Not sure if you noticed or not, but the 3-bet here is less than pot -- 18, pot raise would be 24. The better price could help explain the cold calls in the blinds?
Although we don't hate AAJ2 single-suited going 4-way, I definitely prefer 3-betting to 24 here and attempting to iso. The only reason I can see for 3-betting for this smaller sizing would be if the blinds and the UTG raiser are super nitty and folding to a lot of 3-bets (of any sizing) allowing us to 3-bet a wider range for a better price. (But this seems pretty unlikely).
EDIT: After watching the rest of the footage, there seems to be a preflop-battling/loose 3-betting dynamic between our Hero and Poker Avalon. MAYBE our Hero is trying to induce a loose 4-bet (even if unlikely) from Poker Avalon in order to get in the 5-bet. I don't hate it, but I don't love it either.
Thank you for pointing this out. I don't think it occurred to me while recording that this was a small 3-bet. There are merits to a strategy that involves smaller 3-bets, especially in IP. If you check out some of Tom Coldwell's old videos, he explains why he likes that strategy.
Basically, we keep the SPR a little larger to play the (likely) HU 3-bet pot in position, giving us some maneuverability against our (likely weaker than us) opponent. We also avoid letting him reduce the SPR as drastically when he decides to 4-bet with a strong range.
I still don't think the blinds should cold-call very wide. I wouldn't adjust my cold-call strategy much at all in this situation in the blinds as the pot odds don't change greatly (if we assume a call from the opener).
Thanks man! I think that the stack disparity between the BB and the other two of us isn't large enough to create a strategy adjustment that large. Now, if the BTN and I were both 300bb deep and the BB was 50bb deep, it would become very much worth considering.
Still, in both cases, I think we need some reason to believe the BB will be squeezing an above average amount. He's not short enough to make having a very wide squeezing range a great strategy in my opinion.
Another issue in these spots - when we have the main hand that wants to go for a backraise (AAxx), we block a good chunk of the BB's squeezing range, unless he's just a super loose squeezer.
I play in a game where if I 3bet or squeeze, everyone who called the initial preflop raise will call the 3bet. Most of the time there are 3-4 players in the pot. I'm always lost with a hand like AAxx. It seems foolish to be 3betting this hand when I just want to c/f most of the time when the flop is not ideal.
Is it still wise to 3bet AAxx hands when it usually goes 3 or 4 way? Should I adjust my 3betting range to more rundowns and just flat call big pairs to set mine?
In the interest of talking amongst each other, I'll throw in my 2 cents:
This game dynamic can be frustrating because we feel like we should be winning more of these pots as the PFR, but we are gonna have to give up a decent number of boards when it goes 3-way or 4-way. This is okay.
To adjust, continue 3-betting the better AAxx combos (ones that are single or double suited with connectivity.. AAJT-double, AAKK-double, AA65 double, etc.), and then add in hands that are going to be able to make the nuts... high rundowns like KQTJ / QJT9 single or double, high paired / double paired hands like KKQQ / JJTT.
You should find yourself in plenty of good situations on the flop where the pot is already pretty large and you get the money in VERY ahead (set over set, higher wrap over lower wrap, ace-high flush draw + pair vs king/queen-high flush draw + pair). Basically, someone will flop a slightly worse hand and be forced to go with it against your monster. You've got a gold mine just waiting to be harvested... go, quick!
I have played a lot in games like this in the past. As Cody mentioned focus more on playability and multi-way equity - high suits and connectivity. In good position when you've already seen a number of limpers and you know they are probably just going to flat call, you can have free reign to manipulate the pot size as you please. Don't be afraid to throw in some 3-bets of any size with hands like AT98 ds, consider some small raises with other rundowns and consider min raising poor aces if there's any chance it will induce anyone to 3-bet light or gain you free cards. Basically throw balance out the window and go for maximal exploitation. It can be a little dangerous to do this as a beginner because you need to recognize that trying to exploit players in this way also opens you up to being exploited yourself, so as long as you don't make it a blind habit and are able to recognize better players, I think this is OK.
Thanks, Cody and Esta, for getting the discussion going! I actually think you guys took care of everything I was going to say!
Weak single suited AA84 type hands play poorly in these spots and I'd just be calling. My squeeze frequency is relatively low in spots like these and I stick with the high card/high suit type stuff. Basically, hands that will let me shove and have 40+% equity against top two pair on a bunch of flops.
Hey, Minute 3 of the video we have a 3-way 3bet pot with the NFD on 654cc:
I don't think hero will have much of a bet/folding range in that spot given that he's just not going to have enough fold equity. I will get to this later, but for now I want to talk about the EV of pot/calling.
I gave BB a preflop range of 15% (not top 15%, but a 15% OOP 3bet range comprised of high playability hands) excluding AA. We assume BB with his short stack will stack off with any 2pair, any FD and any pair+oesd (67,75,74 hands). This range is 42% of his preflop range.
BTN on the other hand opens 65% and will stack off tighter on the flop. He will only stack off with a flushdraw if he has a pair or a nut gutter to go along. Overall BTN stacks off with 39% of his preflop range.
Hero's equity for stacking off HU vs BB is 52% and his equity in a HU all-in vs BTN is 45%. Our equity in a 3way all-in is 36%. Overall we have good equity in every scenario and on top of that we have a 35% chance of both players not flopping a hand from the stackoff ranges I gave them - in which case they both fold and we win the pot. Now, 35% is a ton of FE when you have great equity when called, however with a hand that wants to bet/fold you're just not going to profit on a bet in this spot. Which in my opinion means that hero should be either bet/calling or checking.
Here is the EV calculation for pot/calling flop:
Hero nets 30.5$ on this line, which is actually higher that his equity share in the pot (25.5$). That means that hero realizes more than 100% of his equity by pot/calling. We can obviously play around with our assumptions (I'll be happy to follow input from people) but we can already see that potting here works pretty well with this hand in a vacuum.
The EV of checking is much tougher to figure out, but I think we can agree that the main point that we should focus on in our decision is how often BTN will bet when checked to with a hand that would otherwise just fold against our bet. But it has to be a decently high percentage of the time, or else we just sacrifice too much by allowing the flop to get checked through sometimes (as demonstrated by the result of this hand). As Phil mentioned in the video, our hand doesn't play great on turns - most of the time we turn nothing, which means not only our equity plummets but also our ability to realize it becomes much poorer.
The calculations feel correct intuitively to me. One issue is that when we pot, BTN could call and get it in on a non-club turn which will hurt our EV tremendously. We are a little too deep to be treating our bet as a shove. Still, it's a good approximation to start with.
If I had to guess, I think we only need the BTN to bet-fold maybe 30% of the time to make checking a higher EV play.
If it gets checked around on the flop, I don't think we dip that much below our pot equity in terms of our EV on the average turn card. Having a nut draw (with streets still to come) helps with getting your EV pretty high in comparison to your equity in the pot. For example, on a club turn we will have maybe 95% equity but our EV is higher than full pot. If we end up seeing a river we will very rarely make a mistake, since it's not like we are going to call a bet with Ace high or one pair, so we have implied odds there.
Without going into a huge calculation:
our EV on the turn will be pretty high still when checked around due to their weakened ranges and our implied odds.
-Getting the BTN to bet fold around $30 is a very big gain.
-Potting flop and being called by BTN is bad
The one counter is that when the flop gets checked through, or when we check and someone else bet-calls, we may have missed out on some fold equity which is quite valuable.
So all that combined means to me that there's some frequency that the button will bet-fold that makes this a better hand to check, and while I don't know what it is, I suspect it's not too high. I just went with 30% off the top of my head.
Thanks for the video; I liked it. I have a question about the AAKQ hand at 32:00 on KT7 flop. You say you prefer potting it to betting half pot because "there's so little fold equity when we bet 20". Isn't that a good thing with hero's actual hand, since he's actually getting some value? You say you think potting it is the way to go, but I don't understand the point of potting, especially when we have the Ad--it seems to me like we just mostly get worse hands to fold and better hands to continue. Could you maybe further explain the benefits of betting pot here?
Thanks for the lengthy response Phil. Everything you said makes sense.
I think it's worth mentioning that if BTN bets with all his stackoff hands, and bets 30% of the time he doesn't have a hand from the stack off range we gave him, his overall betting frequency will be 57%.
If SB will shove with all his stackoff hands (42%), it means that the chance of the flop getting checked through is 0.58 (Chance of SB not flopping a SO hand) * 0.43 (Change of BTN not betting) = 0.25%. So most of the time we can expect our check/jam attempt to be successful.
If BTN chooses to check back the more marginal part of his stackoff range, we will see a turn more frequently. In that sense it matters how merged/thin BTN is willing to bet when checked to and not only how much he bets with air.
We seem to differ in our opinions on how "bad" it is when the flop gets checked through. Obviously hero always has a decent expectation when holding a nut draw, but since our nut draw is naked and doesn't have SDV, on too many turns hero's equity against a 3-way betting range drops below 30%, forcing him to fold his equity in the pot when facing a big bet.
The upside of betting the flop is that hero is never forced to fold his equity in the pot in any scenario. Given that folding equity at low SPR situations is costly, there's merit to taking a line that avoids it altogether whenever this line is viable.
Good point about BTN being able to peel and stack off on non-clubs. I think a good and rather simple exercise would be to test how much BTN gains by employing this strategy with a hand like KQ65 against hero's potting range.
I might take on this exercise if other people find it interesting as well.
Loading 17 Comments...
Not sure if you noticed or not, but the 3-bet here is less than pot -- 18, pot raise would be 24. The better price could help explain the cold calls in the blinds?
Although we don't hate AAJ2 single-suited going 4-way, I definitely prefer 3-betting to 24 here and attempting to iso. The only reason I can see for 3-betting for this smaller sizing would be if the blinds and the UTG raiser are super nitty and folding to a lot of 3-bets (of any sizing) allowing us to 3-bet a wider range for a better price. (But this seems pretty unlikely).
EDIT: After watching the rest of the footage, there seems to be a preflop-battling/loose 3-betting dynamic between our Hero and Poker Avalon. MAYBE our Hero is trying to induce a loose 4-bet (even if unlikely) from Poker Avalon in order to get in the 5-bet. I don't hate it, but I don't love it either.
Thank you for pointing this out. I don't think it occurred to me while recording that this was a small 3-bet. There are merits to a strategy that involves smaller 3-bets, especially in IP. If you check out some of Tom Coldwell's old videos, he explains why he likes that strategy.
Basically, we keep the SPR a little larger to play the (likely) HU 3-bet pot in position, giving us some maneuverability against our (likely weaker than us) opponent. We also avoid letting him reduce the SPR as drastically when he decides to 4-bet with a strong range.
I still don't think the blinds should cold-call very wide. I wouldn't adjust my cold-call strategy much at all in this situation in the blinds as the pot odds don't change greatly (if we assume a call from the opener).
really like this format! much more dense than a live vid
min2: wouldn't it be nice to flat (almost) all of our hands in that spot in order to just pop it up fairly often when BB is squeezing?
other than that great video although I really would like to know some of larskissa's reads
Thanks man! I think that the stack disparity between the BB and the other two of us isn't large enough to create a strategy adjustment that large. Now, if the BTN and I were both 300bb deep and the BB was 50bb deep, it would become very much worth considering.
Still, in both cases, I think we need some reason to believe the BB will be squeezing an above average amount. He's not short enough to make having a very wide squeezing range a great strategy in my opinion.
Another issue in these spots - when we have the main hand that wants to go for a backraise (AAxx), we block a good chunk of the BB's squeezing range, unless he's just a super loose squeezer.
Great video series - I love this format as it allows the viewer to digest a lot of different situations in a short period of time.
Phil, general PLO question, if you don't mind:
I play in a game where if I 3bet or squeeze, everyone who called the initial preflop raise will call the 3bet. Most of the time there are 3-4 players in the pot. I'm always lost with a hand like AAxx. It seems foolish to be 3betting this hand when I just want to c/f most of the time when the flop is not ideal.
Is it still wise to 3bet AAxx hands when it usually goes 3 or 4 way? Should I adjust my 3betting range to more rundowns and just flat call big pairs to set mine?
Thanks!
In the interest of talking amongst each other, I'll throw in my 2 cents:
This game dynamic can be frustrating because we feel like we should be winning more of these pots as the PFR, but we are gonna have to give up a decent number of boards when it goes 3-way or 4-way. This is okay.
To adjust, continue 3-betting the better AAxx combos (ones that are single or double suited with connectivity.. AAJT-double, AAKK-double, AA65 double, etc.), and then add in hands that are going to be able to make the nuts... high rundowns like KQTJ / QJT9 single or double, high paired / double paired hands like KKQQ / JJTT.
You should find yourself in plenty of good situations on the flop where the pot is already pretty large and you get the money in VERY ahead (set over set, higher wrap over lower wrap, ace-high flush draw + pair vs king/queen-high flush draw + pair). Basically, someone will flop a slightly worse hand and be forced to go with it against your monster. You've got a gold mine just waiting to be harvested... go, quick!
I have played a lot in games like this in the past. As Cody mentioned focus more on playability and multi-way equity - high suits and connectivity. In good position when you've already seen a number of limpers and you know they are probably just going to flat call, you can have free reign to manipulate the pot size as you please. Don't be afraid to throw in some 3-bets of any size with hands like AT98 ds, consider some small raises with other rundowns and consider min raising poor aces if there's any chance it will induce anyone to 3-bet light or gain you free cards. Basically throw balance out the window and go for maximal exploitation. It can be a little dangerous to do this as a beginner because you need to recognize that trying to exploit players in this way also opens you up to being exploited yourself, so as long as you don't make it a blind habit and are able to recognize better players, I think this is OK.
Thanks, Cody and Esta, for getting the discussion going! I actually think you guys took care of everything I was going to say!
Weak single suited AA84 type hands play poorly in these spots and I'd just be calling. My squeeze frequency is relatively low in spots like these and I stick with the high card/high suit type stuff. Basically, hands that will let me shove and have 40+% equity against top two pair on a bunch of flops.
Hey, Minute 3 of the video we have a 3-way 3bet pot with the NFD on 654cc:
I don't think hero will have much of a bet/folding range in that spot given that he's just not going to have enough fold equity. I will get to this later, but for now I want to talk about the EV of pot/calling.
I gave BB a preflop range of 15% (not top 15%, but a 15% OOP 3bet range comprised of high playability hands) excluding AA. We assume BB with his short stack will stack off with any 2pair, any FD and any pair+oesd (67,75,74 hands). This range is 42% of his preflop range.
BTN on the other hand opens 65% and will stack off tighter on the flop. He will only stack off with a flushdraw if he has a pair or a nut gutter to go along. Overall BTN stacks off with 39% of his preflop range.
Hero's equity for stacking off HU vs BB is 52% and his equity in a HU all-in vs BTN is 45%. Our equity in a 3way all-in is 36%. Overall we have good equity in every scenario and on top of that we have a 35% chance of both players not flopping a hand from the stackoff ranges I gave them - in which case they both fold and we win the pot. Now, 35% is a ton of FE when you have great equity when called, however with a hand that wants to bet/fold you're just not going to profit on a bet in this spot. Which in my opinion means that hero should be either bet/calling or checking.
Here is the EV calculation for pot/calling flop:
Hero nets 30.5$ on this line, which is actually higher that his equity share in the pot (25.5$). That means that hero realizes more than 100% of his equity by pot/calling. We can obviously play around with our assumptions (I'll be happy to follow input from people) but we can already see that potting here works pretty well with this hand in a vacuum.
The EV of checking is much tougher to figure out, but I think we can agree that the main point that we should focus on in our decision is how often BTN will bet when checked to with a hand that would otherwise just fold against our bet. But it has to be a decently high percentage of the time, or else we just sacrifice too much by allowing the flop to get checked through sometimes (as demonstrated by the result of this hand). As Phil mentioned in the video, our hand doesn't play great on turns - most of the time we turn nothing, which means not only our equity plummets but also our ability to realize it becomes much poorer.
Great work!
The calculations feel correct intuitively to me. One issue is that when we pot, BTN could call and get it in on a non-club turn which will hurt our EV tremendously. We are a little too deep to be treating our bet as a shove. Still, it's a good approximation to start with.
If I had to guess, I think we only need the BTN to bet-fold maybe 30% of the time to make checking a higher EV play.
If it gets checked around on the flop, I don't think we dip that much below our pot equity in terms of our EV on the average turn card. Having a nut draw (with streets still to come) helps with getting your EV pretty high in comparison to your equity in the pot. For example, on a club turn we will have maybe 95% equity but our EV is higher than full pot. If we end up seeing a river we will very rarely make a mistake, since it's not like we are going to call a bet with Ace high or one pair, so we have implied odds there.
Without going into a huge calculation:
-Getting the BTN to bet fold around $30 is a very big gain.
-Potting flop and being called by BTN is bad
The one counter is that when the flop gets checked through, or when we check and someone else bet-calls, we may have missed out on some fold equity which is quite valuable.
So all that combined means to me that there's some frequency that the button will bet-fold that makes this a better hand to check, and while I don't know what it is, I suspect it's not too high. I just went with 30% off the top of my head.
Let me know what you think.
I love this format! It's so much easier to follow and digest.
Best format for me as well.
Nice Vid Phil. Always pleasure to watch. I like the format to.
hi Phil,
Thanks for the video; I liked it. I have a question about the AAKQ hand at 32:00 on KT7 flop. You say you prefer potting it to betting half pot because "there's so little fold equity when we bet 20". Isn't that a good thing with hero's actual hand, since he's actually getting some value? You say you think potting it is the way to go, but I don't understand the point of potting, especially when we have the Ad--it seems to me like we just mostly get worse hands to fold and better hands to continue. Could you maybe further explain the benefits of betting pot here?
thankss
Thanks for the lengthy response Phil. Everything you said makes sense.
I think it's worth mentioning that if BTN bets with all his stackoff hands, and bets 30% of the time he doesn't have a hand from the stack off range we gave him, his overall betting frequency will be 57%.
If SB will shove with all his stackoff hands (42%), it means that the chance of the flop getting checked through is 0.58 (Chance of SB not flopping a SO hand) * 0.43 (Change of BTN not betting) = 0.25%. So most of the time we can expect our check/jam attempt to be successful.
If BTN chooses to check back the more marginal part of his stackoff range, we will see a turn more frequently. In that sense it matters how merged/thin BTN is willing to bet when checked to and not only how much he bets with air.
We seem to differ in our opinions on how "bad" it is when the flop gets checked through. Obviously hero always has a decent expectation when holding a nut draw, but since our nut draw is naked and doesn't have SDV, on too many turns hero's equity against a 3-way betting range drops below 30%, forcing him to fold his equity in the pot when facing a big bet.
The upside of betting the flop is that hero is never forced to fold his equity in the pot in any scenario. Given that folding equity at low SPR situations is costly, there's merit to taking a line that avoids it altogether whenever this line is viable.
Good point about BTN being able to peel and stack off on non-clubs. I think a good and rather simple exercise would be to test how much BTN gains by employing this strategy with a hand like KQ65 against hero's potting range.
I might take on this exercise if other people find it interesting as well.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.