SB 3-betting Range vs Button Open - Page 2 - Medium Stakes Poker Forum

-variance (If ranges are opening up quite a bit 3 handed I don't mind folding some bottomish range 3 bets so I can 4 bet when I'm on the button with more of my middle range hands. This IMO is so important 3 handed because a lot of the time the game turns into a 3-bet carnivals out of the blinds.)

Can you explain more clearly how your statement in parentheses has anything at all to do with variance?

Quote

11-04-2014 , 12:00 PM

#27

thesilverbail

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,659

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveistheman84

i honestly have no idea how much difference there is, but know that there is at least some difference, thus i think it'd be wrong to treat both scenarios the exact same. maybe i'm over adjusting, but i feel that using the same btn open against say, you in the bb in a 9 handed game as a btn open against you in the bb in a 3 handed game would be wrong. would you say it'd be an over adjustment to go 1 to 2 pips wider in 3 handed?

yes simulations have shown that this is case, card removal actually makes very little difference. There should be a thread about it somewhere.

Quote

11-04-2014 , 12:21 PM

#28

steveistheman84

old hand

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 1,438

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesilverbail

yes simulations have shown that this is case, card removal actually makes very little difference. There should be a thread about it somewhere.

.........well ain't that some ****.......

Quote

11-04-2014 , 12:31 PM

#29

DougL

Too helpful for this post

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 21,810

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesilverbail

yes simulations have shown that this is case, card removal actually makes very little difference. There should be a thread about it somewhere.

As I recall, it makes so little difference that you shouldn't pay attention. But I googled to check.

Hood has this thread in STT strategy forum, where it makes a difference in a FR STT with an ATC shove, but the example was picked to show a shove becomes a fold. I'm not sure how much his method carries over. Maybe someone with Stox EV could duplicate this method for a marginal LHE hand FR from the BTN and show it is clearly worse to open? Still think that FR players in BB are so likely to be bad it won't matter enough to tighten up a real amount.

Quote

11-04-2014 , 05:07 PM

#30

rodeo

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 3,305

Quote:

Originally Posted by steveistheman84

i think it should change enough to open from the btn 2 pips wider, which would seem to be a significant increase in range percentage. maybe i'm over-adjusting, but it seems to work okay.

you must be 1.) playing in very soft games with players that don't know how to exploit you, 2.) running good, or 3.) both.

Quote

11-04-2014 , 05:45 PM

#31

steveistheman84

old hand

Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 1,438

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodeo

you must be 1.) playing in very soft games with players that don't know how to exploit you, 2.) running good, or 3.) both.

definitely 2) x 10. i don't really think that it's much of a leak as you're stating. i'm not opening 2 pips wider across the board, but have been adding k4o and k3o, q5o, and adding a couple more gappers like 96o and 85o. i'm not adding j5o or anything, and most of the time it goes off 3 handed, the btn is being straddled by all 3 players, so it's not much of an occurrence. anyways, i guess that i was wrong in my assumption of the effect of card removal and just keep the same defaults across the board.

Quote

11-04-2014 , 06:05 PM

#32

phunkphish

veteran

Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 2,902

I wanted to disagree with steve, but I think he may be on to something.

Most extreme example: 10 handed game, all villains are loose passive and will play any ace. All villains however fold to hero on the BTN.

Hero looks at 56s.
Without card removal, 29% chance at least one of the blinds has an ace.
With card removal, 40% chance at least one of them does.
Hero instead looks at A2o.
Without card removal, 22% chance at least one of them has an ace.
With card removal, 33% chance at least one of them has an ace.

The difference is staggering. Blinds are about 10% more likely to have A-hi hands. Plus, villains' aces will be more likely to pair. This also doesn't account for an increase in other broadway cards in remaining villains' hands.

The initial assumptions are very crude, but having more reasonable assumptions is very difficult to do. If we guestimate the actual effect to be only 3-4% more A-hi hands, it's still more than negligible.

Quote

11-04-2014 , 06:22 PM

#33

DougL

Too helpful for this post

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 21,810

Quote:

Originally Posted by phunkphish

and will play any ace.

Most mid-stakes players don't play in games this good. It is the key assumption, that every A dealt gets played. If every seat at the table was playing A2o UTG and a similar loose opening range, we could talk about how common 2BB/HR win rates are. You'd also never have a hand fold to the button, so card removal wouldn't be a big concern.

Quote

11-05-2014 , 02:43 AM

#34

RLjolt

centurion

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 195

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlanBostick

Can you explain more clearly how your statement in parentheses has anything at all to do with variance?

Button is probably paying more individual attention in 3 handed game vs 9 handed game so general hand variance (whether or not we happened to 3-bet the last 4 sb's in a row) may have a greater effect on villains perception of our range vs actual range. I'd suggest that generally speaking, the majority of our standard 3 betting range OOP becomes -EV if villain starts opening up their 4-betting range on the button.

Quote

11-05-2014 , 05:35 PM

#35

thesilverbail

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,659

Quote:

Originally Posted by RLjolt

a. this is not the definition of variance. What you are saying is that gameflow matters.

b. If the last sentence were true, doesn't that mean we should greatly expand our standard button capping range ourselves?

Quote

11-05-2014 , 07:21 PM

#36

RLjolt

centurion

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 195

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesilverbail

a. I definitely was not trying to define any term in that sentence. Gameflow can be a product of variance though, right? If so, that's what I meant. If not, then it's not what I meant.

b. That's why I said earlier in thread that I'm 4-betting from the button more.

Quote

11-05-2014 , 07:35 PM

#37

thesilverbail

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,659

Quote:

Originally Posted by RLjolt

b. That's why I said earlier in thread that I'm 4-betting from the button more.

More than what? more than before or more than everybody else is doing? If the first one, why do you think it's better to 4-bet some hands now that it wasn't before? if the second, why do you think these extra hands are better to 4-bet?

Quote

Page 2 of 2

First

1 2

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 2

First

1 2

Last