Common wisdom on the forum has it that bet/folding and raise/folding for value can be reasonable options at every action except preflop when facing a raise in front; while bet/folding and raise/folding for value can be perfectly fine postflop, and open-raise/folding for value (e.g. with a small pocket pair) preflop is also standard, it is considered almost taboo to 3-bet/fold or 4-bet/fold for value when 100 BB deep. Why's this, and does your answer change for stack sizes of 300 BB deep? I am interested in why people think GTO play should look this way, not some population exploit.

I think your sample is biased giving you the impression raise/folding doesn't occur preflop.

You may have wanted to put GTO somewhere in the title. I was rather confused until I reached your last sentence.

I said reraise/folding for value.

Well part of the problem is that no preflop hand has 0 equity in the pot so value and bluff aren't really a well defined continuum of value/bluff.

Another reason people are calling more is that preflop betsizing has been getting smaller leaving more room for post flop play.

The other problem is what you consider value (i.e. expecting to get called by worse but only raised by better).

I can certainly 3-bet/4-bet bluff expecting to fold or give up if my opponent continues but a combination of fold equity preflop, preflop equity, the construction of my ranges, and post flop skill advantages on the aggregate make 3-bet 4/bet fold the best play.


Any way back to the sample issue the advice is generally given out in posts on the forum where you're only seeing a small subset of hands that are biased toward made hands (i.e. no one posts trivial hands where the decision to fold is clear).