Yatahay Network - $0.50 NL (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (BTN): 198.18 BB
SB: 100.5 BB
BB: 200.82 BB
UTG: 107.08 BB
MP: 106.2 BB
CO: 108.16 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.5 BB) Hero has 5 4

fold, fold, CO raises to 3 BB, Hero raises to 8 BB, fold, fold, CO raises to 26 BB, Hero calls 18 BB

Flop: (53.5 BB, 2 players) 2 A 8
CO bets 26.74 BB


Preflop
Against CO RFI of 2.25 bb, my frequencies with 5 4 are:
Fold @ 50%, Call @ 25%, 3-bet @ 25%


I had a misclick and meant to 3-bet to 9.5 bb, but only fired off 8 bb. I tightened the range against this larger RFI size a little by eliminating some of my calls, but the RNG returned a number between 1 and 25, so 3-bet it was! (I've included my 4-bet calling range as the IP solver range at the end of the post, but 54s on the BTN always calls the CO 4-bet.)

Flop
After a half-pot c-bet, I'm really shocked that the solver has me continue with all 54s:

I understand the semi-bluff raise with 5 4 holding a gutshot and flush draw, but I'm really surprised that the other 54-suited hands call--even the ones without a BDFD! If I call flop, the SPR on the turn is 0.52. So even if Villain checks turn, I don't have that much bluff equity since calling gives him 3:1 odds. I'd expect TT-KK to still call at that depth, but maybe I'm wrong.

Can anyone make better sense of this strategy? I'm thinking it has to do with Villain slowplaying some of his strongest hands like AA and Ax, so his c-bet range is more merged. Looking at various turns, if villain checks, we bluff a fair amount. Although for a lot of and turn cards, we bluff 5 4 and 5 4 but check back 5 4, presumably because we're hoping villain is on a spade FD or heart BDFD. For most turns, if villain checks, we check back most of our range.

Maybe the solver is recommending this counterintuitive strategy because it thinks OOP checks turn about half the time. I don't have credible stats on this Villian, but in reality, I doubt the turn check rate is that high. If Villain double barrels nearly 100% of the time he c-bets and gets called on the flop, then we'd have to fold flop. So perhaps folding flop is a reasonable exploit against the pool?



FWIW, these are the ranges I'm using in the solver:

(OOP) CO RFI, BTN 3B, CO 4-Bet


(IP) CO RFI, BTN 3B, CO 4-Bet, BTN Call

You should be folding vs a 3x. That is a way different range than a 2.25x range.

Also his 4bet is absolutely huge. Fold twice.

The in depth analysis is great but both the 3bet and 4bet call are huge mistakes you need to rectify first.

Calling the 4 bet is just lighting money on fire. I’m ok 3-betting occasionally as long as you don’t do something stupid, like call a 4-bet.

nothing wrong with 54s in general but yes they made it so big twice I'm not sure I want to flat much at all besides maybe KK+ at least if they always cb so big

post is very sensitive to the inputs with such tight ranges but besides fds 54 has maybe the best equity against their value

perhaps it can bluff on higher card runouts where u otherwise run out of bluffs

it only blocks A4-5 and doesn't block any of their flop bluffs that xf later

I'd like to put aside the 3-bet for a moment and focus on the 4-bet call.

The preflop ranges I'm using assume sizes of 2.25 bb -> 7.25 bb -> 23.25 bb. So in that case the 4-bet is 3.21x the size of the 3-bet and the CO is adding 21 bb more to a pot that was 11 bb (adding 1.91x the size of the pot). From the BTN perspective, calling the 4B costs another 16 bb in a pot that was 32 bb, so 2:1 odds.

In this hand, the sizes are 3 bb -> 8 bb -> 26 bb. So the 4-bet is 3.25x the size of the 3-bet. And the CO is adding 23 bb more to a pot that was 12.5 bb (adding 1.84x the size of the pot). Calling the 4B costs BTN 18 bb in a pot that was 35.5 bb, so 1.97:1 odds.

So looking at these ratios which are relatively close, I'm not understanding why the 4-bet call decision in this hand would be that different from the strategy devised by the 2.25 -> 7.25 -> 23.25 sizings.

Unless it's because the BTN 3-bet range should have been much different facing a 3.0 bb RFI relative to a 2.25 bb RFI, causing the 4-bet call range to be much different than assumed in the chart I'm using?

I'll run a 6-max pre-flop sim to see how the strategy changes against sizings of 3 bb -> 9 bb -> 27 bb relative to 2.25 bb -> 7.25 bb -> 23.25 bb. (It probably won't be ready until some time in July.)

Unless someone has a better idea, I'll use the following parameters:

RFI always 3 bb
3-bets IP: 9 bb
3-bets OOP: 12 bb if no squeeze possible, 15 bb squeeze from blinds if BTN flats after open from UTG-CO
4-bets: 9 bb -> 27 bb | 12 bb -> 30 bb | 15 bb -> 36 bb
5-bets are always all-in

No limps except from SB
Only BTN and BB can flat an open
No preflop calling and then raising by same player
Max 3 players in multi-way pot

I feel like you are focused on all the wrong things.

Your 50nl population is going to be under 4betting so who cares what optimal does. Your opponent doesn't play like a solver.

On top of this the 3x sizing is generally a sizing tell for strength which incentives us to 3bet less preflop.

I've also never seen a 100bb sim go 7.25x to 23.25x. Most go to 20-22 range. (Monker, GTO Wizard, GTOx)

I’m using ranges and sizings put together by Fried Meulders in Monker.

I care what optimal is so I have a baseline to work with and understand conceptually how to adjust my ranges when sizings change. I have a good sense of how to adjust my BB call range facing opens from 2.0 bb - 3.5 bb, but not so much how to adjust BTN 3-bet or flat ranges from BTN.

I think you're overthinking this spot preflop - villains 4b sizing is highly exploitative as being unbalanced and more than likely it's extremely value heavy. GTO is great and all but especially at these stakes you're running into highly exploitative players which is really where you're going to show a big edge.

Look, I'm a horrible overplayer of small suited connectors but even I would fold to the 4bet here.

Flop is a clear fold as well. We can't call with a gutshot like a 2014 whale cos solver says so and mutter some mumbo jumbo about backdoor equity and blockers: it's just a snap fold like it ever was.

Also, yeah I can foresee OOP checking with middle pairs quite a bit, and yes you might be able to get some KK-TT to fold (with decreasing likelihood linearly) but you're sometimes going to face a turn barrel, and even a turn check isn't going to mean weakness all the time.

Hey quick question. Am i making a mistake flatting in this spot pre flop? thanks

At 2.25 bb open, raise, flat, and fold are all fine. I'm running a sim to see what optimal is for a 3.0 bb open. The consensus here is to fold for whatever it's worth, but I'll know in a week or two when my 3 bb open preflop sim finishes.

In NL 50, at a 2.25 bb CO open, a fold, call, or raise from BTN are all fine. At a 3.00 bb open from CO is a BTN fold. At long last, here's the spot:

BTN vs CO open at 3.0 bb (5% rake, capped at 6 bb)

I appreciate it's 3BB rather than smaller but that seems awfully tight for button vs CO

Looks pretty normal for 3bb and high rake.

Here is preflop solve for 2.5bb

I normally open at 2.25 bb. This makes me wonder if perhaps I should start opening in the 2.5 - 3.0 bb range, since people at NL50 seem not to understand how to adjust their ranges for the larger bet size. (I didn't either until today when I looked at the sim results.) The other upside to a larger open size is if I do get more preflop folds, I pay less rake. 3-bets would be more painful though, so there's that to consider.

1. IF you increase to 3, that's fine but you'll HAVE to sacrifice the margins of your opening range which means you'll have less hands to play against presumably worse players so just know what you're doing if you decide to do that.

2. The increased sizing is an overriding consideration both because of what it does to your GTO actions as well as what it means for exploitive play. Once you get 4b, this should be an easy fold.

Better to focus on other things.

I actually think it's a completely valid idea, and it takes essentially none of your focus away from other areas of study. Just start using new charts. Uri Peleg talks about this as an interesting exploit at length in his new upswing course.

It does/can though. Changing preflop sizings can drastically change BB defense ranges for example which obviously has carry over to postflop ranges and overall strategies. Better to just stick with standard sizings before you get some decent experience before you deviate much preflop as the edges you're gaining from deviating based on those sizings can be relatively subtle and likely require a bit more knowledge to understand why they are exploits to begin with.

It really doesn't matter *that much*, but is important to be consistent early on with both your sizings and your ranges so you can effectively study and deviate your strategy as you improve.

That being said, everyone has to think for themselves and make their own decisions. If someone feels its +EV to deviate and go towards something unconventional, then by all means do so, but it does make improvement after making that/those changes potentially cumbersome.

To answer the question of why call flop with 45s...
When someone uses a polar sizing, your bluffs on future streets print a lot.
Gutshot-equity+villain-giveup-and-you-print together are just enough to make this a call.

If you think villain will never giveup with anything, you can adjust by never calling these handtypes, but that would be an exploitative adjustment, he should 100% have a very high turn xF frequency with this sizing scheme.

I think folding flop is fine. Ppl struggle to find non Ax bluffs pre and then they probably dont bet half pot with Kc9c type of hand.

I'm not that surprised that this is a call. We have 8% chance to hit the turn with very good realization plus some backdoor equity, that almost covers the cost of a call with additional bluff ev it becomes better.

GTOWizard on average checks turn after half pot 37% of the tiem and then check/folds 50% of the time to 10% bet!

Bit of a late reply, but I disagree with some of this. If your opponent isn't adjusting his BB defense correctly to a larger RFI, you auto-profit. You don't have to do anything special to exploit his mistake. Of course, you can get into the weeds about how to take maximum advantage of a too-loose range, but even if you don't, you profit by playing against him as if he were defending the correct range.