Because he is on the button.

In this debate you are having with Sneaky Pete I actually tend to agree with your end of it more than his, but in this case it's not unreasonable to assume villains range is wider here since he is on the button and people generally raise at least a bit wider from there.

Also in my experience at LLSNL most players do have bet sizing tells and usually smaller raises do represent a weaker and wider range.

@Sneaky Pete, do you ever just flat a 2-bet with big PP's and big Aces, or do you always 3-bet?

3-betting also gives us the opportunity to get in a heads up pot vs SB

When you flat with big PP's instead of 3bet, you are taking hands from your 3betting range and moving them to your calling range.

In other words, your 3betting range is shrinking and weaker because you just removed the strongest hands, and your calling range is stronger and doesn't have a cap.

3betting is aggression or offense.

Calling is passive or defense.

Typically if someone wants to improve defense, he must feel threaten by opponent's offense, enough so that he's actually trading part of his offense as defense.

3b is good and sizing is fine. I would peel the 4

Also his open size is not fishy at all, esp if it gets ppl to take AA/KK out of his range. 4x might be a better size, but that has a lot to do with rake and how often blinds defend

I still see a ton of chops, it's far from a default to open otb. It's fine to open otb, but projecting your own tendencies onto a V is a big mistake.

You were saying?

Are you trolling? Because I cannot believe that you are still arguing that V's opening range isn't wide.

I wasn't lying.

I was saying but for some reason you read "I see a ton of chops because whenever it folds to me otb I fold and that's the reasons the chops happen."

Oh ok, so instead of continuing discussion of whether V's opening range to 3bb is wide, you decided to talk about how often people chop?

Do you even know what you are saying?

LOL...

Lol wow so many ppl don't want to 3bet pre. This is a fist pump snap 3bet for me considering I would also be 3betting a ton of worse hands for thin value and suited connectors for board coverage with the expectation that most V's won't have 4bet bluffs in their arsenal and he'll be raise/calling with a wide range because he's on the BTN and because we're so deep. This means there's going to be a ton of fold equity postflop on the Axx/Kxx/Qxx boards.

So given he won't have 4 bet bluffs, when do you fold?

It depends on how wide is 4! range is. This is an on the fly analysis, but if his 4! value range is AA-TT, AK-KQ, then I think we can construct the following:

1) 5! range: AA-KK (value), Axs (bluffs)

2) 4! call range: All PP's, suited Broadway's

3) 4! fold range: smaller SC's (I think) and off suit Broadway's

I'm not really sure what to do with the SC's OOP to be honest, but 3!/folding those is probably best. I think QQ becomes a hybrid that can be 5! or just flat the 4! for bluff catching good flops.

I think this is starting to move away from live play and into the realm of how online players would be thinking about the hand. Baluga Whale has a really nice 3! Seminar video that touches on 4! and 5! and this is kind of what it gets into.

If anyone with an online background can touch on 4!/5! ranges that would be helpful. Is it even worth considering these dynamics at LLSNL or is protecting our stack the most paramount concern since we can't multi table and can't easily build up to 400 BB's if we GII preflop and lose?

You mean in this hand or in general? Looks like a fold on the flop. I'd probably peel one with J though if I felt there was a chance of V having 4bet bluffs. If I felt like V was likely to have 4bet bluffs then this would be a call.

I think working with a value 4bet range of JJ+,AK makes much more sense. Never giving anyone wider than this without good reasons. Since it is button vs BB I think he can be that wide. Many players will still only show up with KK+ though.

If this is true, then I've found one of the reasons I can't get my long-term WR above $20. I would never attempt this with 98s. Or, are you talking Broadway SCs? If so, wouldn't you often find yourself in the same range as V & be dominated a fair % of the time?

Of course, I can only buy in for $300 as opposed to your $500 buy-in.

Where can I find this Baluga Whale video? Thanks.

I enjoy the debate, but to put things in perspective, I think once he 4!s, every decision until the turn is a marginal one, and you're not hemhorraging chips either way.

Villain is unlikely to be 4!ing light enough for folding preflop or folding the flop to be a big mistake. Calling the 4! with the idea of set-mining is no sort of fat, huge-winning proposition, but the odds are decent enough that it's not a total money burn, and besides, you might win the pot without hitting your J once every blue moon. Calling the flop with the intention of calling one street when the flop is good for our hand can't really be too massive of a mistake, though again, the mean range for an unknown MAAG 4!ing here isn't nearly wide enough for it to be mandatory.

Just don't 5! pre and don't call a turn bet, and I think you're doing fine. It's a gross spot, but also not a super consequential one in terms of your overall winrate, imho.

Squeeze or flat pre is pretty consequential, on the other hand, and I think flatting is missing out on really fat value. I hate to miss out on fat value on any street in these games just because we're deep. If you don't want to lose 400bbs here, then don't blowoff 400bbs with a medium overpair.

It's a bit rich to assume that villain is going to force us to a tough decision for our entire stack very often. If he shows significant aggression postflop in a 3b pot, then he probably has a better hand or 12+ outs. I never ever see players floating flops with GSSD + BDFD on two-toned flops type hands so they can rep the other flush draw when it completes or any sort of crap like that.

I would consider yourself to have pretty decent position.

I would certainly call with 98s+, and would probably generally call with all of the SCs. My 3b/f range would be more like K7s-/43s/87o/etc.

Imo it would be a mistake to be that polarized with your 3betting range in this spot. There is close to 0 fold equity preflop so all you're doing is bloating a pot OOP with hands that will have lots of RIO against his calling range. What we should be doing is building pots mostly around the plan of thin value postflop and also setting him up for RIO with his really wide defending range with some suited connectors mixed in for deception and board coverage purposes.

You're right that it's probably a mistake against unknowns in most games. I tend to assume players play fairly fit-or-fold/weaktight postflop, but that's a result of the games I play in.

I'm now adjusting to a new casino where I'm not sure anyone ever folds ever, which is pretty sweet, but shows why advice can't be so generalized.

Regardless, I still think with how wide villains' ranges are, we can still have a bluff range here with some of our best, most playable otherwise-have-to-fold type hands like 86s. Anyway, my main point was that the post I was responding to seemed to overestimate the ****tiness of our position here and that it's not totally necessary to play 3b-or-fold with all SCs.

Although there is very little FE pre-flop, there should be quite a bit post-flop depending on board texture and ability of Villain.

It's not as cut and dry as we should be 3betting with hands that have decent equity.

I think in a deep game, most hands aren't going to showdown, basically just bunch of "shoving match" with threat of actual violence.

In other words, I don't think this hand matters as much as how it is situated in a series of hands.

Yeah I mentioned in an earlier post that there is going to be a good amount of fold equity post flop because of V's wide range but not so much that it would be profitable to 3bet 72o and cbet any board. There will be some boards that we can profit on by cbetting with air, sure, but there will also be boards that will be two tone and connected and the most +EV thing to do would be to check/fold OOP with 0 equity. So we win small pots on boards that are good for our 3betting range and lose small pots the times we check/fold the dynamic boards with no equity. The profit is going to come from the times when we dominate V and win a medium to big size pot. So we want to choose hands that will have V's calling range dominated the majority of the time, like ATo and KJo vs. his QTo and J9o for example.

Whether it is deep-stack or just 100-bb's, why is it not reasonable to just call, and not 3-bet JJ's, since basically you all agree that this is a set-mining situation?

It only becomes a set mining situation once we get 4!, which is pretty rare against a random bonk. When he flats, we have him dominated.

JJ vs. a BTN raise is pretty much the furthest thing from a set mining situation. You are even more incentivized to 3! JJ OOP if only 100 BB's deep so you can GII as quickly as possible on favorable flops.