UTG/MP opening ranges in 6-max?
Posted by bdon22
Posted by
bdon22
posted in
Mid Stakes
UTG/MP opening ranges in 6-max?
Just curious what everyone's UTG and MP stats are for 6-max, and how you design your ranges.
Do you open ALL pocket pairs or leave some out? How many off-suit broadway combos are you playing? And how far down the SC tree do you go?
My stats look something like PFR 15% UTG, PFR 16% MP. I purposely avoid playing baby PP's in EP and I replaced them with some Axs. I find I can barrel equity better this way, and also use them to 4-bet bluff with.
Loading 48 Comments...
I don't think it is a big leak to play very tigh in early position, especially when the spots are not in the blinds.
I play almost the same range as you (avoiding small PPs, playing all Axs), the only offsuit brodway I am raising is KQo.
What about AJo? I am opening AJo/KQo, fwiw
AJo too, right.
+1
also curious how ppl manage to play 20% open utg profitable? do they have some insane strat vs very strong cc ranges or just do it cause its a lot of fun :)
Yeah if you do the math you need to defend quite a large % of your range when 3-bet if you open 20% UTG and being OOP, I can't see how that can be profitable / fun to play!
What's the lowest PP in all of your UTG open for a "standard" table without any huge fish? 66+? And I tend to go down to 98s as far as SCs are concerned.
Also, as a slight aside, I hear in more and more videos that against standard opponents who open UTG, it's correct to fold low PPs 22-55 as opposed to cold-calling. I guess this is due to being able to continue with 66+ on more flops without having a set but just wanted to see if you all were playing this way as well?
66+ for me UTG
As for cc with low pp I don't do it much since people squeeze so often these days. When i do cc its mostly from the BB or SB if BB is bad.
UTG - 55+ and sometimes 22-44 for board coverage, AJo+, every suited Ax, KQo+, suited broadways, T9s, 89s, 87s.
HJ - every PP, ATo+, KJo+, 76s+, suited broadways, every suited Ax
You don't really need more Axs combos to 4-bet bluff with, unless you want to get out of line with your frequencies.
Also, small pocket pairs are attractive to 3-bet vs UTG/EP opens when deep. At lower stack depths, 3-betting them becomes more attractive if they don't 4-bet often.
Is this assuming we are turning all our AJo combos into 4-bet bluffs?
Here's an example of how I balanced my 4-bet bluffing range with Axs using a somewhat tight UTG opening range of 13% with a MDF 3-bet of 30% and MDF 5-bet of 55%:
UTG opening range: 77+, A2s+, T9s+, QTs+, KTs+, AJo+, KQo+ (172 combos, 13.0% of hands)
4-bet value/call 5-bet range: AK, AA, KK (28 combos, 2.1% of hands)
4-bet bluff range: A2s-A5s, AJs, AQs (24 combos, 1.8% of hands)
This is a good point and I would personally prefer to flat AQs. I also think stacking off with AK from UTG is slightly loose in todays games.
I would be interested to hear what you guys are doing when you have AQ in UTG+1/SB vs a tight UTG open range such as the one stated above.
Are you always flatting, or sometimes turning in into a bluff?
It is always a tricky spot for me and I tend not to 3bet it due to what GT said about controlling frequencies but I feel like calling also sucks a lot.
GT in that specific example I posted I would have folded AQo/AJo/KQs to the 3-bet. It's not a mixed strategy of sometimes flatting 3-bets. Whether or not this is correct I have no idea. I'm like 1 month into learning about this stuff and still confused as hell about it LOL.
Here's a better visualization of what I meant in my example. It may not be correct at all. I was just trying to balance the maths. QQ-TT in this example would be folding to a 3-bet, which seems really nitty tbh.To answer your question, yes I am stacking off with AK in this example (defending vs. 5-bet jam).
A simple improvement would be to call AKo and QQ-TT to a 3-bet, and 4-bet and call AKs to a shove.
I think there's a little misunderstanding; I'm 4-bet/calling all AK combos in that example, but folding QQ-TT to any 3-bet from UTG. In this example there is no 3-bet flatting range. But I like your idea of having a 3-bet flatting range and I think it makes a lot of sense.
If our 3-bet flatting range is QQ-TT, AKo, is it a problem that our range is somewhat capped? Eg. on low-medium connected boards we can only ever have a bluff catcher when the pot gets large. Whereas villains who are 3-betting some SC's will hit that board better than us. One argument is that since the pot is larger and our SPR is lower, having a capped range is not as big of a deal, I suppose...
Since you open from UG and therefore will get three bet by a very polarized range it may be a good idea to call some three bets. Sure, It makes it more difficult to play for you but I believe it is more plus EV because AA and AK are blocking so many of opponent´s value combos.
I do not know if you have a calling three bet range here, but IF you call three bets with QQ, AQs type hands etc you should also call sometimes with AA or AK.
UTG i only open AK QQ+, sometimes jacks
I do not think you should open that tight even if it makes it easier to play. The wider you open the more your premiums will be worth. If you open that tight I am surprised you even gets action from other hands than premium hands or sometimes from setmining players that folds every flop they miss.
would be interest in your EP winrate if you have been doing this for a decent sample 1followu?
92k hands, 6 players, VPIP UTG : 12.8%, PFR 12.8% ; EV BB/100 = 8.45 (EV bb/100 : 16.90).
Will be interested with WR from looser regz.
1/2 (62%), 0.5/1 (32%) and 2/4 (5%). And one hand in 5/10 :D
That´s brutally tight ... I wonder that players still seem to pay you off?!
I´ve
got ~16%, 50% f3b vs. ip-3bet, EV 15bb/100 (real 18bb/100). That still
means, I´m making slightly more $$ than you over all hands - due to me
playing some more hands ...
EV is still very close. How big is your sample ?
Took the last 100k hands, comparable stakes (NL200, some NL100/400).
OK.
I am not sure your making more $ by playing more hands, because the WR is about all the 100k hands, and not only on the hands you are playing.
=> 100k hands, if you are playing 0% of hands, your WR will be 0.00bb EV.
=> 100k hands, 15bb EV = 15,000bb won by playing 16% of hands.
=> 100k hands (yes, I know it is 92k in reality, but for the example), 16.90bb EV = 16,900bb won by playing 12.8% hands
I got less variance, and more time to play more table or opening wider IP :)
If I was only playing QQ+/AK UTG (2.6% of hands), my EV will be 384.56bb, so my EV with all the hands will be 384.56 / (100/2.56) = 9.99bb/100.
Of course in reality, it will be lowest, because I will not be paid as much.
Now, the interesting part will be to know which range will give us the bigger bb/100 in the long run : 10%, 13%, 16%, 18% ?
There is still a lot of variance in those UTG winrates, it might be interesting to compare UTG+1 openranges and winrates to get a bigger sample. Filtering on UTG folding would make the results more relevant.
Sure, but GL to have 1M sample by position, in 6 max with 6 players ;) Maybe it is possible in zoom.
Anyone with current results on this? My utg/mp winrate keeps being horrible (due to too weak post flop play) and I consider becoming a nit in those positions next to taking coaching.
*Nvm I thought this was small stakes forum since I just did search.
Opening all PP is actually slightly plus EV but players tend to spew post flop making it -EV if you cant trust your postflop play i would say open 66 or 77+. These are my ranges from UTG
http://gyazo.com/7b86bab4e63219808e5f631edaadda52
You can open the wheel suited aces if you are getting 3bet alot or you want to broaden your range. I put them into my 4bet range vs wide 3bets.
MP range
http://gyazo.com/fb2fa5709251f0add8a9161337dcf01e
Here in MP same deal for the A6-A9s with A9s being a better flatting hand.
I think someone asked for results this sample is a little off as i was dealing with some tilt issues but its decent none the less for 1/2 and 2/4
http://gyazo.com/f4537e1644809e48e734046098ff485c
Maybe, maybe not. I have trouble trusting the rest of your post after you make such an authoritative statement where you can't possibly be sure.
I believe any suited ace is going to be a higher EV open UTG than 22.
Why can't i possibly be sure? Alan Jackson who has studied thousands of relevant large samples made the claim actually not me. I was coached by his prodigy Keysar months ago and have been opening PP ever since seeing the results of Jackson's work. You could just ask me why i think this instead of having an ego. I am sure people take you seriously.....
I have no doubt that in good games opening any pair shows a profit. I'm not sure when/where Jackson's samples come from, but if you give me a link I'll check it out and comment further.
Regardless, no one knows whether opening 22 at a table full of players of roughly equal skill is correct. Your statement implies that you know it is, which you don't. If you just meant that it's good in good games and you've done well opening all pairs in your games, then I withdraw my criticism but you should be more clear and less condescending imo.
'Why can't i possibly be sure? Alan Jackson who has studied thousands of relevant large samples made the claim actually not me'
In my opinion its quite ignorant to be so dogmatic about something like that. You are pretty much taking what another reg 'said' and trying to use it as some sort of absolute proof. there is no logic underpinning your argument. I personally think when someone says, I do or dont do X because other regs do(dont do), or another reg told me to do(not do this) as an argument, just seams like a cop out for someone who doesn't have even a marginally intelligent argument.
P.S I love how you try to glorify your 'coach' in an effort to try give what you are saying some legitimacy.
Its not that hard of a concept to understand my coach showed me relevant large samples of winning players who were showing a profit opening all PP in midstakes games. Not spewing much post flop except in obv cbetting spots. The research was done by Alan Jackson and passed down to him. We also looked at his samples which consisted of several million hands. Seems like enough proof to me. Where would you prefer i get the relevant information a cabbie in NYC?
I also clarified my statement below to respond to steves comment
Ahh i get you now i apologize didn't mean to come off like that was just reiterating what i was taught by Keysar and the results i get from it. Unfortunately Keysar is recovering from being in a coma right now so i might not ever be able to get the answer from you as he taught me that during our coaching but if he ever comes back ill ship you the info.
Alan Jackson also only plays vs fish afaik and not much zoom. You will have to filter for no fish in the blinds and still open those hands. I was personally never profitable with them.
Hi Mateo my fellow gripseder. If you make a statement than it is good to directly deliver the "proof" or your source of reference. That way no one will claim that it is just your personal opinion. Good luck with your 125k goal for the year!
Be the first to add a comment