MultiStreet Analysis. Optimal play. Preventing ATC profits.
Posted by laxputs
Posted by
laxputs
posted in
High Stakes
MultiStreet Analysis. Optimal play. Preventing ATC profits.
Btn opens to 2bb. sb 3bets to 7.5bb. Btn flats. Suppose btn 4bets a 10% range of value and bluffs and flats 30% of his 63% btn opening range. Suppose Sb 3bets 18%. Btn flats a range of 22-TT, KJo_AQo some sc's. Axs,J9s+ or 205 combos.
Flop: 222
Sb cbets 1/2 pot.
To prevent sb from profitably cbetting atc (even on a board that hits sb's range inherently stronger than btn's), does btn continue with 66% x 205 combos, or 135 combos? The weakest hands of 135 combos would be QJs bkdrfd. QJs-bkdr has about 31% equity vs sb's 3bet range. KJs has about 36%.
Question 2. Turn is 9bkdr. Sb cbets 1/2 pot. Does btn continue with 90 combos (.66 x 130)? That would be about pp33+ AJo/AQo. Axb+ QJb. (b = turned bkdrfd).
Question 3. Say btn continues with 90 turn combos. Versus a "reasonable" sb turn 2 barreling range, pp33 is best 63% and has 53% equity or so. Does it make sense to jam all pp's and any turned bkdrfd bluffs that btn can continue with versus sb's 2 barrelling range? Can btn jam his entire continuing range? If btn jams a balanced range, sb folds some better hands that have equity. Takes away an option from sb ( 3 barreling). Protects hands like low pp's with decreasing equity. And gets value from worse hands some of the time.
There are obviously significant problems with this turn strategy, but so are there too with call call call. Is it reasonable?
Is the math used here: defend x% of button's range versus sb's sizing of bet/(potsize+bet) applicable here?
Thanks.
Loading 4 Comments...
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.
This thread has been locked. No further comments can be added.