Daily Hand Quiz

This spot is totally read dependent on the villain. We aren’t told much, but I’m guessing that given that we gave been ‘playing tight the last few orbits’, and this villain to our right has a big stack, he’s been taking advantage of that.

The spot also depends on what our objective is. If it’s to fold into the money, then it’s only top 5%. However, I’d we want to accumulate chips and try to run deep, ee should seize on spots like this and 3bet much wider.

With an 18BB stack, we gave a ton of fold equity here. Yes, villain has a huge stack, but that doesn’t mean he’s going to spew over a third of it off with a marginal hand. I like 3betting here pretty wide, around 25 per cent or a little more.

A problem we have is that villain’s goofy raise size (3x is way too much at this stage of tournaments) makes our 3bet sizing awkward. Had villain made it 2.2x-2.5x or something, I’d be 3betting to about 4.5k-5k to represent a monster. That would leave us room to get away if we’re light, as he’s only 4bet shoving if he’s either a, holding the nuts or close to it or b, a very competent aggro player.

As it is, I suppose if we’re 3betting it either needs to he a shove or a small 3bet to 5-6k. I like the latter for the reasons above. The shorties in the blinds aren’t calling all in without the nuts, as I’m guessing by their stack sizes they’re in fold-into-the money mode, and seeing this hand develop they’ll just let us get on with it and hope we bust. With a smallish 3bet, villain will only come over the top with monsters (especially given our image and the fact we’re on the bubble), and if he flats we have position on the flop.

Thoughts on a shove… if we were to do that, I’d rather do it with suited connectors than Ax type hands and broadway cards, because we’re likely to have more hand equity if called. It’s an interesting move, but I prefer the 3bet.

If there’s one change I’ve made to my game recently that’s really worked, it’s 3betting a lot wider in the mid-late stages of tournaments. It’s particularly effective near the bubble, and this looks like a perfect spot (likely active/aggro opponent attacking tight shorties in the blinds on the exact bubble and we have an imposing chipstack). I like 3betting here pretty wide the more I think about it. It’s a powerful move.

So in summary… With about 30% of my range here I’m making it 5.5k and folding to a shove unless I have top 5%.

Would be interested to hear thoughts on this post.

[Reply]

Waste_Of_Paint Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 12:39 am

I’d add to this…3betting wider is especially powerful in position. We can either take 4.4k down now with 5.5k 3bet (worth the risk imo) or maybe play a flop in position if we get flatted.

[Reply]

Jeff Reply:
April 8th, 2011 at 3:59 pm

How will you play the flop if flatted?

[Reply]

Voted top 25%, but I could be talked into being a little tighter than that.

Bet sizing is a little tricky here. We don’t really want to see a flop, so we need to bet enough that the big stack won’t be tempted to come along.
I’m not sure $5K does the trick as we’re giving V nearly 3:1 odds on a call.
Any more than that and we’re pretty much committed, so if we’re going to steal I think we just shove to maximize FE.

[Reply]

I’m usually on the “play aggressively to accumulate chips or die in honor” side, but being exactly on the bubble shortstacked is different. Still, we’re not too shortstacked to aim for the FT. But it would be pretty foolish to be eliminated as the bubble guy. Rank objectives: now that we’re on the bubble, we’d like to pass it. This is not the right spot for a semibluff/bluff raise. It simply doesn’t worth the risk, even if he’s raising light most often. Let the big stacks bully, I don’t care. We’ll leave the bubble behind in like 3 hands. Then starts our rally for the FT. 5% (OK, maybe 10% at the tables, but I do think 5% is correct.)

[Reply]

I’ll 3 bet top 10-20% of the time depends on V’s range and playstyle. Make it 5.5k and fold to a shove with worse than TT or AQ off/ KQs.

[Reply]

3bet top 5% with an over 3bet of 10%.

im 3betting top 5% and balancing by 3betting 5% junk, thus having an overall 3bet of 10%.

To the people 3betting top 10%+ of hands are you really 3betting KQ/KJ/AJ in these spots where you only get action from dominated hands? what if you get 4bet? it sucks to be 4bet off hands like KQs.
in effect your turning your hand into a bluff since when you 3bet KJ you only get called by worse (CO isnt flatting KT to your 3bet).

3betting AQ+ here as well as junk (76s etc) is better since we get called by worse when we value 3bet, and fold out better when we 3bet bluff.

So in effect, imo you should 3bet ~10% here, half the time for value, half the time for bluffs.
Furthermore, you should NOT 3bet broadways here, because you only get called by worse. Its better to flat broadways to keep in worse hands (ie flat call with KQs on the button since we keep in QT, QJ, KT etc).
Anyone wanting to 3bet these types of hands is stupid.

[Reply]

Aces Reply:
April 10th, 2011 at 2:25 am

+1

I like the concept here, reminds me of Jason Mercier 3 betting style.

[Reply]

T Reply:
April 11th, 2011 at 5:55 pm

We don’t want action. We want to take down a nice pot. This is a perfect spot to do this because
a) villain’s range is ATC – he’s playing the spot, not the hand – and he does not want to spew 1/3 of his stack on the bubble (or ever for that matter),
b) the blinds fold practically always,
c) we can likely fold ITM and have been quiet long enough that a player to our immediate right will have noticed, so we are representing no less than a monster.

CO is just abusing the bubble, that’s the prerogative of the big stacks. It’ll work often enough that he doesn’t mind losing 3 BB’s here folding some decent-kickered ace. He may well be suspecting that we’re pulling some bluff, but there’s no way for him to confident about that (remember there’s not history) and his hand would still have to hold up.

The ‘only folding out worse, only called by better’ argument doesn’t apply here because he or one of the blinds calls IMO with TT+, AK, *maybe* AQs. That’s 3% so we actually see a flop here slightly less than 9% of the time. You might be able to make a case for increasing the range a bit, but our fold equity remains massive.

If you raise less than all-in here with the intention of folding to a 4-bet, then you must not have paid very good attention to either image because he *will* jam any hand, and rightfully so, as it’s perfectly obvious that you’re trying to test the water.
You could do this to stack him with AA or KK, but against a random hand you’ll lose 1 out of 6 times, which I still think is rather steep this close to the cash.

[Reply]