Hi all,

You're playing heads up, you 3 bet a polarized range OOP, and the button calls.
Flop comes Q86 rainbow.

Is it okay to fire with 100% of your range here?

It seems like this kind of flop intersects both your range, and your villains range very well. Alot of the low suited connector type hands have either a pair or a draw, while the higher broadways can either have a Q or also a draw like a J9 or JT.

So im thinking, if you bet out with all of your hands, i looked it up on equilab, villain probably folds out a third of the hands that he'd call a 3 bet with (stuff like AT, KJ). This means that we can pretty much instantly show a profit by betting, as long as the villain doesn't catch on that we're firing with our entire range. Also, an A or a K turn will greatly improve our range, to the point we can comfortably fire a second barrel with most of our draws without the villain being able to do much, not to mention random flush draws we pick up.

Only problem imo is that we have less queens. Villain might call with QJ, QT, even Q9, hands i wont 3 bet with. What if he begins to raise flops.
Basically, trying to get an idea of what hands i should not be c-betting with and on what textures. Putting our "bad hands" into our checking range will "strengthen" what we lead out with. Do we need to do it in this particular scenario.

There really isn't a shortcut for finding the exact range of hands you should continue with. You'll need to put in some time with some software (equity calculator, simulation software, etc) to get an idea.

In general you should be bluffing with hands that have some equity but little showdown value at the moment. Think of something like T9 for a double gutshot vs AT with A high showdown potential. In the end equity IS equity no matter how you look at it but it's easier to call and win with A high expecting to see a bluff on the river vs T9.

Try to avoid hands with little to no equity and 0 blocking effects. They simply have to buy the pot too often with too much working against them.

It is also helpful to choose hands that block the best parts of villain's calling range while avoiding hands that block parts of villain's bluffing range. In your example JT would block a lot of the combos of QT and QJ villain my continue with.

Finally if you are playing against unknowns then I would say in general you could cbet quite a bit if not all of your range on that board. If you play in a regular game with people who pay attention you may want to check your worst parts of your range.

There's a couple of things wrong with this line of thinking IMO:

Firstly, when you C-bet any flop (whether it was 3bet preflop or not), if villain folds a third of their range it is profitable. Anyone half decent knows this and has adjusted their ranges appropriately. Against good opponents, and presuming you're 3betting at an appropriate frequency, most people won't just instantly give you credit and fold and should be floating/reraising flop with front or back door draws and decent Ax, particularly heads up (its very optimistic to expect AT to instafold to one bet HU). Also most players now use a hud, so if you do C-bet 100% of flops most people can identify this and will pummel you with check raises/traps. Therefore it's important to build ranges and not just C-bet ATC.

Secondly, just because a certain line may seem +EV, doesn't make it the most +EV line for every hand in your range. For example on Q86r it may be +EV to C-bet TT, but maybe bluff catching is more +EV depending on your opponents tendencies, especially considering you blocks draws you can extract value from. Obviously C-betting QQ is +EV, but maybe in some circumstances slow playing can be more profitable.

As just grinding said, use high equity low showdown value hands to bluff. On that board, 79s and 57s are the absolute nut bluffs, particularly if they have backdoor flush draws (I don't know how you've constructed your 3bet range pre but they may be some bluffs you have). Then second to those would be gutters like T9s and JTs. Third to those might be hands like Kx with no pair, as K high is unlikely to win at showdown after checking 3 streets but you at least have 3 outs to improve to top pair. Don't underestimate the showdown value of A high, particularly heads up. In fact I believe A high is in the top 50% of showdown value hands using ATC.

Then when constructing your range on that flop, depending on the bet sizing you want to be adopting you can mix in the corresponding number of value combos (or alternatively work out what value combos you want to be betting and organise an appropriate number of bluff combos). If you bet small you are going to need a more value heavy range and if you want to bet bigger you're committed to a bluff heavy range (if you're playing unexploitable poker). There is a load of maths on constructing bluff:value ratios and bet sizing that I'm sure you can find somewhere on here. Bet sizing selection (and therefore value:bluff combo ratio should depend on your range vs range advantage, or at least that's my understanding.

Anyway that's my understanding on range construction anyhow, don't know maybe other people approach it differently

Are you 3-betting polarized because your opponent has very obvious tendencies you can exploit? 3-betting ranges when OOP have become a lot more linear in the past few years, because villains defend IP much better than they used to.