As some other posters already mentioned, if you don't call anyway and just 3b a ton, i don't think it's a problem. Just construct a somewhat balanced 3b strategy, mostly depending on playerpool tendencies and player types. The 3betting range is not the problem, because it can't be capped, if you polarize correctly (against certain villains only of course).

If you intend to call with a somewhat wide range, i think it should absolutely contain hands like AA or KK, even if you mix it in only very rarely, since it usually is capped and that way you throw your opponents off and at the same time protect your range against certain flop textures.

I think wether you have a 95%/5% mix or just 3b 100% of the time would not make that much of a difference, but from a technical standpoint it makes alot of sense. Having a flat of like 50% with AA is horrific, totally agree with other posters.

There's a helluva lot of mixing in GTO solutions, but the mixing usually happens with mid-strength hands, and only rarely with the nuts.
e.g. You would typically always 3-bet KK+, but with AK and QQ or KQs you could mix between 3-betting and calling, since these hands are not "100% fist-pump stack offs" or "obvious bluffs".
When you're bloating the pot (with a 3-bet), you clearly want that range to be your strongest, hence why it will contain the nuts more often than not, but board coverage and balance comes from mixing in a multitude of hands at lower frequencies.

FWIW, 4-bet/5-bet pots are a little different. I think AA is sometimes flatted instead of 4-bet/5-bet, because otherwise your ranges will become too capped/face up/exploitable. Facing a single raise, though, ranges are still wide enough (i.e. there are enough combinations) to allow you to 3-bet the top of your range at 100% frequency.

in low stakes cash this is a leak. never expect your opponent to do the betting for you and allowing their full range of trash to hit the flop for a low price is asking for trouble.

i've read a lot of poker books and if they don't classify a strategy to a villain type its mostly hogwash for applying it at the tables. There may be truth to it from a mathematical long run EV against their GTO villain in a 1 billion run sim, but i believe it will get you in serious trouble in real small stakes cash games.

FWIW I'm pretty sure in Cardrunners videos that came out after the book, Janda did not advocate for this type of play anymore.

...

No, its the opposite. GTO is always do the same thing if that thing prevents the players from unilaterally deviating to another thing in order to increase EV. Unless the choice of 2 or more things all have the same EV they cannot be contained in a GTO strategy by definition. And for sure there is no "randomness" in a equilibrium solution.

Personally think you should be given green, or some great poster award.

You've answered more of my questions than anyone, and everytime I personally think with great replies.

Just my 2c

+1. I just created a thread and was hoping that Arty would respond because he is genuinely good willed, informative, well spoken, and just a pleasure to read. Sure enough he replied an hour later and I learned a thing or two as well. Arty, we are lucky to have you. Oh, and that bit about the CO probably having the best hand was brilliant!

+1,000,000

Good point.... Generally, I will try to flat AA in situations versus certain players, i.e. players who are good enough to understand that my flats in those spots should not include AA and those where slow play should pay off in the long run. Regardless, I have to take a deep swallow sometimes and realize that in situations where I flat AA after a bet (versus re-raising) I will often have to make semi-difficult folds and difficult folds.

Amen. He speaks the truth here. Have to be able to fold it, and sometimes fold the best hand by doing so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A cheque to cover your expenses is in the post.