Re: 200NL- Uninteresting PF spot w/ AK
 

[ QUOTE ]
why isnt this raise size fine?

[/ QUOTE ]

More likely to to force villain to continue with a much, much tighter range. I personally would call/4bet much looser if he made it $20 or so.

Re: 200NL- Uninteresting PF spot w/ AK
 

I'm controlling his implied odds based on his raise size. If he raised to $4 pf raising to $12 would be pretty bad because he'd be able to call w/ basically ATC.

Re: 200NL- Uninteresting PF spot w/ AK
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm controlling his implied odds based on his raise size. If he raised to $4 pf raising to $12 would be pretty bad because he'd be able to call w/ basically ATC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really...

Re: 200NL- Uninteresting PF spot w/ AK
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm controlling his implied odds based on his raise size. If he raised to $4 pf raising to $12 would be pretty bad because he'd be able to call w/ basically ATC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really...

[/ QUOTE ]

Well he'd be getting 20 to 1 odds on a call so he'd be making the right play by calling w/ a PP.

Re: 200NL- Uninteresting PF spot w/ AK
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm controlling his implied odds based on his raise size. If he raised to $4 pf raising to $12 would be pretty bad because he'd be able to call w/ basically ATC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really...

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think either one of you are making a compelling argument. If you raise large and he only calls you with a range that has you crushed than although you will be making money preflop, you will be losing quite a bit of money with your high % CB.

On the other hand, if you make a small raise and Villain calls with a wide range of hands and then makes moves or doesn't fold often postflop, then their are flaws in your plan.

The point being is that 3-betting makes alot more sense if the Villain is exploitable.

Of course, you can 3-bet preflop with AK for Value, but it might not be the highest EV play (of course it could be). 3-betting preflop with AK makes alot of sense if the Villain will call with hands you have dominated like AK or AQ. Or if the Villain will call with all pairs and fold unless he makes a set. etc...
On the other hand, it doesn't make alot of sense, if the Villain will make alot of moves on the flop. Or if the Villain is stubborn with alot of hands. Or if the Villan's calling range matches up well against your 3-betting range.

Re: 200NL- Uninteresting PF spot w/ AK
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm controlling his implied odds based on his raise size. If he raised to $4 pf raising to $12 would be pretty bad because he'd be able to call w/ basically ATC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really...

[/ QUOTE ]

Well he'd be getting 20 to 1 odds on a call so he'd be making the right play by calling w/ a PP.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should be cutting down his implied odds by having wider 3-betting ranges, not by raising so big that he can't call without JJ+/AK.

Re: 200NL- Uninteresting PF spot w/ AK
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm controlling his implied odds based on his raise size. If he raised to $4 pf raising to $12 would be pretty bad because he'd be able to call w/ basically ATC.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really...

[/ QUOTE ]

Well he'd be getting 20 to 1 odds on a call so he'd be making the right play by calling w/ a PP.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should be cutting down his implied odds by having wider 3-betting ranges, not by raising so big that he can't call without JJ+/AK.

[/ QUOTE ]

But if someone raises to $4 pf what's the correct amount to 3bet? It shouldn't be just 3x any raise ammount. We're raising for a few reason but one is to build a pot and to make him pay to draw out on us. Obviously raising to $12 isn't going to accomplish much and raising 3x any raise is just robotic and doesn't take anything into account.

I don't believe raising to $24 instead of $20 is going to make a large difference in what he calls me with. But when these donks call w/ their 22 it's even more of a mistake calling $18 instead of $14.

Also, what is everyone's 3-betting range for an UTG TAG PF raiser?