25NL Triple Barrel with 68s
Posted by Ryback
Posted by
Ryback
posted in
Low Stakes
25NL Triple Barrel with 68s
Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 (4 Players)
SB: $41.49
BB: $25.25 (Hero)
CO: $27.10
BN: $34.89
BB: $25.25 (Hero)
CO: $27.10
BN: $34.89
Preflop
($0.35)
Hero is BB with
6
8
, , , ,
Flop
($4.10)
K
4
2
,
Turn
($6.46)
K
4
2
7
,
River
($16.34)
K
4
2
7
Q
,
No info on villain. Is this spew? I feel like this is our best possible turn barreling hand on this board. And on the river we need to bet as we habd 8 high?
Loading 15 Comments...
There are some things to consider even though I think your line is good:
1)Preflop - whats your 3betting range and why you use this size? I suppose going bigger due to rake make most sense but 3betting on a smaller size is fine. It will certainly affect BU tange
2)Flop - can fall into a trap that betting range here is good. But rarely on Khigh 2 low cards is that the case. Actually Ahigh,Khigh not bad for IP, so betting 100% certainly not max EV strategy. If look into solver, he is folding ~10% vs 1/4 and can be touch less/bigger.
Agree that your postflopline is fine. We will be playing like this with KQ/AK/AA/KK always. So we need some bluffs as well and its hard to find proper candidates.
But imo 3betting this combo pre is a little too loose: If we start to 3bet 1-gappers in this spot, our range will be getting out of line pretty fast.
Preflop is a very easy call and not a 3bet. Yes you should 3bet more vs min raise but do it with hands like 66s and Axs instead. Now you 3bet too wide and everything else postflop is too wide.
Shouldnt we even 3betting less vs minraises?
BTN vs BB I think the BB defends wider to smaller raises by calling wider and 3betting wider. Like if you have A3s vs a regular sized raise which is borderline call or 3bet, I definitely like 3betting more vs a min raise. So 86s which is the boarderline call/fold vs a regular size raise, I'm definitely happy to always call and never 3bet.
I THINK that SB vs BTN the SB might be 3betting less vs min raises and flatting more hands but I'm not sure if I understand the theory behind that so I don't do it. Even though the ranges aren't that much difference, Snowie does like to 3bet slightly more vs bigger size openings in SB vs BTN. So I think positions is a big factor as well but I have not done enough studying to know why.
GTO Warrior
Interesting approach. Always thought that bigger RFI equals higher tendency to 3bet (avoiding rake/collecting more dead money) everywhere.
In theory a bigger sizing equals more bluffs/polar range which equals more equity for a linear range that wants to 3bet more the .
But you are totally right in BB vs BU we usually 3bet polar, so maybe this principle doesnt account here. Might you compare this in snowie?
Image is small af heres link to big pic: https://ibb.co/mbrQVck
This is what Snowie recommends for 50nl BB vs BTN for 3 different opening sizes. I haven't looked too deeply into it but just at a glance, the calling range just gets huge vs a min raise. And without counting the combos, the 3betting range is similar for all sizes. I think it is supported by theory that 3betting ranges don't change dramatically vs changes in opening size where as calling does. Yes when the bet size is bigger then the absolutely 3bet hands get narrower (strong pairs + broadways), but a lot of the hands just end up in a mixed strategy of 3betting a portion of the time so the total possible hands you can 3bet in BB vs BTN look dont change very much (pairs, Ax, broadways).
This seems pretty good for different BB playstyles since you can now choose to 3bet more/less vs big/size size and its all going to be similar EV anyway with the same effective range. The calling range is much restrictive and you are going to have to call a ton vs min bets so hands like 68s and 54s are always going to want to flat.
I see a lot of people 3betting these hands BB vs BTN and its always -ev unless they've looked in depth into how they play hand vs different opening sizes. Just for 86s, Snowie thinks its 0 ev to 3bet vs big size, mistake to call vs standard size, and a blunder to 3bet vs small size. I'm not going through all the spots so I will just simplify and call/fold with these types of hands always knowing its just marginal +ev and slightly better than folding.
Sorry for asking dumb questions, but v 3x open v btn we should mix calls and 3bets w A9s for example? Thats what those numbers mean?
Yes, the numbers in the yellow box means the AI wants to mix calling and 3betting because they are the same EV. The number is the percentage of time it would 3bet as opposed to calling. The Green box are always going to be 3bet since its EV is higher as a 3bet, and yellow boxes without numbers are always going to be calls since calling has the highest EV line. White boxes are folds, and white boxes with numbers are 0 ev 3bets or folds.
The most difficult part of these ranges is knowing what to do with mixed strategy hands and recalling our strategy without memorizing all the damn numbers.
preflop seems wide, usually prefer one gap suited connectors and its not at a full freq...flop and turn seem good, river seems close, theoretically you probably have to go for it here, exploitatively they're probably very weighted to Kx and you have poor blockers, but its a question of how often do you get to the river with no equity blocker bluffs that are supposed to barrel turn after using small sizing on flop...usually this will be hands that unblock floats and block the suited Kx in villain range...idk if you're going to have 50% fold equity when you shove river to make this +ev
something stands out to me that it looks like few pair + draw hands or even just draw hands can exist on turn and so villains range going to be stronger when he calls turn
another note: one of the hands you're targetting for a fold would be 88 which you are blocking,
with that being said, maybe even 78cc you are targetting for a fold, which you block too.
given the hands you're trying to fold out (not a king; 7x, 4x) the jam is probably overkill, and a half pot sizing on the river would accomplish those goals.
Q seems like a neutral or bad card for you on river.
flop and turn seem fine, the river is a give up with this combo according to solver, bad blockers, blocks some auto folds from villain, they mix 66 on the turn, pure call A5s and 65s, 88 etc...shove and check are both worth not much ev, solver prefers to use Ax combos to bluff unblocking the middle pairs, draws etc, blocks some offsuit AKo that might flat pre as well
Getting better than 3:1 pre on a call, just call and look to x/r a ton on the flop. Take this flop for instance, we have K4s, K2s, 42s, K4o, 44/22 for fat value, Kx for thin value, 53s, 65s, any club/club, spade/spade, heart/heart that can turn equity, etc.
Call pre, it's just too good. As played, flop and turn are good. I would mix barrels and give ups on the river.
Pre is a call and if youre gonna 3bet it should be bigger. flop and turn are fine. River is bad in theory because you dont block Kx and you block 56(w/ a backdoor flush draw) that floated flop and called turn. A much better bluff on river would be JT for example.
Be the first to add a comment