played some 20-40 live 3 handed with a straddle.
what would be your baseline strategy preflop from SB and BB?
I played 87s,86s,10-7s,J7s,Q5s,10-8off,K5Off, Q7off,J8off in the SB.
What should BB playing range be if SB a)3-bet or b)fold? c) call

I did this once in a 15/30, customary straddle. I'd just find another game, because it's such a rando crap shoot, and not very much fun. It's very hard to know an optimal strategy here.

It's definitely not a random crapshoot, but the variance is insane.

Find a different game. Mandatory straddle is a crap shoot with extreme variance since everyone is pretty much priced in and will call with backdoor draws. 3 handed maybe be some what okay but it wouldn't be a optimal game.

Lol do you guys also think heads up lhe is a crapshoot cuz both guys play like 90% of their hands?

Yeah you should definitely quit this game

Fwiw, I've been playing some three-handed with a 1/2 kill lately. Fundamentally, the 1/2 kill is dumb and ruins the game. But at all times at least one of my opponents fails to adjust to the kill correctly, usually for multiple hours, and the game is insanely profitable (beyond the fact that you're playing 1.5x stakes).

The adjustments to the OP's Mississippi straddle are not particularly hard if you have a solid understanding of the game, but do not assume that everyone is going to make them.

Yeah I mean if you wanna see someone torch money, watch a fish try to play the small blind in a 3 handed game w/ button straddle.

FWIW even across like 4K hands (like 100 hours of live), HU can be a crapshoot, but we obviously shouldn't care about that if we're properly rolled.

Generally speaking, when I analyze spots and try to determine what play is more profitable, it often ends up being the play with more variance (thinner value bets, more turn/river barreling, etc). I haven't really studied 3 ways w/ a BTN straddle, but generally, if the SB is going to play loose passive, getting him to do so for 3 bets is better than 2.

totally wrong. i've played 3handed with 1/2 kill no qualifier and i think it made for the best poker format i've ever played. also, 4handed with mandatory btn straddle was really sick too, though more gambley.

What exactly is totally wrong? I don't think playing with a 1/2 kill 3-handed makes for a very interesting poker game. I also think it's better to play with it because others play so bad. So when I say that it "ruins the game" it just means that I think it makes the game stupid and automatic, but since others haven't thought about the game or are incapable of making adjustments, it is a more profitable game.

Playing 3-handed with a 1/2 kill should have a high amount of gamble if the kill is playing correctly, which thankfully they don't.

makes it anything but automatic. your ranges are always different.

Some of those sb hands look pretty trashy, I'd be raising My entire range that I play

Prob something like
22+, any a, k5+, k2s+, q9+, q8s+, j9+, t9, t8s? 98, 87?

How does that look to everyone?

Not the same. You're anting way less before the flop. I shouldn't have said crap-shoot, but the variance is so high that you may as well play a level up in a full handed game and there'd be less gamble, and more familiarity. Obviously, if your speciality is homicide like Columbo, then go for it. If this were the only game in town, I'd go for it, otherwise, I'd save my strength, read a book, etc. My strategy would be to see lots of flops, and try to manoeuvre, and read through the situation. I don't even know where to begin to approach this game mathematically, but seeing lots of flops seems right. I mean, how much do you just pop it again OTB because you're the button? It might be a strong play, because most flops miss most people.

I think the small blind should raise ~35%-40% and fold the rest.

In the big blind I'd raise 65%-70%, call some other stuff, and fold the really bad hands like 83o-, 72o, 62o, 52o, 42o, 32o.

I came up with these numbers by considering the number of opponents, position, and the size of the pot. In the small blind this added up to playing a range that is wider than a standard cutoff opening range, but not as wide as a standard button opening range. In the big blind this added up to playing a wider range than I would in a standard blind vs blind battle.

In the worst position with least invested in pot, three handed we should raise over a third of our hands?

I experimented with SB range and come up with the following
51.43%range:22+,A2s+,K2s+,Q5s+,J6s+,T6s+,96s+,86s+ ,76s,65s,A2o+,K5o+,Q7o+,J7o+,T7o+,97o+,87o.
and come up with following BB defense range(if SB 3bets -37.56%):22+, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J7s+, T7s+, 97s+, 86s+, 75s+, 65s, A2o+, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o

a)if SB 3bets and BB calls or 4bets. SB equity-34.33% , BB equity 38.32% and
BU equity is 27.35%.
results not the best for SB but tolerable and it happens in 37.56%
but its much better if BB folds

b) 62.46%. SB 3 bets BB folds. SB equity 57.26% and BU equity 42.74
This much better for SB

What you guys think

Nice post sarex!

Agree with above. Though saying BB should fold 83o- should be LDO. At the very least, BB should be folding anything it would fold to a BTN open.

I'd add that straddle should literally be defending any two cards HU for a single raise.

I'd rather do the maths on hyper draw games, and make varience my business. It'll be spread more often.

This is hilarious. Stuck in a game where we are 3 handed and my opponents are straddling.

You have to understand that a number of people ITT took online prop gigs where HU and 3 handed play was just standard. DeathDonkey's HUHU LHE video was the gold standard. People in this forum are comfortable in wide range spots in limit. The idea of playing with villains who aren't comfortable in those spots is amazing -- even winning FR players can be big donors, because they can adjust incorrectly. You can't make the hourly in a FR game that you can 3 handed. You're correctly playing way more pots, and your skill matters much more often. That's why pros flip their sleep schedule to play the night shift.
The key is to be showdown bound enough for the pots you help build. So if you're 3 and 4 betting and building huge pots, it isn't like a FR game where "if he raised the turn, he can beat toppest pair so I should save 2 bets and fold now". The idea of maneuver is strange because your opponents should be sticky. If they aren't, then you exploit their folds.

Sins in this game would be in being too tight PF (large ante) and too tight post flop (huge pot + wide ranges). If they can be bluffed, not bluffing them would be a big mistake. Then, not turning bluff catchers into bluffs. The next level would be in avoiding playing so unbalanced in spots that you're easy to read?

So, shorthanded poker = fun + profit.

Quit obviously

Actually I just don't straddle, more than adequately rolled. No way on earth am I straddling. I hate it when there's the guy that says, "round of straddles?". If I wanted to play three blind hold'em, I would sit at a table that spread three blind hold'em. The blinds are just insane w the straddle. I mean, I'm in the big 3 whacking anything resembling T9o, paranoid I'm over adjusting etc. 3 betting lits and lots of stuff that beats random trash.

There are basically 3 approaches you can take here (1) quit and find another game (2) play standard bad poker or (3) actually do the work so you can come up with close to optimal strategy (I say optimal. It it's actually not going timber optimal at all in a live game, rather highly highly exploitable which is even easier to figure out)..

When somebody actually decides to try and work with option 3, which few people actually do, The first advise he gets shouldn't be quit because it's. a stupid game.


Fwiw, I think Must straddle games are incredibly stupid and almost always object it largely for different reasons and it has nothing to do with running the game or turning it into a crapshoot.