In general, I have used the general rule of range advantage determining how often I can bet on a certain board and nut advantage determining the size of my bet. However, I have come across quite a few instances where this does not hold true. For example, on AdTd2c, solver has us checking 71% or using an overbet sizing even though we have clear range advantage. What is it about this board that incentivizes us to polarize here instead of betting smaller and more frequently? What should I be looking for to identify similar boards where despite range advantage, I should polarize? Thank you for your input

In some boards, medium strength hands dont benefit from betting because there are few or no hands that fold to your bet that have any significant equity

Basically A high texture type thing. You aren't denying much equity and both players have a lot of AX. I don't believe you lose much EV at all by betting often for a small sizing, but the equilibrium output will have you checking frequently and utilizing the large sizing if that's how you sim it.

Here's a flop report, filter for (Ace)(Ten-King)(Low card). These formations tend to use overbetting strategies:



Your strong value top-pair hands can generate more EV with overbets. This works because BB doesn't have the nutted hands to counter the overbet strategy. So BTN can continue to overbet with strong top pair+ on turn and sometimes river depending on the runout.

If you remove the overbet size then the strategy can shift to smaller bets with a wide range. That doesn't work if all your value hands go into the overbet line, as the medium-strength hands need protection.

----

As Brokenstars pointed out, this is mostly an Ace-high texture thing. Here's a report, grouped by high card. Ace high boards tend to bet less frequently, but use a larger size.




Aner0's point about medium-strength hands is also correct. On a board like AK3r, for example, your King-x has very little incentive to bet. You can't deny equity to overcards (there's already an Ace on the board) or draws, and everything that folds has almost no equity against your 2nd pair to start with. You just fold out hands you had dominated in the first place.

Food for thought: why do we bet small on AKx boards for SB 3bet then?

i mean comparing an ip srp and an oop 3bp just doesnt make much sense imo

there are several reasons why those spots are different

there can be some small betting in splitting strategies but only big bet on those boards is a higher EV strat than only small bet

the more you know

What ranges are you using? For 500z rake it looks like the EVs are pretty similar for SB vs BTN:


with a clear preference for smaller size for SB vs LJ:


Even if only big bet was a higher EV strat, the question still remains: why is there so much small betting with Kx (if we allow it) when it doesn't need much protection? Clearly equity denial is not the only factor.

Exactly, and it's important to understand those reasons.

That's an interesting question. So the main differences are:

1) The SPR is lower. The Geometric bet size is closer to half pot in SB 3BP, but closer to 116% in the BTN vs BB SRP example.
2) The Aggressor is OOP, meaning theikr checking line has to defend against up to 3 bets instead of 2.
3) The Defender has stronger hands in range. They should have proportionally more strong Ax, and perhaps even flat the 3bet with some AA/KK/AK .



Here's a CO vs SB 3BP. The preferred cbet size is 1/3 pot and it's betting plenty of 2nd pair.

SB strategy


CO facing SB 33% bet:


----

What are your thoughts on why this happens, Keuwai?

I agree with your 2nd point: checking is a less attractive option for marginal hands when OOP, which makes us slightly more inclined to bet.

SPR also makes a difference, but not so much because the geometric size is smaller (Kx bets smaller than geometric either way). Rather, IP is not able to raise as aggressively with the lower SPR, which again is good for betting marginal hands.

But I think the main reason is that we have a much bigger range advantage on this board when we 3bet from SB (>60% equity). And this allows us to bet thinner for value without compromising our checking range.

This also explains why we prefer to polarise on AKx after 3betting from BB. Our polarised 3bet range doesn’t hit the board as hard, so we cannot afford to bet Kx for value without overly weakening our checking range.

Is this confirmed?

I'm looking at sims on GTO Wizard and it cbets small mostly from SB3BET on AKx board.