Quote:
Originally Posted by Eskaborr
Imagine if you 5 bet someone, then the board came a22. Would you think they should defend 50% of the time vs a pot sized bet?
Fact is you can't tailor a profitable range in extreme spots to hit every board postflop nor should it be your goal, so sometimes you will under defend and still be playing GTO.
This spot is not exactly like that but strict minimum defense can be dangerous.
Reason being for you to "exploit" them they first have to be making a mistake folding to your range and you have to fade all the other negative possible actions to arrive to that exact board with air.
MDF is applicable when a bettors range is balanced and contains reasonable bluffs. In the OP's hand, from the perspective of the villain, we are assuming hero's range is reasonably balanced (he's a 2p2 poster after all). On a Ten high, front door flush board a 3 betting range contains all types of reasonable bluffs. The flush, 2 overs, backdoor draws, combo draws, etc. Therefore MDF absolutely applies and the villain should be calling with the top half of his range in order to not be exploitable by a bet 100 strategy.
In the scenario you gave, I'm not super familiar with the 5 bet ranges (or the 4 bet call ranges) roughly 200 BBs deep (which is what you need to be to call a 5 bet pot with reasonable sizing and still have a pot sized bet left) because especially live low limit that's not a situation I'm worried about being well studied in. I also doubt live low stakes players have those properly balanced. I'm sure there are supposed to be some 5 bet bluff mixing with hands like KQs, KJs, QQ, maybe even some mid suited connectors at a low frequency - but no live player is doing that. Therefore, to exploit their lack of balance, you would overfold in your scenario. But it's due to your villain's lack of balance, not some flaw in MDF.