Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain R
Your strategy posts are making less and less sense. Taking some weird line to "probe" when we already have the information to make the obvious adjustment is pretty terrible. You realize you're essentially saying you want to take some non-optimal line "for information". While you're at it, why don't you raise him "to see where you're at"?
That's actually what I was kind of afraid of and why I've been very insistent that if you start going down this path that you should not fold. That's not what this is about.
If villain FSDRs, you've *already* gotten the bet that you "should have" gotten if villain had just called down. And if he's truly FSDR-ing, then he's folding to your 3-bet because that's what the line is supposed to be doing.
Furthermore, increasing your 3-betting frequency with weaker hands on the turn is exactly the sort of thing that you can do to get yourself in trouble. What happens if villain *isn't* FSDRing? What is he raising the turn with? How does your hand fare against that range?
Most likely, you're in a world of hurt against his value range. And then you "should fold." But then why would you ever open yourself up to this sort of thing by 3-betting the turn? The turn 3-bet opens you up to being exploited because you're giving your opponent a cheap way out when he's behind and a way to extract a lot more value when he's ahead.
You're raising to win zero extra bets when you're right but lose as many as 3 extra bets when you're wrong. That's not a good strategy.
So go ahead and 3-bet more often with your semibluffs. That makes sense. You steal pots sometimes that you shouldn't win, and you've probably got the right price to make the bluff. And expand your value range a little bit to balance that out.
But with your marginal showdown hands (I take QQ to be marginal here because of the thinner value-raising range villain should have on that turn card), you're playing a game on a knife's edge. There are no more "optimal" lines to exploit at this point. It's all about capitalizing on your opponent's mistakes. And if you already know what those mistakes are, then use that information. If not, then find out.
Quote:
Don't take a less exploitable line because you want to explore his response to some weird line, that's ridiculous.
I could turn this around and say "Don't play directly into exploitative lines by opening yourself up for an all-risk/no-reward scenario." I don't think the "obvious" adjustment is to start 3-betting marginal showdown hands. That's also ridiculous.
After you've expanded your ranges as described above, you've still got quite a few hands in your range. The standard thing to do is to keep doing what OP did. But if you're looking to exploit (which is what OP suggested he's looking for), I'd look to exploit in the non-standard plays. I'm trying to induce specific types of mistakes based on what I think villain is trying to do.
So if I think villain is FSDRing, I'm not 3-betting the turn because that doesn't exploit that line (he gets away for no more bets). I also don't expect him to bet the river because FSDR isn't about betting the river. So the only place to begin to exploit with these marginal hands is the river donk.
But if you think he's FSDRing but will change his mind and call down with weaker hands, then go ahead and 3-bet your marginal hands for extra value. But I don't think it's "obvious" that this is what you should be doing with those hands.