I see and hear more about the fact that good players only have a 3b/fold range from the sb and I wonder why ?

I can understand why and how mw we can squeeze profitably although I still find a call with low pp and some suited connectors/broadways depending on villains.

However, vs single raiser, if he's from utg/ mp and Im looking down at KQs,AJ and 33-99 what is really the best play ? even if he's lp why not have a call range here ?

Would love to hear your thoughts about this

I will preface my comments with the thought that I am sure in some games or vs some opponents flatting is an option and can be good. My comments below are meant to reflect the theory behind this in game trend as well as actual play in tougher games or vs good competition.

The basic idea is that by calling you leak too much information about your hand and create a more lucrative opportunity for a good opponent in the BB to squeeze.

Even if you aren't squeezed, you create a good price for BB to come along and even if that doesn't happen you are still going to see a flop with the worst relative position and a face up range.

All of those factors together mean calling yields a lower EV than it would calling with the same hands from other positions.

Now you might ask why can't we call with our premium hands sometimes to strengthen our range?

We probably could, but that would likely sacrifice EV for the very top hands (QQ+) that would prefer to 3 bet for pure value and still put the hands like AQ+, KQs in awkward post flop situations where your EV does not reflect your clear equity advantage with those hands vs villain's range.



Sent from my SM-G900R4 using Tapatalk

Think about equity realization and the penalty for playing out of position to at least one player. You don't get to realize as much equity compared with both the big blind and the in position raiser. Because of this, you need a range that is somewhat stronger than the opposing ranges in order to play profitably from the small blind. If your range fits that criteria, then what's to stop you from 3 betting nearly everything you want to play?

That's not to say that I never call first in the small blind. I do, particularly in tourneys, but if I was coaching a beginner, I would tell him to 3 bet or fold from the small blind.

How big does villain open? If it's a 3x open, I don't think the price you're getting is cheap enough to make flatting the best option, except perhaps with hands like 99/88 and maybe AQo or ATs (AQ/ATs could also be 3-bet). Most of the stronger hands than those should 3-bet for value/protection, some of the weaker Axs and KQs could be 3-bet as a bluff, but the smaller pairs play so badly OOP (and can't continue vs a squeeze) that I think they should just be folded.
It's pretty hard to find a 'sensible' calling range for the SB that isn't really face up and capped. I mean, if I open in MP and get flatted by SB, I'm immediately thinking "He's set-mining 99-77 or he's a fish".

So what do we need to consider when looking at AJ-AQ and 22-77 from the sb vs different villains and positions ?

If you're considering flatting, you need to work out how much equity you have against villain's range, and think about your chance of realizing that equity while playing OOP against him.

e.g. #1 If villain opens in MP and his range contains A2s+, ATo+, ask yourself how many streets of value you'll get with AQ on Axxxx, or your likelihood of getting a free card on KTx. If villain is tighter and doesn't have so many dominated Ax in his range, then AQ will be less profitable as a call.
e.g. #2. If you flat 33, is villain often going to pile money into the pot on 943r, or check back boards like A54 and give you have an additional chance to bink?

If you're considering 3-betting, you need to estimate how much of your EV comes from villain folding to the 3-bet, and how much comes from calling with worse. e.g. I would 3-bet AQ in SB v CO or BTN, because villain can fold pretty often, but also call with dominated hands, to the point that AQ will often still have decent equity/playability on flops where it didn't make a pair. I wouldn't 3-bet with 33, because if villain doesn't fold immediately, I hate 85% of flops. With small pairs OOP, I usually just fold, but maybe in your game set-mining is still very profitable.

the trend of good players to exclusively 3b or fold sb was like 3 years ago, where did you hear it? old coaching videos, or something recent?

Arty - Let me start off by saying everytime I see u post I try to read thoroughly I really
like the way you put things.

Your explanation is actually really good. Right now I'm getting back to the game after
a few years off and basically going through the micros in which people today actually
fold more than before so sets are really not as money printing as they used to be.

That said - It's really hard for me to throw into the muck a hand like 55-66 vs btn raise, so while I understand that my hand will be face up and I wont be getting much value
even when I hit a big part of the time and understanding that it's going to be hard/ -ev to start balancing here out of oop and vs possible bb squeeze I think maybe some of the time I can 3b with the intention of folding vs any resistance pre or post.

And that said - I also understand it's a lesson in looking at things better, Yesterdasy after this post I played a session in which I was basically folding this range on this sb, kinda of just to get over myself lol and I get it.

This is an intersting topic


and Enzet - It was replied to me in a hand I posted in these forums and also heard it watching some poket streams (live at the bike and some ept final table)

In addition to the good suggestions of the above posters, I will do a little math for a “typical” case, which hopefully illustrates how such analysis can provide additional guidance.

Assume single raiser opens with a 3bb bet with a pot of 1.5. Also assume he bluffs 10% of the time and the SB has 80% equity if he calls the bluff. Then to call villain’s bet SB needs 31% equity which he gets with almost any hand. This assume BB folds
.
However, the first OP question was for SB 3 betting. If the SB make a raise of 5bb, then villain will most likely fold his bluff hands plus the bottom of his raising range, say for an additional 5% or his folding frequency is 15%. This then requires SB to have a hand with 39% equity for +EV. If the SB raise was 10bb, the required equity increases to 43% assuming the fold equity remains at 15%. An Excel EV analysis module allows me to do these types of calculations quite easily.

If you assign an open-raise range to villain, then you can determine what range SB needs for a re-raise of a specified size based on the required equity. For example, if villain’s open-raise range is the top 20% of hands, Equilab shows the SB has the 39% required equity with the top 70% of hands. For villain raising with a top 10% hand, SB can raise with a top 35% hand. Given OP’s example of KQs,AJ and 33-99 for the SB range, villain can have a hand as good as top 7% for SB to achieve a 39% equity.

The above is meant to show how you might do an EV analysis to help decide on reacting to a raise in the SB. The result, as with most math analyses, should then be adjusted to account for other factors not explicitly considered, for example, equity realization OOP as was noted earlier.

There are always a few combos in a range that are "barely" playable, because something has to be the bottom of your (playable) range, and such hands will break even in the long run. Any breakeven hand could also just fold, because folding is also breakeven.
I believe those hands you mentioned (66/55) are close to breakeven in SB vs BTN/CO in most online games.
That is to say, you can probably break-even by set-mining with a call, but you probably also break even by 3-betting. Slightly worse hands (44-22) would likely do slightly worse than break even, so I have no problem folding those in SBvBTN. With 66 I couldn't say if calling is definitely better than 3-betting, because neither option is massively +EV. I'm kind of indifferent, and usually make my decision based on game conditions (e.g. If I've been card dead/nitty, a 3-bet might get more respect, thus making that a more profitable choice than calling in that particular vacuum). I'm similarly ambivalent about hands like AJo, ATo or KJo or QTs in the same spot. I sometimes fold them, but 3-betting can't be terrible, and against some players even calling might be fine. I don't want to be flatting too many hands though. It's just so hard to make money by flatting in the SB.