Say there is a 3x open and we call from the blinds. Villain cbets half or 2 thirds pot on a wet board. Our raising range consists of things like sets, two pair, and draws, no? I think it is easy to find our value range, however I am unsure how many combos of hands we should be using for bluffs. How should we set up our bluff and value combos with that in mind on boards like:


JcTc2d


KsJs6c


875ss


JT8sss


Also, what is our sizing?

These are all questions that you'd want to address with a solver. You also need to define the opener's range first.

The way I do this doesn't really need a solver or the opponent's range. It depends on your preflop calling range, the bet size from the opponent as well as the pot size.

Lets assume you are the big blind, 3bb button raise, and you called. This makes the pot 6.5bb. Lets say you check and he bets 4.5bb or roughly 2/3 pot. To determine your bluff range you must first determine your continuation rage(includes raises and calls). To do that we use the following formula: 1/(1+(bet/pot))=60%. So you should be continuing with 60% of the combos in your range that beat a bluff(sorted relative to the flop). Once you determine how many combos are left there you use the following formula to determine your bluff combos (bet/pot)/(1+(bet/pot))=40%. Lets say for example your continuation range has 90 combos(just as an example) you would need to have 90*0.4=36 bluff combos. The bluff combos should start at where your continuation range stopped meaning your bluffs should be the best 36 combos out of the hands you would have otherwise folded.

I'd like to get better at this as well.

I generally pick hands that have good equity, but not doing it too often where we are easy to play against. If my opponent can jam over me with any two then I am check/raising too loose.

It is important to consider nut advantage as well. On the boards you listed, I think 875ss is probably the best to check/raise because we aren't capped on that board and probably have even more of an advantage there.

Stack size will be important too. Shorter stacked you can check/raise wider and trap with other hands that you would otherwise raise when deep.

If I was to guess with a normal 100BB stack, most flops you can check/raise somewhere from two to three times as many bluffs as value hands.

I don't think in terms of combos anymore on the flop and turn. Instead I think about how profitable calling is and I compare that to how profitable I think raising is. The difference is usually tied up in my hand's ability to win in these important spots:

a) vs a small flop 3 bet
b) vs a large flop 3 bet
c) vs a flop call

notice that on some flops below, the frequency that (a,b,c) happens will change based on the board.

I compare those flop risks and rewards and compare them to these spots that come up if I call the flop instead of check raising:

d) vs frequent large turn bets
e) vs infrequent large turn bets
f) vs frequent small turn bets
g) vs infrequent small turn bets

notice that again the frequency that (d,e,f,g) happens will change based on the board.


JcTc2d

I would expect at least a 2/3 pot sized bet here. I think the obvious draws that qualify for check raising 100% are the best draws in my range(which I didn't 3 bet preflop thus I can't have Royal draws) like K9cc, Q9cc, Q8cc, 98cc, A9cc, A8cc, 87cc, A7cc, A6cc, KcQx, Kc9x, Qc9x. I'm check raising all of those 100%. I think K8cc-K3cc can be played as a high frequency check raise, with little opportunity for counter exploitation, but I prefer to raise between 40% and 60%, and call between 40% and 60% with those combos, as well as many other not as strong flush or straight draws.

rarely, I'll throw in a low equity low frequency check raise with something like 54dd, but I fold that and all no pair no draw hands at or near 100% of the time.


KsJs6c

this one's a lot less volatile, I'm rarely raising this board with strong hands or with draws. QTss, Q9ss, T9ss are 100% check raise for me, but even the Ace high flushdraws I'll call between 40% and 60%.


875ss

I'm donking and check raising lots of strong hands as well as draws, the draws that I choose to check call 100% are mostly hands that can hit the bottom end of the straight, and some weaker 6x hands(note the power of the overcard pair outs, the bigger the 6x, the more likely I am to donk or check raise), and some weak flushdraws. basically everything else is a donk or check raise.


JT8sss

kinda the same idea as 875ss, except the straight draws are significantly weakened.

Some great analysis by Bob148, imo.

A true theorist, simply points out that *some* of these boards should be donked some of the time.

Part of the difficulty for the #neverdonk crowd is that it is not easy to balance, because different players IP respond differently, and you have to have a plan for the turn. XR flop and check turn is possibly just incorrect theoretically.

The main problem I see, is getting enough combos into the xr range (you need a ton) without exposing a weak range to the jam hammer.

We are trying to be aggressive from oop, and monetize more of our range’s draws and wiffs while maintaining balance on the end and avoiding exploitability.

FWIW, the small sample of hands that are posted in the high stakes hand history thread in NVG, do not feature flop or turn checkraises anywhere near what is commonly discussed on 2+2.

Nice, I think a 1/2 pot check raise accomplishes this goal at a price that is high enough to put the opponent to the test effectively on those boards.

I don't follow that thread, but I think it's for the reason that (ev bet or raise) = (ev check or call) for many combos, and also that the standard deviation goes up significantly when we take aggressive actions. When two experts face off for high stakes, both of these effects cause more passivity. There are also multiway factors that can come up, such as a big fish to your right with a 1kbb stack, which you cover, but you happen to be playing a big pot with the expert to your left. I would err on the tight side in that situation with many hands that I would otherwise play aggressively a significant % of the time.