I'm trying to brush up on my theoretical game and I'm trying to go over a few basic concepts. Could someone please point out there areas where am I incorrect or where I have incorrect thinking?
Game is FR 9 handed NLH 100bb
I open UTG to 3bb with a range of AA-77,AKo-AQo,AKs-ATs,A5s,KQs-KTs,QJs-QTs,JTs-J9s,T9s,98s (128 combos, or 9.65% of hands)
I get 3bet by the CO to 9bb and it folds to me. CO is risking 9bb to win 4.5bb so if I fold > 66.6% of the time, he makes instant profit. So I need to continue with ~42 combos (1/3 of my range) to deny that.
But a lot of the pre-flop range charts I see are advocating changing how many combos you defend based on the position that 3bets you, which logically makes sense (because a BTNs 3bet range is going to be more combos than MPs 3bet range), but I don't understand it from a theory perspective.
Isn't ~42 combos the optimal amount of combos to defend vs that sizing?
Further, if after the 9bb 3bet, I 4bet to 22bb, I am risking 22bb to win 10.5bb so if CO folds > 67.69% of the time I make instant profit, so he has to defend > 32.31% of the time.
So, what ratio of bluff combos vs value combos should I have if I'm risking 22bb to win 10.5bb?
Does this mean that I should have ~67.69% value combos and ~32.31% bluff combos?
Finally, does anyone know a quick trick for figuring out what % of your range you have to defend, given a player is risking x bb to win y bb?
Thanks for reading