and 4bet sizes should remain more or less the same for the 3bet/4bet/5bet game, but the likely hood of them calling should definitely increase per - .5bb less on our 3bet.

If we get them to play 4bet/fold and set mine OOP it's like win, win no? All we risk is his tweener hands like AQ, AJs, KQs, TT becoming auto-flats.

I have interest in 4betting sizes too.

It seems like the standard to 4bet to 25bb ish when 3bet to 10, 100bbs deep. However, when I do this @50NL, it is pretty common to get flatted, so I raised the size to 27ish, and they still flat IP. It happens especially when I figure someone has a depolarized range, and I 4bet with a very polarized range. They just don't seem to be able to let go of AQ type hands which they 3bet for value.

Would the adjustment be to just raise my size even more and not 4betbluff?

As long as they have a really wide range for flatting your 4bet, and you're 4betting these types mostly for value, it should be fine if they call. In that case, go ahead and 4bet bigger for value if they'll just call with weaker holdings. Or try just 4bet shoving. If you're very likely to be called, 4bet bluffing sounds a bit suicidal to me, so stick to value hands and stop 4betting these types with a "polarized" range.

The problem with 4betting 27bb and up is that you're mathematically committing yourself to calling a 5bet shove regardless of your holding--which makes 4betting huge and folding "bad". Also, if you're committing yourself to calling a 5bet jam, you're also telegraphing this to your opponent (assuming they notice). So you eliminate a branch in their decision tree for them, which makes their play easier, again assuming they're actually thinking about it.

But if you're 4betting mouth-breathing stations that only have a call button, it's definitely going to be better to stop bluffing them and 4bet for value.

Why allow villain to 4-bet smaller?
Why force yourself to de-polarize your range?

Because I think you only lose 1 to 3 BB on their 4bets while you gain 4.5 to 5 BB on their set mines, and they should be 4betting less often than they're calling if they take up the odds. The range shouldn't be depolarized that much, AK, JJ+ should be fine as long as the Axo, Kxs in our range can just pick up the dead money by cbetting. Even if they flat me wider than PPs, I still have position on them also.

Basically, I don't think losing a few BB on 4bets and adding a couple value hands to my range is that bad if they start playing OOP with me.

That's at least FWIW, they don't seem to adjust 4bet sizes to 8bb 3bets that much.

Because I think you only lose 1 to 3 BB on their 4bets while you gain 4.5 to 5 BB on their set mines, and they should be 4betting less often than they're calling if they take up the odds. The range shouldn't be depolarized that much, AK, JJ+ should be fine as long as the Axo, Kxs in our range can just pick up the dead money by cbetting. Even if they flat me wider than PPs, I still have position on them also.

Basically, I don't think losing a few BB on 4bets and adding a couple value hands to my range is that bad if they start playing OOP with me.

That's at least FWIW, they don't seem to adjust 4bet sizes to 8bb 3bets that much.

The money is only dead if they fold. Obv. if they are so bad that they play fit or fold postflop when you gay 3-bet preflop it is the same as printing money. I kinda assume that villain is not a fish.