Some 3betting math help
Posted by m3taphysics
Posted by
m3taphysics
posted in
Gen. Poker
Some 3betting math help
Hello!
I have been toying with excel and 3betting math/ranges. To try get a handle on some GTO strategy and just a general feel of the math. Could somebody confirm what I have?
Note, I haven't adjusted the ranges, I just plugged the percentages into Equilab to get a rough estimate.
Villains Opening Range UTG : 15% (77+, A7s+, K9s+, QTs+, JTs, ATo+, KTo+, QJo)
Villain 4Bet Range : 2.56% (QQ+, AKs, AKo)
Villains Call Range: 2.11 (JJ-TT, AQs, AQo)
Given these opening ranges, Villain folds to 3b 68.87% of the time:
1 - ((4b range + call range) / opening range) = 68.87%
So they are only defending 31.13% of the range that they are opening, if they never bluff.
Now, given some standard opening sizes:
Villain Opens 3bb
We 3Bet IP to 9bb
Blinds are 1.5bb
For an immediate profit, villain must fold more than 66.67% of the time 9/(9+3+1.5).
Villain is actually folding 68.87% of the time, given a 2.2% margin of error.
Does this imply we make an immediate profit by 3betting him, with any two, assuming he never adjusts and is a complete robot?
So in short. Given these standard 3betting sizes, You must defend a minimum of 33% of your opening range to ensure villain cannot make an immedate profit by 3betting you?
And given this baseline. How do we go about constructing a calling range, given villains approximate 3betting range?
Or have I completely gone wrong with my maths? (it happens often!!)
Loading 8 Comments...
I'm not an expert, which is why I wanted to read the question :) All seems right, if we assume we lose every time he even calls then we need to win $4.50 exactly twice as often as we lose $9 to break even which is 66.67% and if he folds more often it's profitable to 3B any two.
Looking at my button ranges it implies given a 40% opening range I do not defend anywhere near enough!!
If you open 40% on the button. You need to find 33% of that range to defend (4bet or call). I defend around 15-20%. Which would imply that 3betting me from the blinds is incredibly profitable....
I think...
I would guess it's only a problem if it's a problem. I imagine that unlike the imaginary villain above you would adjust if you got 3B every time. Also unlike your toy example there is still further action and you will be in position with a stronger range than GT would suggest. I know that's not a game theory based answer :) You could construct ranges that were GTO.
Pretty good article here that delves into the math of 3b/4b/5betting that I have been trying to wrap my head around lately if you haven't already read it.
http://en.donkr.com/Articles/Category/Optimal-3-bet--4-bet--5-bet-Strategies-in-NL-Hold'em-6-Max-16
Tipton's book is good reading for a quantitative approach:
http://www.amazon.com/Expert-Heads-Limit-Holdem-Volume/dp/1904468942
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/33/books-publications/expert-heads-up-no-limit-holdem-v-1-optimal-exploitive-strategies-will-tipton-1281938/
Thanks zenfish I have been thinking of getting this book how does it compare to Janda's?
Tipton's book is mathematically more rigorous (HU games allow for more of that). I think the two books complement each other well.
Dont forget, that you have 2 or 3 villians behind(if you are CO) , and that costs you money, that you have to rest on your EV equation. If you are SB/BB you can do the equation without counting that you have villians behind.
BTW sorry for the english
Be the first to add a comment