I have been away from poker for 5 years, so I'm probably lagging slightly behind

Structure: 6-max, NLHE. 100bb stacks.

UTG (winning reg) opens 3bb, HJ (Hero)?


Would it be terrible to play without a 3bet range here as a standard?
(CO and BTN are tags and capable of 3betting light).
I think I wanna experiment with flatting my entire range here because:

1a) I strengthen my range against squeezers allowing me to call and 4bet more 3bets.
1b) Realizing I flat JJ+ and AK here they will be less inclined to squeeze me lightly, allowing me to see more flops with speculative hands like low-mid pockets and suited connectors with good implied odds against a tight UTG-range.

2a) I strengthen my post-flop range against turn and river barrels, making
him less inclined to bluff, making it easier for me to get to showdown with
mediocre hands... and float more and take down the pot on turn.
2b) It allows me to raise more flops as a bluff since I can now do it with QQ+ as well... or stack his TPWK or 2nd pair because he thinks my flop raise is nuts/air, but I'm sitting with AA... or even induce a flop 3bet spew or calling my flop raise and check/raising turn with air because he thinks my range consists of the few combos of sets and a lot of air.

I also enjoy experimenting with "extreme" rules and see how it goes. It is fun and interesting, if you dont mind donating a few stacks to everyone else while you do it.

In this case, you are choosing to flat or fold, versus an 2b from UTG (and EP1 i suggest) .

So you experiment by being very exploitable, and try to figure out if the opponent is using all of this to imbalance himself by trying to exploit you. All the while you are in position.

My 2c.....

Some tables in Vegas play this way, but the UTG player also has a strange and wide range to open with, as a counter exploit. Basically, they are all bypassing normal ranges and 2bet/3bet process while building family pots that are large and worth fighting over.
If a player is not "playing by the rules" as socially constructed by the group, then the others react by exploitive folds or bluffs that take into account the normal range that a player would open with UTG. You either play by the rules of the group, or become a cards up nit (re-exploit).

BUT.....

When you play this way against a table of ABC TAG, you will simply get taken to value town, stack after stack. Plus, the normal stakes online are full of TAG or LAG regulars that would simply read you as a call station.

Much more interesting is to play without a 2b flat range preflop. Only raise 3b or possible call the 4b. Now that is power poker from position, as long as you choose your opponents wisely.

Let us know how it goes!

Rob


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seems reasonable and you seem to have a good idea of its implications preflop and postflop.

I don't think it's a good adjustment, since it prevents you being able to win the dead money immediately. If you wanted to eliminate an action from your pre-flop arsenal, it would probably be better to have no flatting range, and just 3-bet everything that is playable.
The optimal play, of course, is to 3-bet some hands and flat some. I don't see much point in cutting off one of your "limbs". Snapping off a branch of the game tree might make your strategy easier to remember, but it also reduces your overall EV.

Hacking off this much of the game tree this early cannot be good. Your options should be open.

Do you guys have a range for open-limping the button in 6-max cash game with 100bb effective stacks? If not, why not?
Why cut off that much of the game tree early on by only open-raising otb and never limping?

Poker is a fight for a share of the dead money. Raising (to steal the pot and deny free equity) tends to have a higher EV than limping. You can't maximise your profit if you restrict your options to calling pre-flop, because so much of your EV comes from not seeing a flop. People that never raise pre-flop don't make money, obviously.
The SB is probably the only position where limping some hands can be more profitable than raising.

Ok, so maybe I went too far when I suggested flatting my entire range from HJ vs an UTG open... but still I would like to flat a hand like AA to balance myself against squeezers as well as balancing my post-flop range.

I mean, if we never have JJ+ when we flat a pre-flop open we are pretty exploitable, no?
Don't we open up ourselves a lot to squeezers as well as post-flop barrels?

There might be a logical pre limp range, but since winning the blinds right away shows a profit, I am guessing there isn't in 6max. Ironically this is another reason to consider 3betting, because you can take it down. But there are times to flat as well. I am not a fan of playing dogmatically, and while I start w pre-flop scripts, I adjust them to my opponent.

Firstly, all the points you made in the first post (about strengthening your range etc) were fine and interesting. You can definitely flat QQ and even AK in MP/HJ vs UTG. (FWIW, I flat QQ by default). I don't think it's particularly wise to flat aces or kings though. Clearly you can't play a very wide range in that position when facing an UTG open, but your flatting range should still be strong enough to cope with being squeezed. If you call and it's heads up, you won't have a lot of combos in your range, but you'll still have some very strong hands on flops that come Axx, Kxx, Qxx, Jxx, Txx. You have some QQ, all of JJ/TT and AQs/AJs, AQo, maybe KQs too. If you want to occasionally put KK in your flatting range, that's probably fine in theory, as there's probably a fair amount of mixed frequencies in that spot (e.g. 3-bet KK 95%, 3-bet AK 80%, 3-bet QQ 20% or whatever).
Generally speaking, though, I think you'd do better in this seat to "isolate" by 3-betting more often than calling. (FWIW, vs a 2.5x open by UTG at 100NL, Snowie suggests 3-betting 6.5% and flatting just 1.6%. Against a 3x open, it calls a little more and 3-bets a little less, but 3-betting is still preferred). I think some of the 500NLz bosses hardly flat anything in MP. It's just not a good position for cold-calling, unless you're specifically trying to induce squeezes. The problem is, if you flat with AA, you block a ton of the typical squeezing hands (Axs), so flatting might be more likely to just cause a chain of callers (set-mines etc). That's the last thing you want when you'll have the worst relative position if it goes multiway.

To have no 3betting range doesn't really make sense for a few reasons.

You say that it will allow you to play back against the opponents 3 bet bluffs, which is all well and good, however; If you're planning on reraising with the nuts you will be playing your strong hands face up and so will often lose when the opponent continues. If you're planning on calling the 3bet you'll be playing in an awkward seat with an awkward hand. KK, QQ, JJ and AK are not all that great in a mwp, and if we are calling here we are encouraging more and more people to join our pot.

You say that once the opponent realises that you are playing JJ+ and AK without raising you are able to play a lot more hands more profitably in this situation. Which does make sense, this probably would help you play those weaker hands, but, if the opponent realises that you are calling your JJ+ from this seat you are sure to get less money from these, you strongest hands, than you would if you had raised them. You also say that it will make the opponent less likely to bluff us on later streets, which is true, but if we hold JJ+ we want them to bluff! You say that your bluffs will be more successful, but again, we don't want our bets to take down the pot more often whilst we hold the strongest part of our range! Again this is counter productive.

You are trying to get more money from your weak hands but is it really worth the cost to the strong hands?

Instead of taking money away from the most profitable hands in our range, it would be better to make the maximum profit from both types of hand - As the opponent starts to think you make a play in a specific way it becomes more and more profitable to play it in a different way. If he thinks we are always calling our JJ+, we will probably make more money by raising it. If he thinks we are raising our JJ+, we will probably make more money calling it. The only time this logic would not be applicable is if the opponent knew we were using a balanced range. In this case they themselves would balance and so there would be no way for us to take advantage of them.

... Your strategy is all confused. By giving yourself a set definite play you are losing all the profit you make by exploiting the individual opponents. By making a set strategy like this you sound like you are shooting for GTO. And if that is the case. Why not just make the GTO play preflop? Which, I suspect, would be to mix them up to some degree anyway. Both calling and raising.

In the specific scenario you describe where there is a presumably good regular opening UTG (especially if he happens to fold to 3bets on the higher side) and presumably good regulars on the CO and button who 3bet on the higher side, I don't mind having not much of a 3betting range from MP (and if there is a fish in the blinds, even better).

I probably still 3bet AA most of the time (but maybe less than 100%) and maybe some weak suited A's. I can easily see just calling with KK a lot. The equity drop from AA to KK is actually significant, so you won't miss out on as much when you could have gotten it in by 3betting, but just called when you have KK as opposed to AA.

Some balanced flatting is good, wouldn't want to cut that branch off either, and it's totally fine to experiment and *some* but not all AA here imhe because you don't want your observant opponents to know you don't have AA when you 3bet. AAis imhe a very flexible hand.