Hi J.D.
I'm omitting the math, because it requires a spreadsheet.
4-bet bluffing with too strong of a hand example: Our opponent folds to 4-betand 5-bets at a frequency that makes AJs 0 EV 4-bet. Calling a 3-bet with AJs is worth 2bbs. Therefore its better to call AJs than 4-bet it.

Now assume our opponent folds to 4-bet and 5-bets at a frequency that makes AJs +1.5bb EV 4-bet. Calling 3-bet with AJs is worth 2bbs. Therefore even though AJs is a profitable 4-bet, its better to call it.

Does that help? If it still unclear, I'll expand upon this. :)

Hi Benniao,

Thanks for watching the video :) . The real question is what should our R be? KK might realize more equity than its hot/cold equity here by flatting. Would 22 realize more also or would it realize less? And if we agreed that KK realizes more and 22 realizes less, could we agree on the degree of these changes? Nothing is clear cut here.

Practically, I would have find an distinct R for every hand (based on equity/position/number of nuts hands). Suffice it to say, I don't thinks its a good metric for a video lecture on preflop play.

Why don't I use a solver?
Solver is playing GTO strategy against GTO Strategy. Neither my opponent nor I are playing GTO. So does my opponent gain more equity from my suboptimal play or do I gain more equity from his suboptimal play? We can't answer that question from a GTO solver.

Hot/Cold Equity

Hot cold equity is obviously flawed (A3o vs T9s for example), but there is little argument that on a hand by hand basis that hot/cold equity has a very strong correlation with hand performance. AA, KK make the most money and have the highest hot/cold equity. Hand winnings in BBs rank tend to closely match their hot/cold equity rank. We can use more complicated metrics, but every metric improvement slows down the process, while only adding small amounts of value.

I get it. Thank u ,Tyler.
I love ur math/theory vids! :D

We'll always have capped ranges on some board textures, but we make up for that with the gobs (technical term) of money we make when our 5-bet is called.

Thanks Jonathan! I'm stoked you enjoyed it :)

Thanks Pokerhousewife! You're right. Against tight ranges A5s is a great 4-bet bluffing hand. It lowers the number of AAs by half and the number of AKs by a 1/4, while still having good equity when called (around 28% against a range of AKs, AA, KK) .

The reason I chose Kxs is that Axs is a + EV call in wider range situations and Kxs is only a 0 EV or -EV call. This means the threshold for a Axs +EV 4-bet is higher because it needs to be higher than Axs EV as a call (4-bet > Call > Fold). Whereas Kxs needs to be only >= 0 (4-bet > Fold).

Thanks for the sim Julian! Appreciate you taking the time to make it and share it. I should note that if our equity realization improves, the value of slowplaying AA decreases as well. We'll a constant tension between a player who bluffs too much preflop and play tight postflop and a player who bluffs too much on every street.

And because of this tension, I prefer to call 4-bets here with AA, only when I know my opponent bluff too much on every street, because this makes EV 4-bet Call >> EV 5-bet

Thank you again for the sim and the ideas for future vids!

Calling 4-bets with TT, its certainly a better option against a polar 4-betting range that makes jamming TT roughly 0 EV. We should try to make hands below our value hand range indifferent to 5-betting. If we raise the frequency to high, then it becomes very profitable to shove things like 22 over a 4-bet.

Yes it is currently more common to see people flat 4-bets with suited broadways/connectors. However, I don't see how that should justify us to have a higher 4-bet bluffing frequency, because every bluff would make 4-bet flatting ranges more valuable too. If its profitable to flat against 38% bluff, its much more profitable to flat against someone who is 4-bet bluffing 26% more (50% bluff).

Bluffing frequencies should always be based on a combination of folding frequency and equity realization. If our opponent folds to 4-bet too often, then we should 4-bet more than some number that makes our opponent indifferent to shoving some hand. Otherwise all bluffs are designed to make our value bets more profitable.

Depends very heavily on BT fold to 5-bet %. He needs to fold over 50% of the time to make this profitable. However if only folds 40% then we lose -8 bbs, so its definitely a higher variance play.

No, we can always use a combination of range vs range equity and 1 - a logic to make our oppositions bluffs breakeven. This will keep our ranges from being exploited. Sometimes this will mean calling down lighter than we might necessary like.

I don't think anyone knows precisely what optimal is because it moves based on stack sizes and preflop sizings. However, I'm comfortable with my estimate, if I allowed any hand with more than 30% equity to 5-bet bluff me, my opponent would have profitable 5-bet bluffs with a wide range.

Thanks Faisal, Nut hands become more important deeper, because we no longer can stack our overpairs 100% of the time. This means that we have to mix our ranges preflop, so we flop nut hands on more board textures. For example, rather than 3-betting 100% TT and 0% 99, we'll 3-bet 50% TT and 50% 99.

Hi Shekhar, I completely agree. One small caveat is that the board will come Ace high about 18% of the time and on those boards KK will become a bluffcatcher.