Gto micro cbet range exploit
Posted by Deactivated User
Posted by
Deactivated User
posted in
Low Stakes
Gto micro cbet range exploit
Hello i would like to talk about flop cbet at micro as the preflop raiser
Using solver i have seen that on very dry board pio use the 33 % bet sizing flop 48 % of the time btn vs bb on A 7 2 rainbow
However if i node lock the BB raise to cbet to only nutted hand (which is how most people play at microstake on spain/french poker site) or when i put no raising range at all for the BB
Solver tell me to cbet the whole range at 100 % frequency against a value only raising range and 86 % against an non existant raising range which is quite an huge difference
So is it a confirmation that its not only more easy, but also more profitable to cbet range on such board at nl2-10 ? I have never heard of anyone talking of such change in cbetting frequency
Does peoples often check raise your cbet in your rooms in the micros games ? I did feel like players were raisin against cbet more on some us sites but it was higher stakes than micros
Even if this is partly exploitable if someone would have a perfect raising range as the BB i think like its very very rare in the micro and its even less probably playing zoom
Also it have the same effect for early position, and its even stronger
HJ vs BB ip player must cbet 46% of the time with a 33% sizing against a gto raising range on a72 rainbow
however if the BB have no raising range it goes up to 100% betting frequency
But assuming the BB raise only double pair and three of a kind we can cbet 100 % frequency with an 50 % sizing (Note : Even if solver use this 50 % with 100 % frequency the solver give more ev for the 33% pot one) and since BB will be capped when he call the flop and we could overfold when he raise the flop we will have an HUGE ev win along with an very easy to executee flop strategy
The exact frequency should change depending on what range you use for both player of course but it should stay similar as i have used very reasonable range not too tight not too loose
Iam curious if anyone can confirm me the usage of this exploitative strategy tho since it would change some sizing/frequency in turn and river play
Do you think it would be better to consider thoses micro player only raise double pair+ as max exploit or to play a little bit more conservating giving them no raising range ? ( which would make us play tighter on turn and river since solver will consider them to have a lot more double pair and three of a kind and making us lose less ev against potential good flop raisin strategy)
(Interesting note solved with rake, the 25 and 33 bet sizing hj vs bb have similar ev vs no check raise however against only value raise the 25 sizing have a bit more ev)
(Playing against no raising range and value only raising is almost the same on the turn)
Loading 14 Comments...
I'd suggest you try to see the EV difference of c-betting 33% all the time on boards like those vs having multiple sizings and frequencies.
I think you'll see a very tiny difference for a much simpler strategy, being another argument besides the one you present to simply go 100% third pot in dry high boards as the opener vs a blind defense.
that being said, there's some EV to be gained by studying better sizings, I suggest you look at this videos for an example of a deviation of the simplified strategy (will be on the first example if I remember correctly). https://www.runitonce.com/poker-training/videos/david-versus-goliath/
Yes, absolutely I would cbet 33% on an A72 flop even if I only have uno cards :) (not just from the BTN but in general) People very clearly overfold, especially OOP. And yes, it's even easier to play your let's say 44 as a cbet on this flop as it's quite vulnerable and you're giving free equity with a check.
The only checks you should have are strong, non-vulnerable hands against recreationals (you want to give them a chance to catch up and/or make a mistake with hands they would otherwise fold vs a cbet).
Agree.
You're asking what range to give them on micro that they're raising with, right? I think if you're looking at the whole population, it's more fit or fold than not and they also like to just call with 2pair+ on a flop like this. So I would just give them some 50% weight of that 2pair+ range, very few bluffs and that's it.
I have started to see on gg poker, that some people are using 1/3 range strategy and also against my 1/3 cbets some players are raising pretty often.. should we just adjust our strategy a little bit by using multiple bet sizings..or continue with this battle and call their check raises a bit loose. Bc in general, I used to overfold vs x/raises, because they are underbluffed..
This is a difficult one imo. In theory ppl are estimated to raise smaller cbets often (as they present a whider range) for value and as a bluff.
This conflicts with the fact that raising on these kinds of boards is heavilly (heavilly, heavilly) underbluffed.
So i wouldnt deviate from the strategy to cbet 1/3 on these boards (as it is simply to profitable in the long run) and would be very aware who is going to attack this sizing (mostly taking notes or something).
So i would just start to defend whider vs these raises when i get the feeling that someone is trying to exploit me, because countering this exploit is somwehat more complicated than simply clicking 1/3 on a superdry board and making money immidiatly.
The same folks that over fold to cbet are also going to call two streets with 3rd pair when you check back or even fire off hopeless bluffs.
It seems likely to me that the mistakes made on those later nodes are going to be more valuable than taking advantage of over folding tendencies on the flop. So as a default for a new player maybe simplify your strategy this way but as you get a better feel for the player pool and how to play after checking behind I think there is a lot of EV to be gained with a slightly more complicated strategy
What do you mean by slightly more complicated? I mean usually when you have a check back range, you are gonna have also multiple bet sizes which only on the flop it's a bit complicated.. not saying that most of them are supposed to be mixed at certain frequency.. same goes for the turn and river... and the "complication factor" basically exponentially grow..
I mean, I am not saying that its -ev or so, but I would need pretty strong reason deviate from range bet strategy IP (on most runouts) esp. at low stakes
MatoStar I believe he was referring to exploitative checkbacks by more complicated strategy (which I completely agree with that it is a higher EV strategy than just straight up range cbet against everyone).
Trough an example: On an A72r flop if you cbet your whole range, you'll make money, it's +EV because villain have missed with the bigger part of his range. But the question is: Is it the highest EV play wit all of those hands and against everyone? Of course not. The first hand group that comes to mind is strong hands that doesn't need protection and there are only a few or no bad turn/river cards for them. Let's say KK on A72. Will you make money with cbetting? Yes. Is it highly possible that checking it back will make you more EV against the population? Yes.
Therefore as Brett Banks said there's a lot of EV to be gained by realizing what hands you could gain EV with by not cbetting them - because most players can make mistakes OTT and OTR by bluffing or just calling you when they catch something. So as I stated before in this thread, I would checkback non-vulnerable and not too vulnerable value hands against recreational players and maybe even weak regs. Everyone that will probably make more and bigger mistakes if I give them some space, for the weaker part of their range that would fold OTF (which is the bigger part of their range and usually we want to make them make mistakes with the bigger part of their range).
Oh, now I got it.. those check backs I think I use subconsciously against certain player profiles.. and totally agree that deviating with mentioned hands against some opponents is gonna be higher ev play
I play in .fr (same player pool) and I'm trying to add some raise to my flop strategy. And I agree with your statement: people under raise oop and theiy raise in value most of the time. So I started to cbet 1/3 100%. Easy strategy but you have to think about turn and river when you get called. Not the most difficult work but necessary. Also I started to raise flop from the BB but here's the trouble : usually, when a player bet 33%, he's a reg. And when I raise and get called, boy I don't know how to play turn. Oop it's awful. And it doesn't get better on the river. So I ended up burning chips because my good play flop was wasted by my turn and river play. I'm studying that spot because I feel there is a lot of EV to gain here
And don't forget the node lock assume that players will play the hand perfectly on later street. That's so wrong in reality so keep your mind open when thinking about what line should we take
We should make a group for pt/es/fr players
You have to be aware that rasing small Cbets is an exploit on its own.
So if you get called, you have to proceed carefully. E.g simply fold if your Equity didint improve and the turn is not especially good for your bluffingrange.
Ppl tend to have the feeling they have to move on with bluffs.
So XR 23s on AK2 is fine and its also fine to simply XF on a blank turn as the exploit we were playing was simply to attack the rangebet OTF.
That mean that the GTO play is to call or fold evry time we face a small bet? I should look how solvers play in that spot
That mean that vilain can overcall our raise flop et steal the pot turn and if so, we should 2 barrels more often...
Hello high variance play!
Maybe i expressed this wrong.
The raise itself is not the exploit. Solvers also like to raise smaller cbets as well.
So the solver even does this vs a perfect opponent who will be able to defend perfectly vs our raise (Still the raise is part of a GTO-strategy).
But the Villains we play against will often overfold to this raise as they cbet too much and are usually not able to defend properly if they get raised. (this is why it makes sense to raise smaller Cbets more often as an exploit).
But this also means that we face a stronger range when we get called and can give up more often vs most opponents.
But as you already mentioned: Every exploit opens ourself up for exploitation of our Villan if he recognizes what we are doing!
The thing is, if you do the "allways c-bet small" exploit vs someone that plays gto you'll lose money. Of course you won't find people playing GTO. What you can find is someone playing a counter strategy and if you play on fr/es/pt pokerstars I'm 100% sure there will be at least one and vs that person you will be losing a good chunk of ev with that approach.
The point is pay attention to villain before deciding to do that.
(wondering if I just cost myself money with this comment)
Be the first to add a comment