3 Handed no reads. I'm big blind with K Q

BTN raises to 1 BB, SB raises to 1.5 BB, Hero raises to 2 BB, BTN calls 1 BB, SB calls 0.5 BB

Flop: (6 BB) 6 8 5
SB checks, Hero bets 0.5 BB, fold, SB calls 0.5 BB

Turn: (7 BB) 9
SB checks, Hero bets 1 BB, SB calls 1 BB

River: (9 BB) Q
SB checks, Hero bets 1 BB, fold

Lololo,poker need op.

Welcome to The Forum. Don't post results it effects the discussion. You get better responses if you stop the hand at the toughest decision point.

Tell us why you bet the turn.

Yes, and what are the stakes... I dunno seems like you lottoed your way through the entire hand at first look.

Yeah I screwed it up and meant to cut it off at the turn. I bet in stride and then realized I made a mistake. I would assume now check back the turn and then fold non K, Q, or 7 rivers would be best. I can't see getting value out of any calls on the turn besides KT, QT, JT, QJ. Given he 3B pre I would think his possible flush draws are cut down to pairs+FD, Ax FD's, or at best broadway FD's. Even giving him a 30% 3B range he crushes my equity.

ProPokerTools Odds Oracle Results (2.3 Professional)
Holdem, Generic syntax
Board - 6s8c5c9s
PLAYER_1 KdQd
PLAYER_2 30%
13376 trials (exhaustive)

This should have been a check then evaluate river, correct?

The problem with the turn bet is that if your pre-flop capping range is anywhere near plausible, you aren't representing very much. Do you really cap with 77? 66? 55? So your range looks like 99, maybe 88, maybe some strong enough overpairs that you are comfortable betting a scare card on the turn, and all your missed overs betting the scare card. And if the SB can figure this out, he should check-raise the turn fairly liberally because he can represent somewhat more of that range.

If KQ is literally the bottom of your range, maybe it's right to bluff the turn with it, IDK. The GTO people can probably tell you this better than I can. I hope you don't do this with all your missed overs, because that seems ridiculously exploitable.

Finally, I'm curious about the river play. I can see arguments for different approaches, and a lot depends on what SB is going to check-raise on this flop (and thus what SB's range looks like here) and whether SB is going to call the river with something like AK or AJ or 44.

If there aren't any lesser hands in SB's range that can call your bet, it might be correct to check the KQ behind, believe it or not. Especially since there's probably some JT's in there that are going to x/raise you.

I don't keep betting with all missed overs but I typically don't play a lot 3 handed.

I have worse hands in my cap range 3 handed though.

I played HU with SB prior to this and I thought I'd get called by A high.

Thanks for the input on the turn.

I never 4 bet preflop in this spot with rare exceptions like vs a maniac or vs opponents that check lots of flops.

If you thought this, then you should have definitely checked the turn. The only reason to bet it is to try and get him to fold a high

Duly noted.

Food for thought, if Sb does call you down here with A high then one of you is probably really bad. Finding out which is important

Or tilting which is just temporary really bad

+1

That's what I was getting at with my question about betting the river at the end. Whatever villain's range is for not check-raising but check-calling the flop, and not check-raising but check-calling the turn, that river should either make a better hand than we have (AQ, JT) or convince anyone with a brain to fold (AK and AJ and underpairs seemingly beat nothing after that river).

So what are we really getting value from, and is it really going to make up for the times when we have to pay off a check-raise? If the answer is villain's actually going to call the river with his AJ or something, that's really bad. If not, then as ZOMG says, maybe we are really bad.

I semi lied. You could also be betting to charge two cards between T and K with the intent of checking the river ui. Your cap has kind of ****ed the dog though, because you're going to be put in an ugly spot most of time on the river when you check the turn

I think an interesting point people may be glossing over is that since you said you would cap worse this may be much closer to a barrel for you than other players. most people just can't credibily rep much on this board but over pairs and AK.

Thx. Bottom line is I monkey spew bet the turn w/o thinking and the explanations helped. Might need to post this in the preflop thread but I'm a little shocked it seemed like a few people wouldn't cap here 3 handed.

3 handed is just 9 handed w slight bunching effects.

I don't think you can get away with playing a 4 betting range and a calling range because your calling range will likely be unprofitable due to the information you give away.

In no limit, you can sometimes get one or both of your opponents out of the pot preflop. This advantage isn't present in limit holdem, which is why a good 4 betting range will strictly be for value. A calling range, on the other hand, can have lots of good drawing hands in it that the 4 betting range can't.

With all that in mind for constructing my preflop range, there are some hands that I think are roughly breakeven that can be called or folded here like 22-44, A8o, A9o, K9s, KTo, Q9s, QJo, J8s, T8s. There are some hands that I think are clear calls like 55-88, ATo, AJo, A2s-A8s, KJo, KQo, KTs, QTs, QJs, J9s, JTs, T9s, 98s, 87s. Anything better that that is basically printing lots of money whether you 4 bet or call. That range: 99+,
AQo+, A9s+, KJs+, is only 92 combos. Compare that to the number of combos in the "clear call" segment, which is 132 combos.

Now consider how much more you're really winning with your 4 bet range and compare that to how much you could be winning with a call range. Especially consider that the button may cap for you and that you don't win every time you cap. So you're really gaining <1 small bet per hand by capping the 92 combos.

You'll be dealt one of those 92 combos about 6.6% of the time.

I'll be dealt one of the hands in my range about 18% of the time. I

I think I can win more per hour with my 18% than you can with your 6.6%.

I understand calculating the 6% vs 18% hand combos.

Can you explain how we only gain <1 sb win we cap and how you win more by only calling here? Or at least point me in the direction?

To re-raise pre, or rereraise pre, you need to have equity, and still have your hand disquised. And position helps. Though I assume it helps that it won't go 5 pre. So if your opponent is out of line, you can throw in the raise really wide, and maybe even a lemon hand combo like 76s as a ploy (even more so in home game to be invited back).

Play becomes very sharp though. Usually heading for the cap is danger danger territory though. Run some hot and cold equities but remember, your showdown value isn't super, you are out of position, though you are suited. You have a decent bluff catcher.

In defense of capping, I will say a couple of things:

1. This wasn't this situation, but for the "never cap" strategy to make sense there needs to be, as Bob says, a significant number of hands that you feel you could play for 3 bets and not 4. Which means, in turn, that the tighter the ranges of your opponents are, the more I think you should just cap. That prevents you from missing a bet on a checked behind flop, and in those situations, your call is basically the same as a cap anyway in terms of the information it gives your opponents. (This is similar to how in some no limit situations, a call is the same as a shove because your opponents are super-strong, so you might as well just shove.)

2. If you are planning to barrel a lot of hands down, the cap becomes more defensible IMO, especially since you have position on the 3-bettor, who presumably has the stronger range of your two opponents and who you are more likely to end up heads up against. This is because the cap makes you look super-strong and could thus give you some more fold equity, especially where you flop draw on a draw heavy board which eventually misses (and thus the SB is going to be calling you down a lot of the time if you raise the flop). In other words, if you have JhTh and the flop comes 9h7c2h, I think you probably have more fold equity with this hand if you capped it pre- than if you raise that flop.

do you three bet out of the bb to a btn open?

The 'dumber than bob's answer' is that you have more hands you want to play here preflop for three bets than you do four. when you are playing against multiple very good hand readers they realize your 4 bets are very top heavy and can bail on bad flops and attack good ones. For instance a good player can make your life hell on this board once they realize you have basicly no hands that connect on a 9 high board. No offense but if I see someone 4b KQ and then barrel this board, I'm going to start raising this flop or turn with **** like Q high and it can make you life hell.

You 'win more' because when you 4b here pf anyone who can read hand basically know you have an overpair or two bigs cards and it makes their postflop play easier. If you never 4b pre, and then raise this flop, now you can have A7s, or 89s, or 9Ts, or AA or 88. Your range is now uncapped and includes all monsters and bluffs and makes it harder for people to play against you

You can't afford an unbalanced top-heavy 4bet, and underestimate what your opponents can do to you. It's better to flat call three all hands than to 4bet barrel like this. Though nothing is absolute in my mind, but a more concrete answer would require more analysis of ranges at each point by the OP.

With some relatively standard ranges for all three players:

Vs big blind capping range:

btn: 24.95% equity
sb: 28.16% equity
bb: 46.89% equity

46.89% of 12 small bets = 5.6268 - 3sb investment = 2.6268 small bets of profit best case scenario. Consider that the button will gain some of this ev due to the power of position and all the stuff that zomg said. 2.6268 small bets * 6.64% of the time = 0.1744195 small bets per hand won by the big blind by playing cap or fold strategy is best case scenario.

----

Vs big blind calling range:

btn: 28.44% equity
sb: 33.63% equity
bb: 37.93% equity

37.93% of 9 small bets = 3.4137 small bets - 2sb investment = 1.4137 small bets of profit by calling * 18.1% of the time = .2558797 small bets per hand won by the big blind by playing a call all strategy.

Of course, sometimes the button will cap. Let's look at that possibility:

btn caps 99+, ATs+, AQo+, KQs = 80 combos / 666 combos = 12% of the time the button caps.

btn: 44.96% equity
sb: 25.7% equity
bb: 29.34% equity

29.34% of 12 small bets = 3.5208 small bets - 3 small bet investment = .5208 small bets of profit for the big blind * 12% of the time = 0.062496 small bets of profit for the big blind per hand, which is in addition to this profit:

button declines to cap the other 566 combos / 666 combos = 88% of the time button calls.

btn: 26.44% equity
sb: 34.58% equity
bb: 38.98% equity

38.98% of 9 small bets = 3.5082 small bets - 2 small bet investment = 1.5082 small bets of profit for the big blind * 88% of the time = 1.37216 small bets of profit for the big blind per hand, which is added to the profits from the times the button caps:

1.37216 + 0.062496 = 1.389712 small bets * 18.1% = 0.2535178 small bets of profit per hand in the big blind.

comparing that to a capping strategy in the big blind: 0.1744195 small bets per hand won by the big blind by playing cap or fold strategy is best case scenario.

And it's close from a raw equity standpoint. Add in all the stuff that the others have said, which will bring down the ev of a 4 betting strategy and I really like just calling everything here.

Really in 3 handed spots, my BB strat will vary

If it's fish opens BTN, TAG 3 bets SB, I'm capping less often BB. If it's TAG open, SB fish 3 bet, I'm calling with a wider range than I'm capping with in the first example