I just watched a Jonathan Little video and he introduced a concept that seemed kind of cool. I hadn't really thought about it before. He said that his decision to 3-bet pf has a lot to do with if the blinds are good players or bad players. If they're bad, he's more inclined to flat. If they're good, he's more inclined to 3-bet because they're more likely to give him trouble post flop.

$1/2
$250 effective stacks

V1 40's white male. He is a typical calling station. Tends to call down with top pair, weak kicker. He'll call with any piece of the flop.

V2 25 y/o Asian. Overall, he's a bad lag. He's been running a lot of unconvincing bluff lines that have gotten picked off. He's been raising the turn a lot with some mediocre hands. Spewing chips and has rebought 3 times for a full bi.

V3 50 y/o white tourist. passive overall with some aggression pre. pfr probably around 20-25%. Pretty fit or fold post flop. Face up player

V1 is the small blind. V2 is the big blind. V3 is in MP. Hero (tag image) on button.

Pre-flop
V3 opens to $15 from MP
Hero?


To this point, I would 3-bet this close to 100% of the time hoping to play a big pot in position against a predictable opponent.

I believe what Little is saying is that you should consider calling to get two additional bad Vs in the pot. Is there merit to that?

Thats like a LP dynamic...
Say co raises and your bu maybe u flat there to bring in a fish in the blind

Ok had to read post carefully... Ans. is yes... IF YOUR GOOD ENOUGH POSTFLOP

If V3 is actually that wide 20-25 PFR and is fit or fold post, easy 3bet to $45 or so for value. We make a lot of money here when he calls with most of his pfr range and then folds flops he misses. This also leaves us plenty of room to fold to a 4bet.

This isn't a hand you wanna play 4 ways against super wide ranges either when you could get the same amount of money in the pot against one easy opponent with a much more defined range.

I would just 3-bet QQ. I think you have to be careful, he probably said he'd be more inclined to flat, not that he would always flat. Plus, QQ is usually a RIO hand unless you hit a set. I don't really want to play 4-handed postflop. Plus, this is 1/2. FPS at 1/2 is usually bad.

99 would probably be a better hand to do this with. Say the original raiser's range isn't that strong and you want to 3-bet with 99. If the blinds are bad, then you might want to keep them in, and 99 plays well multi-way.

I think this really depends on the table/poker room you're playing at. At the 1/2 game I frequent no more than 4 people including myself ever open raise and a most of the time I can sit in a game for 5 hours before the first 3bet. At these type of tables I would probably just flat here. Now, if 3bets are more common at this table you're describing which I hope they are, I think 3betting here is standard and is the correct play 98% of the time. I would raise it up to $40. I think QQ isn't an easy hand to play 4way post flop even otb - or atleast not a situation I wanna be in if I can help it.

Easy 3-bet.

I think the concept in general has some merit, but don't over do it. With bad, passive players in the blinds, I'm definitely less inclined to mix in light 3-bets (J9s, 77, A5s, etc) here, since the EV of flatting with those hands IP is much higher than it would be with two tight/decent players in the blinds.

I don't think the logic extends nearly as well to premium pairs though. With QQ, we're likely in good shape against the PFR's calling range, and we'd strongly prefer a heads up flop to a 4-way one. An overcard is going to fall otf almost half the time.

I would be more inclined to flat QQ here with a bad, aggressive player in the blinds. A true maniac that you can expect to make some dumb small pot builder / take initiative type 3-bet a high % of the time would be ideal.

Gotta raise this, c'mon. Too many people limping around. This concept is interesting, but guess what It's not just the blinds you're up against.

I would tend to reraise to around $40, expecting V1 to call fairly often. I don't think you have any real reason to believe that by calling you will induce the players in the blinds to call a huge preflop raise. I would also be reraising to $40 with a much wider range than only premium hands, assuming he will play straightforwardly after the flop.

We stacking off if he 4 bet shoves? In my experience at 1/2 it's almost always KK+ with the occasional AK.

Not really.

When we are making decisions we need to make our decisions based on the available information we have at the time. Now, lets say there are two terribad villains in UTG and UTG+1 and they limp and then V3 raises to $15, the information we have now is that UTG and UTG+1 like their hand enough to put money into the pot, therefore they are very likely to call that $15 raise. So now, we can decide what to do based on this information PLUS the information that V3 also likes his hand.

that is completely different than 2 terribad players sitting in the blinds with ATC. Odds are that those players will not like their cards enough to call a $15 raise because they have ATC. So we should make our decision on what to do with QQ based on all the other information available to us.

Then there is the simple matter of pot odds and implied odds which is a staple of winning poker.

Do we want to go 4-way with QQ with a 5bb raise when eff stacks are 125bb and give those implied odds and pot odds to our villains and in effect turning our QQ into an reverse implied odds (RIO) hand.

And the other consideration is post flop fold equity. If our villains truly are terribad, then we will have no fold equity if a K or A hits and they have some weaksauce A6 or K8 hand. Or put another way our QQ is still vulnerable to over cards...

So add all that up, and our decision on how we should play QQ in this spot needs to be made based on how to extract max value from the principle raiser. So, it's a 3-bet.

We should want to flat hands like Axs or baby pockets or SCs and S1Gs so we can keep our implied odds as high as possible, and THEN hope the terribad players come in from the blinds... That is a much more favorable scenario especially since we are in position.

But QQ is just not the hand to do that with because we want to play QQ straight for value and by flatting a meager $15 raise with QQ and hoping for a 4-way pot we turn QQ into a RIO hand

so 3-bet pre.

There are sometimes where I will flat an initial raise with QQ. The biggest reason why I will do that is if the opening raiser is one of those aggro villains whom for as long as he has the initiative he blasts the pots and stacks off and has tons of air and awesomeness in his range. Then by all means I will flat this guy when in position, let him keep the initiative as long as possible so he can shovel money to me.

Another reason to flat pre with QQ is if the opening raise was so big that it denies implied odds for setmining and drawing. If our MP villain is aggro spewy tilty and he open raises to $45, then we can absolutely flat our QQ hoping others come along (or we can 3-bet pre to ensure stacks get in on the flop). That would be a different scenario where we could flat if we choose to.

Otherwise, flatting hoping blinds come along when the blinds have ATC is not optimal. If they were in EP and limped that would be one thing since they expressed interest in their hands. But having ATC in the blinds is a completely different scenario. That and for the RIO reasons I listed above, 3-bet in this spot is more or less mandatory.

I think that there is some merit to flatting OTB here:

1 - I don't think we are losing much value vs V3. He is probably folding the majority of the hands we want in PF, and definitely OTF. While not the end off the world, him 4b isn't great since he has a PF aggressive streak and may ship AK, JJ, or even TT.

2 - V2 seems like the type that would squeeze light here often enough to worry. Even if he calls, it sounds like he will do something stupid enough to outweigh the RIO situation.

3 - V1 is not a threat.

That said, I still 3b here a lot.

* edited many times from a phone

Would it be different if we had a hand like AK (or even AQ) instead of QQ? Would it ever be a good idea to flat here with AK hoping that one of the blinds comes along with a weak ace?

flatting is ok here if villains in the blinds call with dominated hands a lot like JTo and will put a lot of money in when they flop weak top pairs. in general, i think most villains wont go too nuts when they flop weak top pairs in todays games. therefore 3betting for value vs the majority of villains range is probably best unless you think villain will fold dominated hands to a 3bet.

the only difference would be pfr range

is he going to call your 3bet with aq, aj, kq? if not, then flat and let someone come along with a weaker ax or kx

This hand is an interesting situation. On the button, we really should be isolating V3 with a strong, linear range, of which QQ is certainly a part of. The only reason I would consider flatting is to draw V1 in and try to bait V2 into making a big squeeze. The SPR of 4 we would get 4 ways doesn't seem favorable enough even with poor opponents, so I'd rather just 3-bet it.

However, let's say that the opener is a GOOD player (if they exist at 1/2). Then the dynamic totally shifts in my opinion. I had a situation like this at 2/5 where a player on my right had me fairly well read and voiced his displeasure for me being a nit (He didn't say it out loud. He talked about how there's players like me in his home room that he just wants to bust so bad). He was playing like a wannabe LAG (and losing) but not giving action to my aggression at the very least. And the rest of the table is very unskilled/loose-passive. In this hand, V raised UTG to $25, and I flatted him next to act with QQ to bring in players rather than 3-bet and frequently waste my hand. My plan worked to a 5-way pot, flop came T34 two tone and I got a short stack AI for ~250 on the flop and my hand was good at the end.

Against good players, there are situations where you shouldn't have an aggression range preflop & on the flop (or it's just super narrow that it's negligible. This is much rarer preflop IMO), especially with position on them. The hand described in OP isn't one of them though IMO. Against baddies, just build the pot up with your edge, they're here to gamble anyways.

Seriously this.

If I had a nickel for everytime some terribad player called a 3-bet for 20% to 60% of his stack merely to c/f the flop, i'd have a lot of nickels.

If they are terribad, odds are decent enough that they will call the 3-bet anyways

What can I say, I learned from the best.

G


I agree with what you are saying vs "terribad" players, but as described Villain 3 doesn't seem to be in that category. Villain 1 and 2 could be, which is why flatting has some merit.