Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Beginners Questions Poker beginner? Ask your (possibly) naive question here and our community will attempt to help you.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-19-2019, 04:32 PM   #26
LoveUknow
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 61
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtyMcFly View Post
If you're in position vs a 3-bet (by someone in the blinds), then it's actually beneficial to only have a narrow 4-bet range, and a wider flatting range. In UTG v BB 3-bet, for example, I would routinely flat KK. I would not flat AA though. It has a much higher EV as a 4-bet. The former (KK) does not block many of villain's bluffs (with hands like ATs, A5s) so it can get value by calling the 3-bet and picking off a c-bet bluff. If you 4-bet KK, then villain folds his bluffs (so there's no value for you), and just stacks off KK+/AKs and you get it in bad.
AA by contrast, does block Ax bluffs, which means villain is more likely to have KK/QQ when he 3-bets, so you should 4-bet for value and get stacks in with 80%+ equity.
Since you should always be 4-betting AA for value, but it's only 6 combos, you should only 4b bluff with about half a dozen combos of Ax hands (that block AA/AK, ofc) for balance. KK/QQ can (sometimes) go into your flatting range to help "protect" your weaker flats, and enable you to call down on boards like Jxx/Txx. (i.e. You don't fold the best overpairs in 3-bet pots, and having these overpairs in your range prevents villain from triple-barreling all the time).
In a BTN vs SB battle by contrast, villain in the SB should be willing to stack off JJ (or TT or even AQ), so in that case KK/QQ are clear 4-bets for value. In BBvUTG/MP though, he's not stacking off worse than KK/AK (unless he's an idiot), so your 4-bet range should be much stronger and more polarized (e.g. AA, A5s-A4s).

The idea of having no 4-bet range at all is just stupid though. It would be as peculiar as having no 3-betting range or no pre-flop raising range, or no c-betting range. Some hands (particularly the nuts) need to build the pot, and by having the nuts in your raising range, you also get the opportunity to bluff profitably with hands that would otherwise have to fold.

What you don't see is that if you are the person with QQ or AK and villain has AA you save yourself a stack and some money.
And since these situations happen both ways around it has next to 0 influence on your wr.

Also about 4b bluffing: People like 4b calling with TT-QQ,AK so if you 4bet your A5s from UTG vs BB you get in trouble.

Last edited by LoveUknow; 03-19-2019 at 04:42 PM.
LoveUknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 04:50 PM   #27
ArtyMcFly
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ArtyMcFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Enchantment Under the Sea
Posts: 11,950
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
What you don't see is that if you are the person with QQ or AK and villain has AA you save yourself a stack and some money.
I'm not really sure what you're trying to tell me. I don't always 4-bet and stack off QQ/AK. I'm pretty good at dodging bullets, baby.



My 4-bet frequency with AA is 100% of course. I like winning.
ArtyMcFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 04:54 PM   #28
ArtyMcFly
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ArtyMcFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Enchantment Under the Sea
Posts: 11,950
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
Also about 4b bluffing: People like 4b calling with TT-QQ,AK so if you 4bet your A5s from UTG vs BB you get in trouble.
Note to self: Stop 4-betting light. It's clearly losing.

Oh wait.



I dunno about you, but I quite like having an EV of 961bb/100 when I 4-bet pre.
ArtyMcFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 05:04 PM   #29
LoveUknow
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 61
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

9
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtyMcFly View Post
Note to self: Stop 4-betting light. It's clearly losing.

Oh wait.



I dunno about you, but I quite like having an EV of 961bb/100 when I 4-bet pre.
Show your bb/100 when you call a 3B too^^.
Stakes?

Yeah you are probably one if these nits that have AA 90% of the time when you 4b and once in a blue moon a 4b bluff.

I'd snap fold your ass with QQ, JJ and then gl with your win rate.

Also what stakes are these?

Vs complete fish I'd deviate drom a default strategy too.

The sample seems very selected. Not even 200 4b bluffs and probably on stars with a HUD when you got a billion hands on villain's 3b tendencies.
You yourself sir are not balanced between 4b value and bluffs and thus overfolding vs you is the way to go. Thats why you make money with your bluffs.

Also I'd love to see your call to3B oop and ylur bb/100 when doing it.

Last edited by LoveUknow; 03-19-2019 at 05:12 PM.
LoveUknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 05:14 PM   #30
hyperknit
adept
 
hyperknit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,046
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
9

Show your bb/100 when you call a 3B too^^.
Stakes?

Yeah you are probably one if these nits that have AA 90% of the time when you 4b and once in a blue moon a 4b bluff.

I'd snap fold your ass with QQ, JJ and then gl with your win rate.

Also what stakes are these?

Vs complete fish I'd deviate drom a default strategy too.

The sample seems very selected. Not even 200 4b bluffs and probably on stars with a HUD when you got a billion hands on villain's 3b tendencies.
You yourself sir are not balanced between 4b value and bluffs and thus overfolding vs you is the way to go. Thats why you make money with your bluffs.

Also I'd love to see your call to3B oop and ylur bb/100 when doing it.


He had AA 54/335 times. That’s hardly 90% what the heck?

Why are u responding so aggressively to someone whose trying to help u improve?

Stay humble dude
hyperknit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 05:18 PM   #31
LoveUknow
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 61
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperknit View Post
He had AA 54/335 times. That’s hardly 90% what the heck?

Why are u responding so aggressively to someone whose trying to help u improve?

Stay humble dude
Sorry, didn't mean to be agressive.
But I am sick od this argument that you make more money by 4betting. 50% of the time you are the guy with KK vs AA.
Plus, once you call a 3b it is so easy to play vs you.

Last edited by LoveUknow; 03-19-2019 at 05:27 PM.
LoveUknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 05:20 PM   #32
LoveUknow
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 61
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperknit View Post
He had AA 54/335 times. That’s hardly 90% what the heck?

Why are u responding so aggressively to someone whose trying to help u improve?

Stay humble dude

Also:
1. The numbers don't add up to 335. // taking that back. am on smartphone so excuse me. still not sure tho how to read his screenshots.
2. Look at his value/bluff ratio.

-> snap fold

Last edited by LoveUknow; 03-19-2019 at 05:27 PM.
LoveUknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 06:28 PM   #33
WereBeer
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,404
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

No idea why you are pretending to ask questions when all you want is for people to agree with you.

You're wrong, various posters have explained why you are wrong, Arty provided stats demonstrating why you are wrong. You're wrong.

However if you want a 0% 4bet range, stick with it. It won't make you a losing player on it's own. It's just less profitable than having a 4bet range. But it's your life, play poker how you like.
WereBeer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 06:54 PM   #34
LoveUknow
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 61
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by WereBeer View Post
No idea why you are pretending to ask questions when all you want is for people to agree with you.

You're wrong, various posters have explained why you are wrong, Arty provided stats demonstrating why you are wrong. You're wrong.

However if you want a 0% 4bet range, stick with it. It won't make you a losing player on it's own. It's just less profitable than having a 4bet range. But it's your life, play poker how you like.
The stats he provided are flawed. Do you see KK? Do you see the numbers adding up? Does he include his loss in BB once he calls a 3B?
Does he have a balanced 4b range or is he only exploiting bad players basically?

In order to make a point one with possibilities to a preflop solver and with the capacity should solve SB vs BB but nodelocking SB to never 4b and then compare the EV. That would be sick if someone could do that.

Also he should give information on how the BB must play his range in order to do so and if itīs plausible that humans deviate much from optimal in this scenario etc. etc. Maybe the EV loss is negligible and it is indeed a very good pure strategy.

So no. Noone explained **** here. Noone either gave me an argument that was persuasive and that I was not able to counter.
LoveUknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 07:19 PM   #35
ArtyMcFly
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ArtyMcFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Enchantment Under the Sea
Posts: 11,950
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

I'm not sure why I'm replying to someone that is using such an aggressive tone, while accusing me of various things that aren't true. I suppose you're just tilted about something, so I'll continue to try and help and maybe you'll calm down and listen to someone who knows what he's talking about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
Show your bb/100 when you call a 3B too^^.
With the filter "Call 3-bet = true", I'm obviously losing money, but not as much as I would by folding every time. (I typically open for 2.5x, so when I call a 3-bet, it's because I think it will have an EV of better than minus 250bb/100. In this sample (125,000 hands total), my EV when I raise-called pre was -112bb/100.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
Stakes?
The bulk of the hands in my current database are from 6-max 2NL zoom. It might shock you, but some 2NL players (including me) have 4-bet bluffing ranges. My overall 4-bet frequency when faced by a 3-bet was 11.5%.



Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
The sample seems very selected. Not even 200 4b bluffs and probably on stars with a HUD when you got a billion hands on villain's 3b tendencies.
You yourself sir are not balanced between 4b value and bluffs and thus overfolding vs you is the way to go. Thats why you make money with your bluffs.
I think it's already been established that I don't always have aces when I 4-bet. This is the heat map showing every hand that I 4-bet:



[ ] Only 4-bets AA.

I'm pretty sure I would have had better results at 2NL if I wasn't so balanced. (I basically play like Snowie pre-flop). I definitely ran badly in this sample, but a lot of the Axs did not make money as 4-bets. In many spots, I should have just folded instead of making the GTO play. (Some of my biggest losses came from 4-betting hands like A7s/A5s/A4s and not getting the desired outcome).
FWIW, I think the reason why the offsuit aces did well as 4-bets is that I reserve those for BTN vs the blinds. At 2NLz, villains will 3-bet light in the SBvBTN, so 4-bet bluffs in that positional battle actually work quite well. Those villains don't 3-bet light so much in CO v UTG, so I was making a mistake by routinely 4-betting A5s/A4s etc when I was in EP vs a 3-bet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
Also I'd love to see your call to3B oop and ylur bb/100 when doing it.
I'm not sure how to set up a filter that specifies I am OOP pre-flop, but I hardly ever call 3-bets when I'm OOP, because I don't think it's very profitable to do so. It's why I have a '4b or fold' strategy with the weaker parts of my continuance range. That said, you can see from the first image in this post that I lost over 5bb per hand when I called in SB v BB 3-bet, and obviously lost money overall when I called 3-bets. (I remind you that my 4-bets on average had an EV of almost 10bb per hand. The majority of that comes from AA netting about 25bb every time.) I think I did badly in SB v BB 3bets because I was again playing too "GTO-ish", and thought that villains would be 3-betting much lighter in BvB than any other position. What's actually the case is that 2NL villains aren't very positionally aware. Their BvB 3-bet ranges were pretty strong, and I should have folded more often. (My overall fold to 3-bet was 58% which is probably too low when playing against nitregs).

P.S. The reason why KK wasn't featured on the earlier chart was that I listed the hands in order of bb/100. I ran abysmally with KK in this sample. With the filter set to "4-bet = true", my EV with KK was 1383.9bb/100. My actual winrate with KK as a 4-bet was 162.93bb/100. FWIW, I lost with AKs as a 4-bet, although its EV was over 1000bb/1000. #Runbad4Lyfe

Last edited by ArtyMcFly; 03-19-2019 at 07:30 PM.
ArtyMcFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 07:28 PM   #36
LoveUknow
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 61
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtyMcFly View Post
I'm not sure why I'm replying to someone that is using such an aggressive tone, while accusing me of various things that aren't true. I suppose you're just tilted about something, so I'll continue to try and help and maybe you'll calm down and listen to someone who knows what he's talking about.

With the filter "Call 3-bet = true", I'm obviously losing money, but not as much as I would by folding every time. (I typically open for 2.5x, so when I call a 3-bet, it's because I think it will have an EV of better than minus 250bb/100. In this sample (125,000 hands total), my EV when I raise-called pre was -112bb/100.


The bulk of the hands in my current database are from 6-max 2NL zoom. It might shock you, but some 2NL players (including me) have 4-bet bluffing ranges. My overall 4-bet frequency when faced by a 3-bet was 11.5%.

P.S. The reason I didn't include KK on the earlier screengrab is that the hands were shown in order of bb/100 winrate. I ran abysmally with KK in this sample, be it in SRPs, 3BPs or 4BPs. As a 4-bet, my EV with KK was 1383bb/100, but my actual winrate was 163bb/100. I actually lost money with AKs as a 4-bet, despite the EV being over 1000bb/100. #Runbad4Lyfe.

P.S. The reason why KK wasn't featured on the earlier chart was that I listed the hands in order of bb/100. I ran abysmally with KK in this sample. With the filter set to "4-bet = true", my EV with KK was 1383.9bb/100. My actual winrate with KK as a 4-bet was 162.93bb/100. FWIW, I lost with AKs as a 4-bet, although its EV was over 1000bb/1000. #Runbad4Lyfe




I think it's already been established that I don't always have aces when I 4-bet. This is the heat map showing every hand that I 4-bet:



[ ] Only 4-bets AA.

I'm pretty sure I would have had better results at 2NL if I wasn't so balanced. (I basically play like Snowie pre-flop). I definitely ran badly in this sample, but a lot of the Axs did not make money as 4-bets. In many spots, I should have just folded instead of making the GTO play. (Some of my biggest losses came from 4-betting hands like A7s/A5s/A4s and not getting the desired outcome).
FWIW, I think the reason why the offsuit aces did well as 4-bets is that I reserve those for BTN vs the blinds. At 2NLz, villains will 3-bet light in the SBvBTN, so 4-bet bluffs in that positional battle actually work quite well. Those villains don't 3-bet light so much in CO v UTG, so I was making a mistake by routinely 4-betting A5s/A4s etc when I was in EP vs a 3-bet.

I'm not sure how to set up a filter that specifies I am OOP pre-flop, but I hardly ever call 3-bets when I'm OOP, because I don't think it's very profitable to do so. It's why I have a '4b or fold' strategy with the weaker parts of my continuance range. That said, you can see from the first image in this post that I lost over 5bb per hand when I called in SB v BB 3-bet, and obviously lost money overall when I called 3-bets. (I remind you that my 4-bets on average had an EV of over 10bb per hand). I think I did badly in SB v BB 3bets because I was again playing too "GTO-ish", and thought that villains would be 3-betting much lighter in BvB than any other position. What's actually the case is that 2NL villains aren't very positionally aware. Their BvB 3-bet ranges were pretty strong, and I should have folded more often. (My overall fold to 3-bet was 58% which is probably too low when playing against nitregs).
Reasonable stats.
But that does not prove that you wouldnīt do better by never 4betting.

To make the point clearer: 4betting might be a fine strategy. But is pure calling 3B by default a bad and flawed strategy? I donīt see how and I there is no proof unless someone knows somebody who solved stuff like this preflop.
LoveUknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 07:47 PM   #37
ArtyMcFly
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ArtyMcFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Enchantment Under the Sea
Posts: 11,950
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
The sample seems very selected. Not even 200 4b bluffs and probably on stars with a HUD when you got a billion hands on villain's 3b tendencies.
I've got nothing to hide here. I've spent years on this (and other) forums trying to help people get better at poker, especially with regard to using their HUDs and trackers. (See the stats thread in the microstakes forum).

In point of fact, of the 335 4-bets I made in this sample, I'm left with 128 if I filter out QQ+/AK. I would be very surprised if you found many other micro regs who do not have a premium hand 38% of the time when they 4-bet. It's generally said about microzoom games that "the 4-bet is always KK+". For me that just isn't the case. I 4-bet a lot more often than most micro players.
I also don't have billions of hands and HUD stats with which to 'exploit' people. The zoom pools are massive and I barely even look at my HUD when playing, because the sample sizes are too small to mean anything. (And I just play like a robot with hand chart anyway). I've only got 485 hands on the guy I've seen the most, and that's not enough hands for his VPIP/PFR numbers to have regressed to the mean, let alone his 3-bet or fold to 4-bet numbers.
ArtyMcFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 07:57 PM   #38
ArtyMcFly
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ArtyMcFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Enchantment Under the Sea
Posts: 11,950
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
Reasonable stats.
But that does not prove that you wouldnīt do better by never 4betting.

To make the point clearer: 4betting might be a fine strategy. But is pure calling 3B by default a bad and flawed strategy? I donīt see how and I there is no proof unless someone knows somebody who solved stuff like this preflop.
I see your point. I already said in an earlier post that I sometimes flat KK precisely because in some spots I think flatting>4-betting (e.g. UTG vs BB). I'll reiterate that I never flat a 3-bet with AA, however. It's just too good as a 4-bet. (How are you gonna win 30bb on average by flatting a 9bb 3-bet?).

As for solving pre-flop, Snowie doesn't have a full solution to 6-max poker, but it 4-bets a lot (about 13% of the time), because it "worked out" (through trial and error) that 4-betting is +EV. In addition, the guys behind MonkerSolver have computed a pseudo solution to pre-flop that features 4-bets. I think the top level Piosolver subscribers have also brute forced pre-flop solutions. If they had found out that 4-betting was a dominated strategy, news would have travelled fast, and people like Linus and RedBaron would have stopped 4-betting. AFAIK, that is not the case.

Funnily enough, in limit holdem, 4-betting is "wrong". Cepheus found that flatting 3-bets IP (even with AA) was more profitable. But NLH is different to FLH. A ton of EV comes from making your opponent fold pre. You can't do that by pressing CALL.

P.S. I just ran the "call 3-bet" filter on my database again, and found that KK and AKo did reasonably well (over very small samples); although it's hard to prove they did better than they would as 4-bets. Two hands that really stand out, though, are JJ and TT. At 2NLz in particular, those appear to be very bad hands to 4-bet with, and generally play much better as a call, either IP or OOP.

Last edited by ArtyMcFly; 03-19-2019 at 08:04 PM.
ArtyMcFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 08:14 PM   #39
Lyamani
centurion
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 156
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtyMcFly View Post
I see your point. I already said in an earlier post that I sometimes flat KK precisely because in some spots I think flatting>4-betting (e.g. UTG vs BB). I'll reiterate that I never flat a 3-bet with AA, however. It's just too good as a 4-bet. (How are you gonna win 30bb on average by flatting a 9bb 3-bet?).

As for solving pre-flop, Snowie doesn't have a full solution to 6-max poker, but it 4-bets a lot (about 13% of the time), because it "worked out" (through trial and error) that 4-betting is +EV. In addition, the guys behind MonkerSolver have computed a pseudo solution to pre-flop that features 4-bets. I think the top level Piosolver subscribers have also brute forced pre-flop solutions. If they had found out that 4-betting was a dominated strategy, news would have travelled fast, and people like Linus and RedBaron would have stopped 4-betting. AFAIK, that is not the case.

Funnily enough, in limit holdem, 4-betting is "wrong". Cepheus found that flatting 3-bets IP (even with AA) was more profitable. But NLH is different to FLH. A ton of EV comes from making your opponent fold pre. You can't do that by pressing CALL.
Arty! Behave! The best players in the world don't know ****. Them 4betting is an obvious mistake. Forget about the millions they made, they're ****. Everyone in this forum is a moron as a matter of fact. The only person here who has any semblance of an idea on what to do is LoveUKnow. Solvers? AI? Mathematics?

That doesn't say ****. Why get it in pre with AA when you can flat their 3 bets? Basically the only person on this planet who knows anything about poker is LoveUKnow. Not because of experience, not because of the millions of hands he played, not because of solver work, algorithms he wrote.

No. Because he just knows. He doesn't need to test his hypothesis, or proof his theory. He can come to the beginners section of a poker forum and **** on everybody because of a hunch he has. Demanding evidence and concise theories offering none himself.

We should rename this thread to Petitio Principii
Lyamani is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 08:22 PM   #40
LoveUknow
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 61
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyamani View Post
Arty! Behave! The best players in the world don't know ****. Them 4betting is an obvious mistake. Forget about the millions they made, they're ****. Everyone in this forum is a moron as a matter of fact. The only person here who has any semblance of an idea on what to do is LoveUKnow. Solvers? AI? Mathematics?

That doesn't say ****. Why get it in pre with AA when you can flat their 3 bets? Basically the only person on this planet who knows anything about poker is LoveUKnow. Not because of experience, not because of the millions of hands he played, not because of solver work, algorithms he wrote.

No. Because he just knows. He doesn't need to test his hypothesis, or proof his theory. He can come to the beginners section of a poker forum and **** on everybody because of a hunch he has. Demanding evidence and concise theories offering none himself.

We should rename this thread to Petitio Principii
Wow LUL you are triggered.
Craibaby
LoveUknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-2019, 08:30 PM   #41
Lyamani
centurion
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 156
Re: Playing without a 4betting range?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveUknow View Post
Wow LUL you are triggered.
Craibaby
I am just paying homage to the greatest player on this website, you should feel honored.
Lyamani is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Đ 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online