I have a couple of questions about 3-betting and 4-betting pre-flop.

First situation, we notice a player obviously has a wide opening range, should we start exploiting that with 3-bets more often by either opening up our 3-bet range some and or 3-bet bluffing?

#2 we notice that the same player also 3-bets quite often also, should we mix in some 4-bet bluffs against a player like that?

If we make a 3-bet bluff with something like 89 suited or something close to that and get 4bet, should we ALWAYS fold there? Or maybe make the call depending on sizing and position and see what the flop holds?

The last situation isn't based on the same player, that was just a generalized statement.

The main factor to consider which hands to 3bet or 4bet is villains reaction. Against somebody who folds 0% to 3bets, you obviously don't want to bluff. Against someone who folds 100% to 3bets, you don't want to bet for value.

How to react to a 3bet or 4bet depends on villains range and stack sizes. If you 3bet 98s and get a 4bet to something like 25BB, you probably shouldn't call if stack sizes are 50BB but that looks totally different if stack sizes are 500BB.

+1
/thread

Ok, so my thinking was in line with yall's... That is what I was wondering. Played online a decent bit yesterday and ran into a whole lot of pre-flop action. Mainly from 1 player. I played the way you suggested and I think it worked 100% of the time. I also had a pretty tight table image.

Last question, is it ever a BAD idea to show your cards to help mold your table image the way you want it? Like if I 4-bet holding KK and villian folds, would it be a bad idea to show to give the image that my 4b range is super strong to set it up for a 4b bluff later in the game?

What are you trying to accomplish when you show kings? That you can get dealt a good hand too?

The questions are pretty general. Position, stack sizes and player tendencies all matter. If you'r using a hud the fold to 3bet % is useful. Just 3 betting wider against a loose opponent doesn't constitute exploiting in itself. You can start 3 betting wider and losing more to the player. They have to be folding better to your 3 bets or calling/raising and getting out played post flop.

It depends on the player. if they have a wide 3bet calling range, then play a wider range for value. if they R\F often, then bluff more. Do neither to extremes, but increase your overall number of three bets

It gets tougher when you know they are 3 betting wide. Depending on bet sizing, a four bet could be in the range of 18 to 24 big blinds. In a lot of cases, especially if you get called and catch a piece of the, this puts you in a position where you are playing for stacks (of course, this is dependent on the starting effective stack). This can also make it an effective bluff, but the risk versus reward can be challenging. In tournament play, a 4 bet is usually going to get you pot committed or all in (unless you are really deep).

If you three bet with 98s and get raised, you have to look at your stack sizes and your implied odds. You are behind at this point, but have a lot of potential draws here. You are likely to be able to get all in post flop, so effective stacks versus the cost of the call will let you know if you should call a 4 bet here. This might be a call ina deep cash game, this is usually a fold in most tournament situations(again, though, that might be different if you are really deep).

Position plays a major role. 3betting people in position for bluff or value is always +EV in compared to out of position. So we should be 3betting people who are opening wide from later positions when we have position on them. If UTG raises then you see one of the blinds 3 bet, generally you will see more value bets than bluffs because OOP and both should have tighter starting ranges. So these are situations where you only 4bet for value. A lot of 4betting goes on between blinds and button because of steal defend resteal. People either defend wider or just fold pf

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I'm in a flow chart type of mood today. assuming ~70 bb stacks or more.
......................../................................\
....vs unknowns ...........................everyone else
....../ ..................\ ........................./................\............\
..online .............live.....................folders..... ....callers.....reraisers
../.........\ ............../ .....\
*..........**...........***....****


* these are the tags and the tight passives. As their preflop range expands, so does my 3 betting range to include more and more drawing hands. My preferred hands here are in specific order from strongest to weakest: A5s, A4s, A5o, A3s, A2s, KQs, QJs, KJs, JTs, (any suited ace), T9s, QTs, following the trend all the way down to the rarest hands that I'll 3 bet, for example the weakest hand I've 3 bet in the past year or so is 76s, and I considered that a very exploitive, and thus a very exploitable, play.

** these are the lags, who by no fault of their own, just can't help themselves by playing too many hands preflop. I 3 bet mostly hands that can win showdowns unimproved here until they prove that they have decent folding frequencies. Once that happens, it's game on. Here, I think about raising drawing hands just this much:
|..............| which is enough to keep them calling. Usually this is best achieved with A5s-A2s, and the occasional KQs if my postition is right. Basically, I expect them to either fold enough that 3 betting near 0ev drawing hands is slightly profitable, or they'll call too much. Either way, we want to have a pretty strong draw to 3 bet them preflop.

*** live folders are a breed all their own, but here the most important factor is the number of players left to act. In most live games, I don't expect to win the pot with a 3 bet often enough to make it a profitable move with something like A5s, the strongest of the draws. imo, unless its heads up. In which case I use the same guidelines as vs online folders.

**** live callers come in many forms. I could go on and on but there are just too many if ands or buts here.

I saved (everyone else) for last because, even after many years of poker, I don't have big samples vs many players individually. I think it's important to note here that whales don't last long in the grand scheme of poker. Thus you're much more likely to have a big sample on good players, many of whom you can learn from.