goldenigloo

Thank you Steve!!

Steve, forgive me for asking a question about a 3-year old video. I guess this is the price you have to pay for creating a good enough video to make the learning path series :-D.

I am getting hung up on a point that you make at the 9:00 mark. You say that we are raising 2.5 to win 4, which means that if we are getting 3-bet more than 37.5% of the time, then all of our raise / folds are going to lose money. This means that we should never fold, which means that the blinds should not 3-bet us more than 37.5% of the time.

Later at the 11:45 mark, it appears like you use the exact same logic to determine the BB’s MDF. We risk 17.5 to win 12, which means that the BB needs to defend at least 40.5% of the time, or else our 4-bet is always making money.

So my question is, what am I missing about our assumptions that makes these two spots different? In the first spot, we determine that the BB’s maximum 3-bet frequency is 1-(our bet / total pot) = 37.5%. In the second spot, we determine that the BB’s minimum defense frequency is 1-(our bet / total pot) = 40.5%. Why are we using the same math to come to supposedly opposite conclusions?