Calling pre-flop raises

[scott_owen]

played a short sessions a 5NL last night, approx 300 hands. Made a loss of around $1. Big Woop. I don't mean to assume that what i'm asking about/theorising will be consistent given the heinously small sample but bare with me.

reviewed win/loss regarding preflop actions.

simply put, i won $ when I raised preflop.
I lost $ when i called preflop.

this is ofcourse because i was not involved in any big hands and the advantage often lies with the preflop aggressor, typical loss was with low mid pp's that i intended to set mine and missed, or missed AQ+ that faced post flop aggression.

to the contrary, when IP i often 3 bet AQ+, mid pp's. and these hands typically won $ either seeing folds preflop of c/f's post flop.

So I have an array of the same hands where I either call or 3bet, and see losses and profits respectively.

So I argue that I should..

1. 3 bet a larger range when IP
2. never cold call unless there is either multiple callers, or raiser is a donk/fish.
3. play tighter re implied odds for set chasing
4. only play high unpaired cards as the preflop aggressor

This should have the effect of..

1. Increasing my $won without showdown
2. Increasing my $won when cold calling preflop, due to only playing vs fish or in juiced pots (because these are typically fit or fold situations)
3. polarizing my 3bet range leading to increased action for premium hands

Regarding the decision to 3bet/call/fold non premium hands preflop

3bets should be against weak/tight pfr's, and be concious of other players yet to act, such as donk/fish in the blinds.

calls should occur if a fish is the pfr, or a fish has called the pfr, and only with significant implied odds.

folds should occur in likely HU pots against against either weak/tight or TAG players. and will depend heavily on villains tendency to call 3bets preflop

calls can also occur against weak/tight villains known to fold to flop aggression.


....

All of this would ofcourse be dependent on overall table texture as this strategy would get in to trouble with a high percentage of loose/passive type players, but will work better against a high percentage of weak/tight players.

Anyone with a larger sample size and/or more experience care to concur or shoot me down?

[madurskim]

First off, 300 hands is meaningless. I 4table 10NL RUSH pretty often and 300 hands = ~20min. of play.

You got the right idea with wanting to be IP as much as possible, as well as the preflop aggressor. I think the fault in your thought process is wanting to go out of your way to create these situations, rather than waiting for the right ones to come around (which they come around more than enough). There is nothing wrong with flatting small pp's and folding when you hit a set (at the micros). Obviously, your sample size is so small that you probably stacked someone w/ a set once, if at all. Over a large sample size it smooths out.

3 betting mid pp's and AQ is very villain and situation specific. 3betting mid pp's, at best you are going to get called by two overs and be flipping, or called by a bigger pair. If you think villain might call w/ a hand like KJ, then 3betting AQ may be profitable at times, but not always. Polarizing our 3betting range and 3betting hands like 55 is more something that we want to do when in blind stealing battles. For example: a nitty reg w/ an ATS of 47% opens for 3x on the BTN when folded to him. SB folds and we have 55 in the BB. Set mining here is worthless b/c you aren't going to get paid off since villain most likely doesn't have a hand. 3bet and take it down pf.


The fact that you're losing money w/ mid pp's is probably due to your sample size. The most important thing with them is getting rid of them quickly when you detect your beat, and extracting max value when you flop a set. Having good postflop skills and being able to hand read also helps w/ playing them against nitty regs, and you can turn a slight profit w/o flopping sets. All in all, there is no need to 3bet them IP in order to turn a profit. If you're 3betting 99 and get called, you pretty much have to fold to any action on a Q+ high flop, again, at these stakes.

Vs. an UTG open and MP caller, if players are decent, there is nothing wrong with folding AQ pre from LP.

[scott_owen]

First off, 300 hands is meaningless.

i know, i did refer to my sample size as heinously small. It's more of a speculation based on the results of a small sample. There is something to be learnt from any individual hand. If I 3bet a mid pp against a 79/24, and then against a 7/4. I don't need a sample size of 20K hands to know that there's value in the later situation and not in the first.

3betting a wider range is obviously a player specific idea, which is why i noted that ops would be better to be weak tight. this was never about always 3 betting mid pp or AQ

All in all, there is no need to 3bet them IP in order to turn a profit. If you're 3betting 99 and get called, you pretty much have to fold to any action on a Q+ high flop, again, at these stakes.

yes, but 3 betting them sometimes against the right villains may increase profit. Its essentially an extension of blind stealing. An OOP villain is going to have to fold most times unless he's noticing and adjusting to me. And beyond that he's also going to have to c/f alot of flops, while I respect that over 5 board cards, something like 99 vs AK is a near coin flip, with just the flop its a long way from even money. Even so, a lot of weak/tight types are going to have to fold hands because they will fear AA/KK if we remain strong on the flop, or even to weaker flop bets, there's a thread going on atm that says something like "missed flop cbet 40% of pot, hit flop bet pot because micro players wont adjust, they'll either call with a pair or fold if they missed"

Anyone with a decent sample care to share their 3bet frequency and range?

There is nothing wrong with flatting small pp's and folding when you hit a set

yeh.. sometimes, but i think you meant 'miss' not 'hit' lol.

[Imthenewfish]

If I 3bet a mid pp against a 79/24, and then against a 7/4. I don't need a sample size of 20K hands to know that there's value in the later situation and not in the first.

3betting a wider range is obviously a player specific idea, which is why i noted that ops would be better to be weak tight. this was never about always 3 betting mid pp or AQ

your goal is to make the most +EV decisions, so why do you think 3betting mid pairs vs a weaktight (which may be +EV) is better than setmining vs a super nitty range?

[scott_owen]

your goal is to make the most +EV decisions, so why do you think 3betting mid pairs vs a weaktight (which may be +EV) is better than setmining vs a super nitty range?

depends on whether the super nit will stack off every time vs the supernits fold to 3bet no?

[kmind]

What Imthenewfish said.

While some of these plays may be +EV it COULD be (and sometimes IS) more profitable to just flat call. Finding the perfect balance is best.

I'm glad you posted this though because you are right, a lot of times betting/raising in these spots is +EV which means it's at least better than folding. Figuring out if it's more +EV than calling is tougher.

[scott_owen]

i'm debating in my mind whether or not pp's are relevant to the idea though. If you're looking to 3 bet steal and its heavily based on the situation then you're going to be throwing a way a lot of situations because you havent got a pp. Surely Ax's and sc's would play well here too.

the right situation for this might come up once a round at best and we might get dealt a low mid pp maybe 1/20 times.. which would mean we make the play ~ 1 in 180 hands (extremely rough maths obviously).. this is too rare for me to factor in the idea that its going to loosen our table image. given that i'll get AK/QQ+ once in 39 hands

[kmind]

Having small pocket pairs in your 3betting range should be either because it's profitable to have these go all-in depending on the situation. Or because your opponent is very tight and either having a plan of 3betting/cbet will produce a profitable outcome or because you'll have the implied odds for when you do hit a set on the flop you'll have a good chance of getting their stack. Of course stack sizes need to be at a certain level.

Keep in mind in like 7 out of 8 flops you'll be bluffing with barely any equity when your cbet is called/raised. And when PP creating so much money by just flatting it makes sense to rarely 3bet these and use other hands that flop better.

[jyms]

I threebet small PP's vs the very loose opening ranges when guys can fold to 3bets, I'm rarely going to stack them when I hit. Against tight ranges or aggro opponents I tend to call them more because of the value of a set.

[Robb]

3. polarizing my 3bet range leading to increased action for premium hands

Careful here - most of your opponents at 5nl won't react to your polarized range. Make sure the range of hands you play holds up well against the range you're likely facing.

[Smith]

I don't do this right now, but 3betting small PP in the blinds is > calling to a wide range steal. If you database it you find out that calling is a leak for most players

I will probably start to explore this in my game soon.

[kmind]

I don't do this right now, but 3betting small PP in the blinds is > calling to a wide range steal. If you database it you find out that calling is a leak for most players

I will probably start to explore this in my game soon.

Interesting that you don't do this already yet produce a very nice winrate. That's a compliment btw. I think once you start doing this your winrate will only increase.

[scott_owen]

Careful here - most of your opponents at 5nl won't react to your polarized range. Make sure the range of hands you play holds up well against the range you're likely facing.

yes, I typically speculate about poker in general though not just the level i'm currently playing.

Where do you think this kind of play will come to the forefront then? I'm playing these stakes now to build a new roll in my spare time. Last time I played poker was pre the US laws when TPTK was golden for whole stacks at 25NL and above

[Robb]

Gotta say I wouldn't know these days. I'm a nano-stakes donk atm, having taken most of a year off. They don't seem to be adjusting down here, tho.

[scott_owen]

They don't seem to be adjusting down here, tho.

Would have to agree, I've run a stupid -2.5BB/100 over ~10,000 hands at micros the last couple of weeks because i'm failing to act on the lack of fold equity. Its been too long and my discipline is out the window. I know the right decisions and fail to follow through.. Going to be knuckling down this weekend and turning it around though. First target ~5BB/100 of a 20,000 hand stretch then move up. I can obviously see from observing the game that this should be a walk in the park.. just have to stop being an undisciplined twat..

:/