So I know the line is ‘don’t set mine in 3bet pots!’, but I want to check my thinking on when you could reasonably do so.

Say we open with 3bb with pocket 4s UTG and the button raises to 9bb. Is it correct here to consider only the additional 6bb for set mining purposes, rather than the entire 9bb?

So we can use 20x as a reasonably conservative estimate, so if effective stacks are 120bb, it’s correct to call. If we think villain is spewy, we can use 15x and effective stacks need to be around 90bb.

Am I way off here? What do you guys use as rule of thumb for 3-bet pot set mining?

that's fine. 15-20x is the go. you have to also take into account that button usually has something good to 3bet an UTG open (but not always, people 3bet UTG super light in some metagames). also, you're OOP making it hard to get paid off, but if you think his range is almost exclusively overpairs and AK, position doesn't really matter.

It's only the size of the bet you have to call that you use in the calculation.

The implied odds are (effective stack + dead money) : additional money you have to call.

If you opened for 3bb, button raises to 9bb and both blinds fold, there will be 13.5bb in the middle when you make the calculation.
If you will still both have 100bb remaining when you make the call, then you are getting odds of 113.5-6 which is around 19-1. Set-mining is fine.

But look at a slightly different scenario. If villain had been UTG and opened for 9bb and you put him on aces. Implied odds of 20-1 in that situation would mean you'd need 180bb stacks to make the call, because although villain made the same size bet, there's less dead money in the pot.

So it seems like it's OK to call a 3x 3-bet if you'll still have 100bb after making the call, because the dead money makes it worthwhile. If you'd not already contributed 3bb, there's no profit to be made.
A similar thing happens when there's a raise and a call in front of you. With two players in the pot, set-mining is especially good. Although there's a greater chance of getting set-over-set (so you might want to dump pocket 5s or worse) there's also a better chance of being paid off when two villains are playing, and there's a larger amount of dead money to go after.

I'm not sure where these guys are getting their odds but the odds of hitting a set is about 8-1. Depending on the size of your pair, you can sometimes win the pot without hitting a set. However, there are also times where your set will lose to a straight, flush, or bigger set.

My general rule which I believe is fairly common is to use a 10-1 requirement for implied odds. So in your case, villain would need 6BBx10 which is 60BBs-(the current pot 13.5BBs) minimum behind (you would obviously need this as well).

That's just the math. Now you have to decide your chances of actually winning 46.5BBs if you do hit your set which is whole other topic.

pants on fire - we know the odds of making a set, we also know we might lose even if we make it - or not get paid off...But that leads to a requirement for the guy to have 15-20x behind to make it worth calling. Im amazed that a long time poster such as yourself is flying in the face of conventional wisdom and I salute you for it.

As far as I know, this is conventional wisdom:

* Never call more than 10% of your stack to a reraise to set mine

* Never call more than 5% of your stack to a single open raise to set mine

Where are you getting your info?

Or maybe put another way: "If you can win more than 20 times the current bet, call. If you cannot win more than 10 times, fold. If in between, continue the analysis."

If you say 15-20x, then you need to add some analysis with that. I did say that was another topic. Although the vacuum analysis of this situation is that a re-raise of a UTG raise does indicate a pretty good hand thus leaning towards the 10x figure.

you are using 10x pants, i suggested that would be Ok the other day and other posters jumped all over it telling me 15-20 x Now Im just confused.

I use 12x as my base. Against a loose cannon, 9-11x. Against a NIT 15-20x.

ymmv

I'm pretty comfy with 15x - 20x and tend not to go below that.

My reason for starting the topic was partly to check that my thinking about calling in 3-bet pots was correct, now this has been confirmed it begs the question why is the conventional wisdom "Don't set mine in 3bet pots!" ?

If we have 100bb, raise 3bb UTG and get 3-bet from MP, we are usually calling 9bb of which we consider 6bb. 6bb x 15 = 90bb, we have MP covered and can therefore call to set mine. Moreover we know that MP has a hand he likes and in a 3bet pot is more likely to stack off with TPTK or overpairs, this means set mining becomes more profitable as we are more likely to get paid off. Against this of course, we have to weigh up being OOP.

So I'm not seeing a problem with set mining here. Is it just the case that people are advised against set mining in 3-bet pots because they are less likely to have odds to call or is there something I'm missing? Other than being OOP of course, which I've mentioned but think is offset by the greater chance of the aggressor stacking off with TPTK+.

Not sure you find too many stacking off with TP any more in the micros. With the meta game played at the higher levels, we HAVE to stackoff....but I think the implied odds at the micros is a ton lower. Particularly OOP where getting villain to double barrel (or call our flop c/r) should set off alarm bells.

Ofc, very villain dependent. I'll stackoff #3 pair with some in a 3B pot..... and lose a good portion of those.

I think it comes down to "do you like riding the seesaw" type graphs and do you have the discipline to avoid "playing the opponent" when you miss....but feel the board HAD TO miss him too. ("He's got AK!!!!! I'm ahead") There goes your 15:1 ratio

meh set mining in 3-bet pots sucks. Villain will have AKo a lot of the time and wont pay you off when you hit. If you are up against an ultra nit box and you know he has AA then to set mine you need roughly 10:1 to make up for the times you lose with your set. This is just against a range of AA. Now if we put him on AA or KK only we have to think about the hand that 50% of the time when he has KK there will be an A on the flop 25% of the time and he wont pay us off. so now 12.5% of the time we wont stack him. So we need 11:1 to make up for it. Now if we put him on QQ+,AK we need roughly 20:1. You kind of get it?

Also when you think of your odds you need to call the amount is how much you have to call so it would be the 6bb's. 6*20 = $120-dead money in the pot. Then compare that amount to what villain has left over in his stack. Pretty simple.

Let's look at this from the other side. Let's assume I am the player on the button.

You open 3bb with 22-99, I have AA-QQ or AK, I 3bet to 9bb in position. Effective stacks are 100bb.

Do I want you to set mine here by calling additional 6bb? Absolutely (if I have a read that you call 3bets only with PPs and only to set-mine). I want you to call me every single time. Why? Because long-term I will win a lot of money if this situation repeats over and over. Even if you hit your sets once every 8 flops.

I thoguht the whole point Vuggie was that over time, I will stack you 1 in 8 = 100bb, but you will win 9bb x 7 = 63bb ...How arde you winning a lot of money here?

Important things here is that (1) Once you call my 3bet, I know you are probably set-mining (from your stats, which won't be too fishy) - in other words, I know that a big part of your 3bet calling range is small-medium PPs (conversely, if you were a total fish, I'd assign you a different range); (2) I have position every time; (3) In this spot, I am almost never 3betting light, but 3betting almost always for value (why? because you are a UTG raiser), which means my range will be something like QQ+, AK, maybe AQ. Now, with these extremely simplified assumptions, let's see what we got:

1. Those times you don't hit a set and fold flop, seven out of eight times I will win in total (9bb+1.5bb)x7 = 73.5bb. Let's not forget the blinds (Also, in reality, I almost never 3bet less than 10bb, but let's assume here that I actually 3bet to 9bb)
2. Those times that you do hit a set, I may actually sometimes get away from my hand (if unimproved, or on scary boards for me) on the turn or on the river (and sometimes even on flop!), especially if I have AK-AQ that don't pair. I'll generously count that you win 70bb on average every time you hit a set. So you win 70bb one time out of eight
3. Sometimes I will set-over-set you. 100bb for me. It's gonna happen very very rarely, but it's gonna be full 100bb my way. The effect of this is that it further reduces by a few bbs your average 70bb profit that you make once every eight hands, and increases my profit by a few bbs
4. Sometimes you'll have e.g. 44 and flop will give you a OESD (e.g. 235). Who are we kidding when saying that, even though you called only to set-mine, you won't try to chase your draw here? What are the odds of hitting that straight against my flop continuation range of QQ-AA?
5. There are other situations where a set will lose (to a flush, to a straight, etc.), but these are too minor to consider, so we call it a wash here.
6. Most importantly - position! It is much more difficult to extract value when OOP than IP. Conversely, when IP, it is easier to get away from big hands that are beat

Now summarise that, and I believe I come ahead by a few bbs in 8 hands, and this winrate will look even better in bb/100.

Now, if your opponent is a fish or a nit who 3bets only QQ+ and can never fold them postflop, it's a different matter - you may show good profit if you set-mine against them in 3bet pots. But against an opponent who is somewhat decent, who has a slightly wider value-3bet range, who can put you on a hand sometimes, and who can fold sometimes, it becomes way tougher to show profit. I believe it's a losing play to call 3bets OOP to setmine against such opponents