BTN RFI vs bitchboi Blinds
Posted by Gino Song
Posted by
Gino Song
posted in
Low Stakes
BTN RFI vs bitchboi Blinds
I'm talkin about SB that 3bets too little with playable hands and flats too wide with theory -ev hands, and a BB that folds too little overall and does not 3bet enough either and will come in multiway hot and wide when SB flats
Question is - do -ev hands (-0.01) become 0 or positive ev vs these blinds? So something like 53s min raised btn is going to be ass blasted by aggressive regs making it 0 ev, but against these guys is 53s positive now?
OR do you think its better to play tighter vs these blinds, like a mixed 0ev is now pure fold since you got less fold equity.
I can see the arguments going both way but I am leaning towards expanding my rfi vs weaker blinds.
Loading 12 Comments...
The main exploit here is to size bigger. 3x or even 3.5x are both fine.
that would require my range to be tighter right? i cant be 3.5x 53s right?
if i pot rfi its going to be a tight btn rfi like 35%
Sounds about right. If they truly are way too loose, you can go quite tight. Any mix is a fold for sure. You don't gain much EV from tightening up alone but sizing up should give some win rate. Don't think you need to go much tighter than 35% if they have low 3bet and they play poorly postflop. I think solvers open like 38% for 3,5x on the button so it's not like the size itself makes you tighten up that much. Think it's like 43% with 2,5x.
Doesn't Snowie have 3.5x open recommendation? It's should be reasonable. Just fold like K8o and similar.
yep i will use that sizing and see how it goes ty - it pots it with something like 38% otb
I agree with Kalupso; the main exploit here is to size up.
Against these wide blinds your steal% decreases, so ~0EV hands which rely on fold equity to be profitable become losing opens.
The main thing preventing you from opening larger is the threat of getting raised. If they're too passive that means you can implement a larger size to overcharge your value against the stations, without worrying about getting exploited by 3bets.
This video explores preflop exploits in more detail: https://youtu.be/MPae2gqkeRw
im going to try playing with pot size rfi in all spots to exploit but its utterly disguising how tight pot size ranges are but if its what it takes to win so be it
I think 3,5x is only viable on the button in 6max online games. Can go like 3x Co and then 2,5x from first two. Anything is viable in SB depending on player in BB. If games are really soft and plyers have like 6% or less overall 3bet, you could probably 3x UTG. It's not a great size fundamentally UTG tho.
dont really understand why we wouldnt be raising utg for something ridicoulous like 5x vs these players then? isnt that max exploit?
If people are not raising enough it's not obvious that the mix hand become folds - you would need Monker to figure this out. A bit like how on the flop if opponents don't raise enough we can small bet more.
But be a bit careful with frequency locking as it can do some clever stuff with its range allocation. You might need to lock it manually.
If they were calling too wide and raising correctly then I think the mix hand become folds.
Yeah, not straight forward and it's quite rake dependant too. I tend to think postflop edge and rake is of similar strength so one approach is to run the simulation rake free with locked SB and BB response.
In this case the deviation was huge because SB VPIP more than 2x more than in a solver. We don't tighten up I think with a tight SB and a loose passive BB, but with two loose passive players and a SB calling 34% and 3bet 6% we probably should tighten up.
Ran some hands with pot sized rfi and I fucking hate it. The sizing requires you to raise so much less, you aren't stealing enough and playing enough hands. Boring no action. You aren't maximizing ev either.
3x-2.5x-2x are all better imo. You don't get 3bet at all, raise/steal at a higher frequency, maximize ev, play vs weaker ranges, and get to realize the equity of a lot of 0 ev hands which aggressive players would push you off of.
Be the first to add a comment