Hand vs Dean on CR vid

[ILOVEPOKER929]

[ QUOTE ]
preflop is fine

cf river. if he called the flop with ace high hes not folding that river. if he has a pair hes gonna think about folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vs a Tag Im 3betting 98s all day in this spot assuming the BB is normal. So I certainly cant fault 97s.

[dangerfish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
preflop is fine

cf river. if he called the flop with ace high hes not folding that river. if he has a pair hes gonna think about folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vs a Tag Im 3betting 98s all day in this spot assuming the BB is normal. So I certainly cant fault 97s.

[/ QUOTE ]


I wouldn't rr 97h here but I definately think against Dean it is not a bad play. Don't think the 3 barrel bluff was horrible at least not as bad as everyone thinks.

[danzasmack]

Isn't a big part of the reason why rr 97hh here because of how it effects the profitability of our other hands?

I dunno after reading like some of the stox book i had a brief moment where I thought I should being playing like only profitable hands. But that makes no sense. The bottom part of your range is a losing part beause it make the top part a bigger winner. No?

[Heir_Aparent]

essentialy yeah. i think thats overlooked sometimes. if you never reraised good players, dean for example, in the SB with hands like this, it would make your raise frequency from the SB too small and consequently youd be pretty easy to play against (from the SB).

i think this is why some ppl said 'vs. dean this is fine'

[DpR]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't a big part of the reason why rr 97hh here because of how it effects the profitability of our other hands?

I dunno after reading like some of the stox book i had a brief moment where I thought I should being playing like only profitable hands. But that makes no sense. The bottom part of your range is a losing part beause it make the top part a bigger winner. No?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course generally speaking you are correct. However, I think these days (moreso this year) in the higher games make this specific play get you crushed becasue you are OOP and people are always capping the crap they stole with from the button. You just get so wrecked here when the button is capping 22, QTs, 78s here.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
Isn't a big part of the reason why rr 97hh here because of how it effects the profitability of our other hands?

I dunno after reading like some of the stox book i had a brief moment where I thought I should being playing like only profitable hands. But that makes no sense. The bottom part of your range is a losing part beause it make the top part a bigger winner. No?

[/ QUOTE ]

A good rule of thumb should be to make the bottom part of your range hands that have greater than 45% equity vs your opponent's hand range. In the case of dean lets assume he is playing around 40% of the range on the button hands like QJo and JTs are near the bottom of the 3-betting range in a 1/2 blind structure game. In a 2/3rd blind structure game I think its ok to loosen the 3-betting range to hands that have 40% equity vs the button's hand range assuming the button will often fold and allow the hand to go heads up vs a good playing button - this means I would include 98s, but 97s is just 1% too low out of my range to 3-bet.

Alternatively I would however opt to call with 97s in a 2/3 blind structure and the BB is loose because the implied odds are good, but the hand still faces the muck in a 1/2 blind structure game no matter what.

The 3-bet of hands in 40%-50% equity range is good because we are creating fold equity on later streets with makes up for the loss of showdown value. Of course as you pointed out it also adds to your image/meta value. I think keeping the marginal 3-betting hands in the small blind to this 10% range is best.

PS: Hi Hold'em strat forums! I miss you! And yes I have become an equity nerd.