Villain is "IveysMom" or something, a pretty reasonable tag who seems to play pretty well. We've been playing a bit on a few tables and he's 3bet me a couple times to which I've just folded, and he seems to like playing back at me in general. I so far have been in line against him, but it's getting to the point where he thinks I'm likely fed up and will start making plays. Pahud has him at 20/16 over a good sample, and he probably views me as 22/20 and solid.

Given dynamics like this I would very often go for a 4bet with any two here in a spot where his 3betting range is very wide. I'm not sure what level he is on or how thin he thinks I'm capable of doing this for value, but I decided to make a semi-thin 4bet to rep a 4bet bluff with intentions of snap calling a shove. Thoughts?

Party Poker $200 No Limit Hold'em - 5 players
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter Powered By DeucesCracked.com

CO: $197.00
BTN: $275.70
Hero (SB): $472.68
BB: $232.50
UTG: $305.35

Pre Flop: Hero is SB with 9 9
3 folds, Hero raises to $8, BB raises to $26, Hero raises to $58

I 4bet to 52$ in this spot (thoughts on size?)

Also, I think calling > 4betting in this spot (ur 8bb deeper which matters a tiny bit, you have position, etc etc)

Vs a nl200 player I think your 4bet range should be polarized to monsters and bluffs, bc nobody shoves light over 4bet bluffs @nl200 anyway

if he shoves QQ+,AQs+,AKo, calling the shove is breakeven

so the only value you get out of 4betting is when he folds, and while that is a big % of the time it might not be enough to make it > calling

when you 4bet bluff here sometimes and he shoves wider over your 4bets like he should (this includes lower pocket pairs) this play becomes a lot better; because you profit when he folds AND you profit when he shoves

but like i said i don't think there is anyone @ nl200 that shoves over 4bets with a good (much much wider than you'd think) range ... when people start shoving 22 on you (if your range is AQs+,AKo,QQ+ and 30% bluffs, shoving 22 over your 4bet is +ev); playing 99 like this becomes a lot better

I think it's fine, though I got flamed for pretty much the exact same hand a while back.

i agree with kaby. calling would be ultra standard to me. if it were CO v btn i would 4bet a tonne here and call a shove from the CO. we have position, i like to use it

trouble with your play is that he may bluffshove with JT or KQ or something which you are flipping with anyway, which is a +EV play for you, but you don't exactly own him

i think 4betting here is +EV, but calling more +EV

i disagree with kaby that people don't shove light at NL200. at party 200 the regs seem to like doing crazy **** preflop

i also disagree with kaby about bet sizing. i like making it about $70. it is still well under 3x but is somewhat more convincing then the 2x 4bet that seems so popular these days. the tiny 4bet used to seem stronger but now it is pretty standard and people no longer give it so much respect. you also offer enticing pot odds for them to call your 4bet with a wide range ala bobbo fitos in his leggopoker vid. with QJ

wow bluffshoving JT/KQ would be terrible in this spot :s


well, then that's site dependant coz they don't do it in my games ... i think i was one of the only persons 4betting small (also bluffs obv) at nl200/400 ipoker and i suspect there was only one player adapting by shoving a wide range (2+2'er mirocco)

the problem with 70$ is that you make your bluffs very costly, almost to the point where you are getting pot odds to call with any two

this might mean you have to re-adjust, it doesn't necessarily make 4betting small a bad play, ppl still make tons of mistakes vs small 4bets

it's not bc you are offering them that they will take them, we still have position, and i saw bobbofittos calc/post/vid; villains aren't bobbofittos and might make huge mistakes postflop

what is he gonna bluffshove with. small PP's? if so then 4bet inducing with 99 is a great play. he is more likely to 3bet KQ then 44, so although if he bluffshoves he might do it more often with 44 then KQ, the fact is he is gonna have KQ about 3x more often than 44.
Axs is a popular preflop bluffing hand, but how many is he 3betting with. ATs+ only imo

if i am 4bet bluffing it is normally a hand that has little value. i doubt i have the 32% required to call a shove with 74s. i usually call shoves if i 4bet or i just 4bet shove myself but if i have complete trash then i do not have the odds to call a shove

74s vs his range it's not a mistake sh58, but FTOP wise it is (like when he has AKo) ... don't know why i mentioned that bc range vs range is what matters


however,

- i disagree with you that 70$ will give us that much more FE; esp when villain notices that you are doing it with bluffs or 99 too
- even if it does give us more FE, it might not be enough, bc villain is getting a much better price on his shoves
- i think you overestimate the likelihood of villain calling preflop AND playing postflop +ev

basicly i just don't get your argument for 70$ care to expand some more about it?

52$ might be a bit too small but i think 58 >> 70, cheap bluffs are fun

I played this exact hand today except i had TT. I had 4bet bluffed villian about 5 hands earlier and folded to his shove. Then when it folded to me in SB and I woke up with TT, I thought wow this is a monster here. So I 4bet and snap called the shove. Afterward we both felt like there was nothing I could do, but I'm not so sure. There may be a few guys at 1/2 that are aggro enough for this to work, but honestly the vast majority of players are not calling or shoving much worse.

The problem I have is if 4betting is bad, then wtf do we do? Calling OOP with 99/TT/JJ is pretty gross as is folding. I'd love to hear some thoughts on this b/c I was gonna post this same hand today!

oops. we are OOP. i'm retarted. in that case i like 4betting alot more than calling.

maybe $70 is too big, but i think a 2x raise is too small. maybe a compromise like $60something

another thing to consider kaby is that with $70 we know for damn sure that we will call a shove with AQ or 88 or something, wheras with the smaller one do we call with AQ or not.

because of all these problems i started just 4bet shoving to avoid the problem all together for a while which worked pretty well, but now i think it is better to use your 4bet size to manipulate your opponent, so i sometimes 4bet shove and sometimes 4bet 2.5x or so. when i 4bet smaller it is because i think i will get shoved on lighter or because i have complete air.

so for my opponents my 4betting 2.5x range is more polarised. it is 3/4 bet/calling and 1/4 bet folding

also what does FTOP mean

$70 is kinda bad; 60 is ok, but 55ish is about perfect. Trust me (as a habitual 4-bettor) that they have very similar fold equities, but the smaller raise allows you to 4-bet bluff without pricing yourself in to call a shove.

Now we're planning on calling a shove here of course, but we should still 4-bet the same amount ldo.

we don't have to 4bet AQ or 88 (in my games, i think a polarized range is best, when villains adapt 4betting 88 and calling is better pbb), but if we do we will know before we 4bet whether we'll call or fold

however, you are pricing YOURSELF in, which might be +ev (bc he folds enough + we make the roughly breakeven/slightly +ev call) but might not be optimal for your range (55$ makes your bluffs cheaper - a topic you seem to ignore or hardly adress imho)

i agree that the choice is between shoving and 4betting small(er); we were discussing what an optimal 'small' 4bet size is

ofc we can both semibluff shove (Axs comes to mind) and bluff small 4bet, but in both cases we need to balance

obv some opponents play close to optimal vs our shoves but terrible vs our small 4bets, and vica versa. ofc you adapt to his leaks


yeah, that's the point i guess ^^

however, you want to
1) get shoved on light
2) bluff

the thing is, both are contradictory ... you'd like to create the illusion of FE for (1), but for (2) you don't want to create the illusion of FE, but you do want to keep your bluffs cheap ... imho the solution to this problem is get your 4bets as low as you can get away with ... i think that's the best way to balance three concerns:

a) inducing action on our monsters (we want to 4bet lower)
b) keeping our bluffs cheap (we want to 4bet lower)
c) giving our bluffs more FE (we want to 4bet higher)

and then, the only relevant factor is our experience with 4bet sizes and the FE they give; and then i agree with claunchy:

$70 is kinda bad; 60 is ok, but 55ish is about perfect. Trust me (as a habitual 4-bettor) that they have very similar fold equities, but the smaller raise allows you to 4-bet bluff cheaper

Now we're planning on calling a shove here of course, but we should still 4-bet the same amount ldo

fundemental theory of poker, not very relevant here

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...=0#Post9761689

this is a good article on the matter that i based my 3bet sizing on. obviously i haven't read it for a while as his sizes are only slightly bigger than yours

maybe i should make it less than $65 in this spot

when you say that the 2 reasons to not 4bet shove are contradictory that is certainly true and is also the point as my range is more polarized

thx for the link

So, according to this article, does it never make sense to 4bet pot?

It never makes sense to 4bet pot according to the assumptions in this article. If I had some way of knowing that light 3betters react the same way to small 4bets as to pot 4bets, I’d eliminate the pot 4bet from my arsenal because if this were the case, 4betting pot would be inferior to both 4betting small and to 4bet shoving, in my opinion.

However, it’s impossible to prove that fold equity is the same regardless of 4betting size.

With the information I have, I’ll probably begin to replace pot 4bets with a combination of small 4bets and 4bet shoves. Note that it’s important to make both small 4bets and 4bet pushes with both hands that are marginal and hands that are powerful.

I haven't made a pot sized 4bet <130bb deep in my last 100k hands of poker I think, and I see no reason to start using it.


Btw, about that article. I don't get the reasoning by the author ... When 4betting to 75$ is more +ev than 4betting to 54$, we should 4bet to 75$ even if that means we have to call a shove with our bluffs. The fact that we have to call a shove or not doesn't matter, bc calling a shove will be breakeven or +ev (it sucks bc of variance though, but whatever, that works in your advantage too if he tilts).

The reason we 4bet to 54$ is because it leads to better results than 75$ for these concerns (read: a 75$ 4bet doesn't have THAT much more FE than a 54$ 4bet ... that's a debatable point but caunchy agreed to it in addition to myself + we induce action and keep our bluffs cheap):

a) inducing action on our monsters (we want to 4bet lower)
b) keeping our bluffs cheap (we want to 4bet lower)
c) giving our bluffs more FE (we want to 4bet higher)

good post

i also 4bet different sizes that i consider exploitable against bad players

so i occasionally min4bet because he is terrible, i have a monster, the stack sizes are right for it etc.

i also 4bet large with hands such as TT or AK against extremely aggro donks whose range i absolutely crush, but i don't want to play postflop with alot of money behind so i push my equity pre (and i don't shove because i don't want them folding)

If we call here (which I belive is the best play even if OOP)
a) What range do we put him on
b) following from a, what kind of flops do we bluff at (and do we cbet or CRAI)

It was said he is 3betting somewhat light so I'd say a decent range is:
AJ+; KQ; 22-55; JJ+; a couple of SCs say 67s-KQs

op, i definitely don't mind the play.

i agree with you. i don't really see where we disagree? maybe you can clarify.

fwiw, i don't make pot 4bets at all anymore and i actually feel pretty strongly that they are stupid. deucescracked (the new krantz/duck/whitelime/etc. coaching/videos site) put up a short video recently that echoes this sentiment. i believe whitelime, the creator, cited 27% or 28% as the maximum amount of effective stacks to which he will 4bet (assuming he's not shoving).

i didn't say you disagreed with me, but like 70% of your (good post btw, ty) post is calculating whether we 'are priced in to call', the fact that you empathize this by spending so much words on it signals that you think it is important, while in reality it hardly matters

you could've (and that would be a better use of time imho) calculated the differences in FE a 75$ 4bet gives you compared to a 54$ bet

like

he shoves x% of his 3bet range over our light 4bet. given that we hold our monster-4bet range constant, and his shoving range constant, what 4bet size is the most ev ... i'm pretty sure it's the lowest amount possible that doesn't hurt your FE significantly + that doesn't give him a lot of pot odds

once again, ty for the article and this certainly isn't meant to disrespect you or discredit your efforts, but the calculations whether we are priced in to call are a bit of a waste of energy and time bc it doesn't matter a lot ... if we can make a +ev 4bet because he folds, and then make a slightly +ev call bc we are priced in when he shoves, we made a +ev play no matter the size of the 4bet [when we are priced in when he shoves obv 'bluffing' 88 >>>> 'bluffing' 86o even both may be +ev ... but that's a whole other topic bc when we are priced in to call it's not a 4bet bluff ]

what experiences taught us, and THAT (not that you can't 4bet/fold when you bet bigger) is the reason a lot of ppl don't 4bet pot anymore, is that a 55$ 4bet gives only marginally less FE than a 75$ 4bet, thus allowing you to keep your bluffs cheaper


now that i think about it, you never disagreed with me indeed, you just showed a lot of examples that you can't 4bet/fold a lot of hands when you 4bet to various sizes ... which is a correct point, but it's not the most important point about 4bet bluffing (obv when you are 4betting to 40bb you are never folding, thus never bluffing)

i hope this clarifies what i meant

so 100bb deep that's 54-56$? (nl200) good to know

Good Thread to all.

Edit: In your opinon what is a standard 200NL TAGs 5bet shoving range? Obv its player & situation dependant, but what would be the base range you would work off of?

in my games?

AK/QQ+ (mb AQ mb JJ)

pbb AQs+/AK/QQ+ as some sort of compromise

btw i generally run like 26/21 preflop so i dont get much respect most of the time + i 4bet bluff waaaaaaaaayyyy too much

i game select gooood i guess

This isn't the "trouble with this" at all. You disregard the fact that a he'd be making a FTOP mistake by folding a huge majority of his bluffs (QJ, JT, Kx, Ax where x is small) all have pretty good equity given the size of the pot.

If he shoves a wide range, great, you're getting it in with a slight edge. If he 3-bets a wide range and folds a lot, great, because most of that range isn't really dominated by 99 at all.

good point. i wrote that post thinking we were in pos so you have to take that into account, but i agree with what you say

with 99 i would rather not induce bluffshoves from hands that we are flipping with and rather not give them the chance to bluff by 4bet shoving myself

this way they are still making a FTOP error by folding and we take whats in the pot more often then having to flip for our stacks

as added bonus is that 4bet shoves seem to be percieved as AK alot of the time, so we can still sometimes get looked up by smaller pairs (although we rarely fold out TT+ which wasn't really our aim anyway so w/e)

if they are 4bet shoving KQ QJ over you, they are also shoving it over you when you have AA

i'm a bit confused ... why start mentioning FTOP? I think range vs range is more important... and that we can basicly ignore ftop bc, well, it's range vs range and not our hand vs his range that matters (it's not like we are shoving 99 in a vacuum, bc most light 3betters are at least semi-regulars)

Given (a) villains 3bet % (b) the way he plays vs our small 4bets and (c) the way he plays vs our shoves we should be able to give both our 4bet bluffs and our 4bet shoves a good 'range'. I think that's more correct than trying to play the hand in a vacuum, bc a lot of the profit that 4betting 99 in this spots shows comes from metagame (I mean, when we 4bet 99 his shoverange is the same as when we 4bet AA, but we profit more from the times we have AA obv, but we need to 4bet more than just AA)

So, given (a), (b) and (c) we should be able to

1) Figure out an optimal 4bet shoving range.
2) Figure out a good small 4betting range [air and monsters, or a more 'merged' range? % bluffs? etc etc]

Ofc that can change,

When he tightens up with his 3bets you should pull off less 4bet shenanigans, and when he starts shoving over your small 4bets with 22 you should obviously adjust your 4betting range from [bluffs, monsters] to a range that includes hands like 99

I haven't done the math yet (damn exams!) but I'll certainly do it at some point. Maybe 4bet/calling 99 is more +ev than calling preflop, but that's something you can't analyze in a vacuum.

It's like when a light 3better cbets that 832r flop and you shove AK... that play is +ev in a vacuum but it is even more profitable bc of 'metagame', like when you flat like QQ preflop and he bet/calls 99.

hope i'm a bit clear coz this seems like a rant, basicly my point is that analyzing small 4bets or 4bet shoves or whatever is something you shouldn't do based on your specific hand at this time, but based on your range in that spot (i'm sure you know this, but as this is a forum i'm not just having a conversation with you obv)

this does not mean that you can't adapt to villains btw. Different villains with different answers for (a), (b) and (c) will require a different range of hands for both 4betting small and 4bet shoving.

some great discussion in this thread. One thing I haven't seen mentioned...

Why on earth would you stay at a table with a guy like this to your left???

someone tell me if this is a bluff or for value.

i only mentioned it cos bilbo mentioned it just now, its not something i think about alot in this case as you rightly point out