The problem with 3betting ranges
02-06-2014
, 10:22 AM
Ok, so I was trying to devise a good GTO 3betting in position range.
I came up with 34 value combos, and so I had 32 bluff combos as well. This is a 5% range.
This means that I can 3bet in position and never be exploitably 4bet bluffed by anyone (using standard sizing). Is my thinking here correct?
Anyway, the problem I had was that it seems in practice it's pointless trying to devise such a range, since in one of my sessions there were two separate hands at full ring, I had a value hand AKs, and a bluff hand A5s, and each time I had the choice of 3betting a nit in early position that only open raised 5% of hands from there.
This meant that I decided to fold A5s and call AKs, instead of 3betting them both, (one for value and one as a bluff). Due to my opponent's opening range, I felt it essentially forced me to change my range vs him.
1.) Am I able to still continue with my original 3betting strategy against this type of player, even if he has a tight range, because he is exploiting himself by opening too tightly, hence my strategy would still be +EV, but not optimally +EV, presumably as I would gain EV when I get to open more pots myself since the tight player is open folding 95% of the time in front of me?
2.) Since my partially GTO inspired 3betting range is 5%, and I have QQ+, AKo/s as my value hands in this range, does that mean that when out of position facing this same range, I should always fold everything apart from KK+ if I open raise and get 3bet by a similar 5% range?
3.) If the answer to question 2 is that I should only continue with KK+, then does that not mean my opponent is wasting EV by esentially 3betting QQ and AKo/s, since they only get action from better hands if your opponent is playing well. Therefore if those hands now get dropped from the 3betting range, and the appropriate amount of bluff combos are also dropped, then the 3betting range now only comes to about 2%, which basically means you will rarely be 3betting in position so does this not mean then that 3betting in position is fairly over-rated as a result?
Anyway, I feel like I'm rambling big time now, so am I on the right track with anything or just offering out spewy thoughts?!
I came up with 34 value combos, and so I had 32 bluff combos as well. This is a 5% range.
This means that I can 3bet in position and never be exploitably 4bet bluffed by anyone (using standard sizing). Is my thinking here correct?
Anyway, the problem I had was that it seems in practice it's pointless trying to devise such a range, since in one of my sessions there were two separate hands at full ring, I had a value hand AKs, and a bluff hand A5s, and each time I had the choice of 3betting a nit in early position that only open raised 5% of hands from there.
This meant that I decided to fold A5s and call AKs, instead of 3betting them both, (one for value and one as a bluff). Due to my opponent's opening range, I felt it essentially forced me to change my range vs him.
1.) Am I able to still continue with my original 3betting strategy against this type of player, even if he has a tight range, because he is exploiting himself by opening too tightly, hence my strategy would still be +EV, but not optimally +EV, presumably as I would gain EV when I get to open more pots myself since the tight player is open folding 95% of the time in front of me?
2.) Since my partially GTO inspired 3betting range is 5%, and I have QQ+, AKo/s as my value hands in this range, does that mean that when out of position facing this same range, I should always fold everything apart from KK+ if I open raise and get 3bet by a similar 5% range?
3.) If the answer to question 2 is that I should only continue with KK+, then does that not mean my opponent is wasting EV by esentially 3betting QQ and AKo/s, since they only get action from better hands if your opponent is playing well. Therefore if those hands now get dropped from the 3betting range, and the appropriate amount of bluff combos are also dropped, then the 3betting range now only comes to about 2%, which basically means you will rarely be 3betting in position so does this not mean then that 3betting in position is fairly over-rated as a result?
Anyway, I feel like I'm rambling big time now, so am I on the right track with anything or just offering out spewy thoughts?!
