calling pre is the worst option of the three

3betting is bad for frequency purposes

Pretty sure I agree with this unless the blinds suck. Almost said something like this in my post. Unless we're just choosing to 3b like 1/4 of some random Axs combos and or Kxs combos (while reducing some of our other normal 3b'ing combos by that same amount) we're going to easily get carried away if we're 3b'ing this hand regularly.

Pretty soon you end up like a 2013 me 3b'ing Q7s and K3s IP because "I just feel like it this time and I play decent post flop usually so why not" and you start having no idea where you are in your range. Scary stuff!

Ironically do we think his bluffing frequency goes up or down with the ace on the board pairs? Ime for most reasonable guys Wayyyy down.

That being said trips!!! I always pay this off and take a note

Additionally a lot of randoms seems to call 3bs with way too many pocket pairs especially oop. My set detector is going wild here but like I said I'm paying this one off. If he's really calling pps to 3bs oop you're going to own him over time

Good post, however if you want a 3bet range in these positions (which I think you should), then you obviously need to include bluffs.
Personally, I think a hand like A8s does the job okay; decent FE, a blocker against his 4bet bluffs and decent EQ against a common part of an EP flatting range (TT-QQ). That's why I prefer this hand over something like 56s.
A2s-A5s is often a flat for me, and so is ATs+ (depending who's in the blinds of course).

You make a good point about the danger of being infrequent with your ranges, which I agree is important and can create confusion for an inexperienced player (or one who is not 100% focused). In the bad old days when 3betting was cool I also picked hands to 3bet with at more or less random, but in those days I wasn't punished for it like I would be now. Eventually, opponents will get so good at poker that you have to really nurse that bluffing range; you realize that you can only bluff X amount of combos, so those combos better make sense!

That being said, a healthy dose of infrequency and randomness is actually a good thing if done well, as it makes you more unpredictable. The only danger is taking it too far.

Sorry to continue going off-track slightly but I'm coming back from a fairly long time off the poker scene and trying to get back into it.
I had some coaching back in 2012/3 (can't remember exactly when) where the coach was encouraging me to 3bet Kx suited in position so I've kind of kept that habit. Literally any Kx suited I 3bet and Ax suited I'll either fold or call depending on villain/position etc.

When we're talking about being frequent with our ranges, does it mean *always* doing X if I have Y? So if I choose to always 3bet Kxs and never Axs, that's ok? Is it only a problem if we start raising random Kxs, some Axs, some suited connectors?

Thanks for any help.

As for the hand I'd like to say I find a fold as I rarely see this with air but in the heat of the moment I probably call. As others said at least we can use the sizing tell for future (if bluff or value).

Many good posts itt! I will give my 2c as well:

the 3b preflop, imho, is meh against an unknown though not a big issue (if at all)

Flop + Turn are standard and river i think we can make an explo fold, given population tendencies.


The problem with these spots is, that our range is pretty face up when we check back Flop + it becomes a "levelling game". However, i think the above hand is not really that much different from any other spot, where we define our range as mostly bluffcatchers (for example, if we XB button vs. big blind on AXXr etc...). Thus i`d approach it the same way as i approach those other spots gameplan-wise.

If villain is a reg, he must suspect that Hero has a hand like this. What else would he 3 bet with, check back the flop and then call a bet on the turn? That is classic pot control and Axs is a huge part of Hero's range. Therefore, what basis would a decent reg have to think that he could knock Hero off a middling ace? In the absence of history, that is a pretty risky bluff to try to pull off. Given the bet sizing, I'm inclined to fold this. If a similar situation arises again against the same opponent however, I would be more likely to call due to table dynamics.