Since A Q 4b pre a decent amount of the time and we block K Q hard, seems like an easy river check? No 3 streets even if the turn and river would be blanks(cards of 7 and lower)?

PokerStars - 15/30 NL (2 max) - Holdem - 2 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (BB): 1,856
SB: 1,144 (VPIP: 61.54, PFR: 38.46, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 13)

SB posts SB 15, Hero posts BB 30

Pre Flop: (pot: 45) Hero has K K

SB raises to 60, Hero raises to 150, SB calls 90

Flop: (300, 2 players) T Q T
Hero bets 114, SB calls 114

Turn: (528, 2 players) 8
Hero bets 264, SB calls 264

River: (1,056, 2 players) 3

180 pre, probably check flop here, call down any bets / bet turn and river 2/3pot if opponent checks flop.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

pre, flop standard, i kinda like checking turn as i dont think were going to be bluffing here much as our opponent doesnt have many hands that are calling the flop and then folding on this turn. I would still bet turn some % of the time, with a pretty polar range. We aren't getting 3 streets so checking to bluffcatch seems good, villain can pretty easily have a T and will think he has a lot of fold equity so i think villain is more inclined to bet his draws rather than take free card. We dont block any diamonds which is another reason to take this line. If turn checks through i would bet out, i know in general people dont 3bet/bet/check/bet as a bluff, but i think in this instance we will find enough bluffs with AK/AJ etc.

The 3b size is pretty bad theoretically. There are 3 ways with postflop with this hand. 1) check flop and play passive bluffcatch 2) small flop size as you played + either stack off turn or check/block turns 3) pot flop and gii vs most of his Qx but fold out floats that you crush (e.g. K6dd). With your small 3b he has way more Tx than usual, so 3) option seems pretty bad. As played I would go with an even smaller size ott so that you can block again on this river (he has to call all Qx this way).

On black rivers you can for sure jam your hand. Not a great check since he has many Ax hands which should call. On this river you should bet for sure (block some bluff range, doesn't block call range) but it's not so easy to construct other hands in your range for me. I guess you just have to bet/call some flushes.

There's no way this is true. At worst, this 3b is "fine" theoretically. Saying otherwise sort of misunderstands how preflop strategy works. Unclear if it's best, but there's no way it's "pretty bad."

Option 3 here is a much bigger theoretical mistake than 3b 150 pre. Other options are reasonable.

Qx should have to call anyway, seems like you might be missing some value with this line.

Probably something like KQ+ and we're golden.

You don't think a 2.5x size 3b is pretty bad? Are you meaning with KK specifically or 3bets in general?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Both.

I'm not sure why you are so confident that preflop is fine and would like to know why you think it's obviously true here.

Just because of the way range EVs work in response to marginal changes in betsizing. I'm curious why you think a slightly small (?) 3b with KK is "pretty bad theoretically" -- this sort of statement just shows you're not all that familiar with theory.

If instead you 3b KK to 210 or 240, fwiw that would also be at least "fine" theoretically.

3betting to 4x at 40bbs is not an option. 3x is best, can change sizing slightly depending on opponent

Simple example, GTO would never 3bet to 5bb pre 75bb deep. 5bb 3bet exists at 25bb however.

I know how preflop EVs work, and it's really damn hard to make an EV error preflop 40bb HU other than folding too much. I assume you would at least agree with me that 4bb 3bet is bad.

Actually also EV of 3betting KK specifically to 5bb here is not bad, but for most hands it's a huge error (as big as you are going to make as a reg preflop).

Maybe not, but that doesn't mean the EV of designing a 5bb 3b range instead of a 6bb 3b range will be substantially different.

Right.

It's bad because of how players play; you could design a strategy with which you would not lose a substantial amount of EV (vs a theoretically-grounded opponent) 3betting to 4bb.

Define "huge error" here in terms of EV loss, please. There actually just isn't any. You're definitely not losing even .5bb/100 *in theory* by 3b to this size. Vs some particular villain you might, but vs some villains we'll also gain EV by dropping our 3b size anyway, so that's kind of a separate discussion.

I don't think so. If you really want to talk about bb/100 EV loss, it will can actually be pretty big even preflop as it's a 3b pot, although bigger errors in bigger pots are not as important and you might not even feel the difference intuitively (50bb/100 mistake in a pot of 20bb is not as bad as a 10bb/100 mistake in a pot of 2bb for your overall game). I have seen typical EV errors in various spots fwiw, and don't know where you got your 0.5bb/100 from. I don't have a 40bb sim with full EVs and sizes, but really believe that this number is wrong.

Also in reality I think 3betting to 150 with KK here is just worse than a bigger size as well for a lot of reasons. I certainly think it's true readless, or vs the vast majority of villains.

So yeah, the EV error in terms of bb/100 is "pretty bad", or at least on a different scale compared to 0.5bb/100 (I would say prob below 5bb/100 , but above 2bb/100), although that wasn't what I was trying to say (it's not a big deal for your winrate, which is what you are trying to say I think).

Theoretically it is definitely better to 3bet bigger pre, but again if you are considering winrates, how you play this hand wont affect that by much (you aren't making big errors post like pot cbetting flop e.g., which even isn't the end of the world either at this SPR).

It could be, if you were advocating a pretty absurd 3b size relative to the pot (for example, going 8 or 10bb would be a disaster because of overfolding), but the difference between 5 and 6 bb will be very marginal.

This sort of thing is true, yeah.

I just pulled that out of a hat, and reviewing some numbers I have it's definitely a touch small, but I would pretty confidently say it's gonna be below 3bb/100 vs a theoretically perfect villain, and if I really had to make a guess it would be about 1.5-2/100. You're right that my point was that it won't crush your wr in any way, but I also did think the EV numbers would be closer.

I don't have a 40 solution either and don't want to get too much into what I looked at, so I hope you can trust that this is a reasonable estimate

This could be true, not sure about it though because you do block v's continuing range, with this effect being magnified the bigger we 3b.

Anyway, interesting exchange here, seems I misremembered some details!

Stop being a nit and bet/fold river. Why wouldn't he raise the flop with Tx most of the time? The 3-bettor has a million hands with equity on QTx. It's not like the board is TT3, and if he raises flop he has nothing to defend against barreling. He has lots of Qx and draws that will hold their equity well enough. I think he should be raising Tx more often than not.

Also, Duncelanas is right about preflop sizings barely changing EV (at least in theory world)

what are we getting called by triple barreling that we are ahead of? KQ which we block and maybe QJ? and those hands arent definitely calling anyway