abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

I'm trying to get my head around ways to open my game up a little and take more small/medum pots away from bad TAG regulars at the tables I play so that I don't continue being a mediocre break even bad TAG player myself. I'd love to get SSNL's thoughts on some preflop scenarios.

Some situations:(all villains here are mcTAGs 20/15/3ish with Attempt to Steal %'s in the low 30's that we have a decent chunk of mined data on) - Heros image is ~20/17/3 similar but a little more aggressive)

i) CO opens 4bb - Hero is OTB with trash like 84o or w/e and 3bets pot. Hero has position if called and will probably take the pot down on OK flops with a CB.

is this is a profitable play in a vacuum? what kind of flops are better to CB Is this only profitable because of the image it creates so that when we 3bet a real hand we get a to more action... ? Or is this just a bad plan?

ii) BTN opens and we 3bet same kind of hand from the blinds - same questions.

Obv we'd be doing this sparingly (approximately how often is a ogod frequency? - or is that totally villain dependant) - but overall is playing more 3bet pots IP vs regulars a good idea if we assume that we play postflop at least as good as the villain does and so position gives us a good edge.

Once this goes "wrong" - say we 3bet IP with air - are flat called preflop and then villain c/r our 3bet all-in. Should we make much of an adjustment and tighten up 3betting considerably afterwards for x orbits or wait until this happens more than once?

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

you don't need to do this with 84 to beat bad tags.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

Question to ask yourself each time.

What is the purpose of my 3bet?

Trying to 3bet X percentage of the time regardless of your hand does not make sense to me. Aggression is good, aggression with no purpose behind it is spew.

However, I have been called a Nit, ABC tag, Aggo Donk, and other names not worth repeating.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

in the examples above the purpose of my 3bet is to win a small/medium pot preflop or on the flop from a TAG player who I think is opening a wide range that will likely miss the flop and he won't be able to profitably continue postflop OOP vs me.

I am not trying to 3bet x% - I spose another way of asking this is - if we think TAG in LP is opening a wide range of hands do we only 3bet IP/OOP if we think we are ahead of that range - or when we "sense weakness" are fairly sure that the hand won't make it past the flop and so our cards as they are very unlikely to get to SD don't really matter?

Am I missing the point somehwere entirely and are there better ways to steal small/medium pots vs bad TAG players?

I figured I'd start with preflop cos it's the easiest street to play.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

you should start with finding the massive amounts of post flop spots to steal the small/medium pots that are more profitable and readily available to anyone who takes the time to look.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

I think 3betting w/ that kind of rubbish OOP from the blinds is something that should be done less than sparingly. I would advocate this only when someone is flat out abusing the BTN and you're fairly sure you will take it down pre, and are planning on a complete shutdown if you do not.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

Um, the idea is that if you are doing this x% of the time, you might as well go ahead and wait until you have a top x% hand. Makes it real easy, and more profitable and stuff.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

Theres really no reason to do it with complete trash. You can do it with hands that will at least flop something some of the time and still be fine. Even 96s is so much better than 84o, and the times you are called the added equity you'll have over 84o will add up.

I just did a rough pokerstove for a villain with a loose calling range of your 3bet - and 96s had roughly a 7% increase in equity over 84o. This may not seem like a ton, but it's a decent clip over the long run.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
in the examples above the purpose of my 3bet is to win a small/medium pot preflop or on the flop from a TAG player who I think is opening a wide range that will likely miss the flop and he won't be able to profitably continue postflop OOP vs me.

I am not trying to 3bet x% - I spose another way of asking this is - if we think TAG in LP is opening a wide range of hands do we only 3bet IP/OOP if we think we are ahead of that range - or when we "sense weakness" are fairly sure that the hand won't make it past the flop and so our cards as they are very unlikely to get to SD don't really matter?

Am I missing the point somehwere entirely and are there better ways to steal small/medium pots vs bad TAG players?

I figured I'd start with preflop cos it's the easiest street to play.

[/ QUOTE ]
If I understand you correctly you are hoping to exploit the fact that in general a person will miss a flop ~60% of the time. i.e. they fold prefop or they miss and fold to your cbet.

Consider this, when they call preflop.
4BB open
~12BB 3bet
call
~25BB pot
check
c-bet ~18-20BB

you risk ~30BB to win ~12. If this play works ~60% of the time you will lose money. Obviously this is very fuzzy math and there are a tons of variables, but in general 3betting air with the plan to win without showdown is -EV.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

3betting is a really important part of a shorthanded NL cash players game. I've discussed with a lot of people WHY 3betting is so effective but if I wrote it all out it would take me 20+mins (only have 2min or so right now).

Basic premises of 3betting:

You want to be 3betting with a wider ranger IN POSITION as opposed to OOP. There are many reasons for this but an important one is that most people feel really uncomfortable playing past the flop in 3bet pots.

Knowing which boards to c-bet and which boards to check is REALLY important if you are 3betting light (which you should be doing with a very high frequency).

Also knowing which boards to float/which boards to raise there c-bet with is very important too. gtg but ill try to re-visit this topic later.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

3betting CO or MP from btn is so effective. Everyone who isnt doing that much, should start doing that now. Dont use hand ranges, just do it with hands like K9s or 78o

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

Consider abusing bad tags, with hands that you can flop equity, not garbage. This is why raising scs > calling pfr. It also helps open your three-bet range on the button.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
Consider abusing bad tags, with hands that you can flop equity, not garbage. This is why raising scs > calling pfr. It also helps open your three-bet range on the button.

[/ QUOTE ]
Abusing bad tags is not about flopping big hands. Often they call way too much 3bets OOP, and you can abuse that by cbetting alot and taking down bigger pots. Often they overadjust and start playing like a spewtard in rr pots and then you can more easily stack them (by tightening up ofc).

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

i abuse light 3 bettors very easily. If the tags have 1/2 a brain you will get exploited if you start noticeably getting out of line. With that said, a lot don't


Also, in todays game you can get away with having a really tight 3b range and no-one will notice.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
i abuse light 3 bettors very easily. If the tags have 1/2 a brain you will get exploited if you start noticeably getting out of line. With that said, a lot don't


Also, in todays game you can get away with having a really tight 3b range and no-one will notice.

[/ QUOTE ]

notes on certain tagfish, 'can 3bet light OOP and he will call light and CF loads of flop'. Usually i abuse those guys till they get sick of it and then tighten up.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

In a vacuum, I think 3betting ATC in position to LP TAG raises is +EV. That said, I don't think this should be your primary focus if you are trying to take more small/medium pots.

I HATE that I am gonna point out the obvious here, but you need to think about post-flop. I honestly think that if you are focusing on pre-flop to "take down more medium-sized pots," then you are completely missing the point.

Mad respect, Matrix, and I appreciate what you are doing. I hope this didn't come across wrong.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

If I understand this correctly, you're not making the right comparison. You want to know if a c-bet is profitable GIVEN that your 3-bet has been called. In this case, you risk 18-20 bb to win the 25 bb pot, which obviously IS profitable given a 60% success rate. To consider the profitability of 3-betting, you want to take into account the profit that you get from a fold pre-flop. You're not just exploiting the fact that the flop will be missed 60% of the time, you're also exploiting the fact that some % of the time players in front of you are raising with hands they can't call a 3-bet with. So say that there's a p% chance of getting a fold pre-flop. Your EV = p(4bb)+(1-p)(.6(12bb)+.4(-30bb)). I'm assuming an 18bb c-bet, and the bb and sb given away to the rake. I'm also assuming that you NEVER flop the best hand. So surely your actual EV is higher than this, probably much higher since the times that you do have the best hand are likely to show a lot of profit. This is assuming you don't get silly when you flop middle pair with a seven kicker and try to bluff out AA or top set or something like that.
Anyway, the above EV is greater than zero as long as p>54.5%. So if you're getting folds from your 3-bets at that rate or greater, it's a good play (although maybe not the best one). If you are good at reading when to c-bet, and good at extracting maximum value out of times when you flop monsters, etc., then obviously you would require a lower p to make this play profitably.

[ QUOTE ]

If I understand you correctly you are hoping to exploit the fact that in general a person will miss a flop ~60% of the time. i.e. they fold prefop or they miss and fold to your cbet.

Consider this, when they call preflop.
4BB open
~12BB 3bet
call
~25BB pot
check
c-bet ~18-20BB

you risk ~30BB to win ~12. If this play works ~60% of the time you will lose money. Obviously this is very fuzzy math and there are a tons of variables, but in general 3betting air with the plan to win without showdown is -EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

In no way do I disagree that 3betting is +EV. My post was an attempt to give a conceptually example of why 3betting pure air such as 84o can be –EV.

On a side note, I don't logically agree with evaluating a play at the moment. i.e. “In this case, you risk 18-20 bb to win the 25 bb pot”

Half of that pot is your money. Looking at the hand as a whole you are putting 30BB in the middle to gain 12 if successful. Where is my logic flawed?

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

EV = p(4bb)+(1-p)(.6(12bb)+.4(-30bb)). p>54.5% = EV

Just thinking about this more. What Percentage of the time are your 3bets called? In my experience its easiliy more than half, I would say its pushing 60%, which is a pure guess-timate. This leads me to believe in the current 6max games the perception of a light 3bet has made a tight 3betting range more profitable.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

I would consider using this move if you are a TAGish player yourself and you have not been 3betting villain with much frequency this session.

Forcing it with 84o off, though, strikes me as a -EV move long run. I think what tilts the scale is the possibility of blinds or villain coming over the top w/ 4bet and you not even seeing the flop. As previous poster mentioned, doing this with suited connectors or 1/2 gappers drastically increases EV.

I think the most interesting part of OP's move is thinking about how much showing down 84o (when you hit straight or trips on flop) will confuse your opponent a lot and make them play marginal hands much more aggressively against your future 3bets [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

This is an example of the "sunk cost fallacy". It doesn't matter who put that money in. You want to take the optimal action given your situation. And if you check down and lose a showdown, or fold to a likely turn bet, then you're giving away that money that's in the pot. So this is not a side note, it's an important issue to grasp, I think. You could question whether it's a good idea to get yourself in that situation in the first place, that is, whether you should have put all that money in the pot to get to the c-bet decision, but that's why I did the other calculation to figure out whether it's a good idea to 3-bet preflop or not.

[ QUOTE ]
In no way do I disagree that 3betting is +EV. My post was an attempt to give a conceptually example of why 3betting pure air such as 84o can be –EV.

On a side note, I don't logically agree with evaluating a play at the moment. i.e. “In this case, you risk 18-20 bb to win the 25 bb pot”

Half of that pot is your money. Looking at the hand as a whole you are putting 30BB in the middle to gain 12 if successful. Where is my logic flawed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

I think it really depends on the game and the villains. I usually don't get called 60% of the time. I'd say I probably get called 40% of the time. But remember that some of those times I have AA and KK, and I get more calls those times because I've 3-bet other times with 67s or some drawy hand like that. I think I'm really understating the value of 3-betting (at least in my game) with my previous calculation, because most of the reason that I do it is to get action for my big hands, whether they be pf monsters like AA or KK, or flopping a big hand with a drawing hand, and the villain thinks I'm just c-betting and doesn't believe me. If I'm getting called too often and not being able to take down pots with c-bets on the flop, then I will tighten my 3-bet range and try and get that same action when I have a good hand.


[ QUOTE ]
EV = p(4bb)+(1-p)(.6(12bb)+.4(-30bb)). p>54.5% = EV

Just thinking about this more. What Percentage of the time are your 3bets called? In my experience its easiliy more than half, I would say its pushing 60%, which is a pure guess-timate. This leads me to believe in the current 6max games the perception of a light 3bet has made a tight 3betting range more profitable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

3betting TAGs very often is going to get them to play back at you pretty quickly. I would do this a few times until I get caught and then tighten up, because they are going to remember you as that [censored] that keeps 3betting me in position and start looking you up or 4betting hands like TT or AQ. In fewer words, do it to establish an image, then use that image to get paid off.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is an example of the "sunk cost fallacy". It doesn't matter who put that money in. You want to take the optimal action given your situation. And if you check down and lose a showdown, or fold to a likely turn bet, then you're giving away that money that's in the pot. So this is not a side note, it's an important issue to grasp, I think. You could question whether it's a good idea to get yourself in that situation in the first place, that is, whether you should have put all that money in the pot to get to the c-bet decision, but that's why I did the other calculation to figure out whether it's a good idea to 3-bet preflop or not.

[ QUOTE ]
In no way do I disagree that 3betting is +EV. My post was an attempt to give a conceptually example of why 3betting pure air such as 84o can be –EV.

On a side note, I don't logically agree with evaluating a play at the moment. i.e. “In this case, you risk 18-20 bb to win the 25 bb pot”

Half of that pot is your money. Looking at the hand as a whole you are putting 30BB in the middle to gain 12 if successful. Where is my logic flawed?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
I see, let me try and put this in my own words.

So on a flop the decision to c-bet or not is based on 18BB to win 25BB, b/c this is the decision at hand.

However, 3betting with the intention of taking it down on the flop with a c-bet must be evaluated as 30BB to win 12?

?

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

IF you are called, you'll risk the 30 to win 12. Think about it this way:
EV[3-betting]=Probability of a fold pre-flop*Original Raise + Probability of a call pre-flop*EV[3-betting|villain calls].
Then EV[3-betting|villain calls] = EV[c-betting]-12.

I'm abstracting from 4-betting and the option of checking behind on some flops and not others, etc. Think about the c-bet decision this way. Say you can either c-bet and get a fold, or you'll get check-raised and fold. Or you could check and lose the hand automatically. If you fold and lose the hand, then you're down 12 for the entire hand. If you c-bet, then you'll win the pot (and be up 12 for the hand) 60% of the time, or you'll have to fold (and lose 30) 40% of the time. So even though 12*.6+(-30)*.4=-4.8 is less than zero, it's still greater than -12, which is what you get by checking.

Note that you'll get the same answer by just considering the 12 as a "sunk cost", then you can either check and get zero, or bet and get 25 60% of the time and -18 40% of the time. This is actually a general property of all decision problems (outside of poker), that if you add or subtract a constant from each of the state-dependent payoffs, the optimal decision does not change.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is an example of the "sunk cost fallacy". It doesn't matter who put that money in. You want to take the optimal action given your situation. And if you check down and lose a showdown, or fold to a likely turn bet, then you're giving away that money that's in the pot. So this is not a side note, it's an important issue to grasp, I think. You could question whether it's a good idea to get yourself in that situation in the first place, that is, whether you should have put all that money in the pot to get to the c-bet decision, but that's why I did the other calculation to figure out whether it's a good idea to 3-bet preflop or not.

[ QUOTE ]
In no way do I disagree that 3betting is +EV. My post was an attempt to give a conceptually example of why 3betting pure air such as 84o can be –EV.

On a side note, I don't logically agree with evaluating a play at the moment. i.e. “In this case, you risk 18-20 bb to win the 25 bb pot”

Half of that pot is your money. Looking at the hand as a whole you are putting 30BB in the middle to gain 12 if successful. Where is my logic flawed?

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
I see, let me try and put this in my own words.

So on a flop the decision to c-bet or not is based on 18BB to win 25BB, b/c this is the decision at hand.

However, 3betting with the intention of taking it down on the flop with a c-bet must be evaluated as 30BB to win 12?

?

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

I feel like I am going to get assigned homework soon. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Thanks for the posts.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have AA and KK, and I get more calls those times because I've 3-bet other times with 67s or some drawy hand like that.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you have TAG PT numbers and post here your 3bets are viewed as light by other regs regardless of frequency. Based on that belief there is less reason to 3bet light.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

cliffnotes:

3betting air IP vs loose LP TAG openers is a bad idea in general and needs a read.

3betting with sc's s/1gaps small pairs or hands that will sometimes flop well enough to push teh flop with good equity vs AA is a good idea in general

you don't need to 3bet light vs bad TAG LP openers at all - the other players do this enough already and you can just use the image they provide to make it seem like you 3bet more often and lighter than is really the case. tho vs solid TAGs you need to do the work yourself.

Knowing what flops to CB/ raise a CB on is crucial otherwise you will just end up spewing.

3betting from the blinds OOP light is usually not a good plan in general.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
cliffnotes:

Knowing what flops to CB/ raise a CB on is crucial otherwise you will just end up spewing.



[/ QUOTE ]
I must be the king of spew here. Are there any good suggestions on this topic?

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

True for some, but not for all. I do usually try and get a little bit of a read on a player before I three-bet him light. And I should note too, that by light I usually mean at least a suited one-gapper or something like that, not 84o as the OP suggested. There's pretty much no situation where I'm going to find myself involved in a raised pot with 84o. I think I'm just not a good enough player to ever make that profitable.

[ QUOTE ]

If you have TAG PT numbers and post here your 3bets are viewed as light by other regs regardless of frequency. Based on that belief there is less reason to 3bet light.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]

Knowing what flops to CB/ raise a CB on is crucial otherwise you will just end up spewing.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the hardest part. It would be swell if we could go into this in more detail.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
I feel like I am going to get assigned homework soon. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Thanks for the posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Chitown-

The general problem with the premise of your argument above is that you are completely ignoring the fact that you often take the pot down preflop. Essentially, the 12 bb's you put in preflop had a good chance of winning the pot right there. Now, the 20bb's you are putting to win 25bb's also has a good chance to win the pot.

The equity of them folding preflop, plus on the flop, plus the random equity you have of *gasp* actually hitting a hand and going to showdown is where we are deriving value out of tags that too often call 3-bets and fold to flop bets (the ones that still think blind setmining in 3bet pots is ok).

Todd

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

Todd, did you read the thread or just my post?

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
you don't need to do this with 84 to beat bad tags.

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't imply that the play is incorrect

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
Um, the idea is that if you are doing this x% of the time, you might as well go ahead and wait until you have a top x% hand. Makes it real easy, and more profitable and stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

But some of the top % are more playable and so should see more flops.

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Knowing what flops to CB/ raise a CB on is crucial otherwise you will just end up spewing.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the hardest part. It would be swell if we could go into this in more detail.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's funny you bring this up because most people simply don't know what boards to c-bet on, what boards to float and what boards to raise c-bets on instead of floating because some boards induce double barrels from otherwise nitty players.

I think the dynamic you are facing here is the struggle of information. The people that know don't want to tell you because they are not being sufficiently rewarded for their troubles and the people asking the questions are not investing in the forum, just taking.

i have had a lot of coaching in nl theory and i've started writing or "compiling," pages on certain topics. I have 2 pages on the effectivenss of 3betting and exactly WHY it is effective. i think it would help a lot of people in this thread (not all).

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Knowing what flops to CB/ raise a CB on is crucial otherwise you will just end up spewing.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is the hardest part. It would be swell if we could go into this in more detail.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's funny you bring this up because most people simply don't know what boards to c-bet on, what boards to float and what boards to raise c-bets on instead of floating because some boards induce double barrels from otherwise nitty players.

I think the dynamic you are facing here is the struggle of information. The people that know don't want to tell you because they are not being sufficiently rewarded for their troubles and the people asking the questions are not investing in the forum, just taking.

i have had a lot of coaching in nl theory and i've started writing or "compiling," pages on certain topics. I have 2 pages on the effectivenss of 3betting and exactly WHY it is effective. i think it would help a lot of people in this thread (not all).

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no problems with people choosing not to give out information, but i do have a problem with you insinuating that im just a 'taker'. I may not have a very high post count...yet, but i think you will find at least 50% of my posts are of a giving nature in this and other forums. Please dont call me a taker!!

Also, what was the point of your last paragraph?

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]

It's funny you bring this up because most people simply don't know what boards to c-bet on, what boards to float and what boards to raise c-bets on instead of floating because some boards induce double barrels from otherwise nitty players.

I think the dynamic you are facing here is the struggle of information. The people that know don't want to tell you because they are not being sufficiently rewarded for their troubles and the people asking the questions are not investing in the forum, just taking.

i have had a lot of coaching in nl theory and i've started writing or "compiling," pages on certain topics. I have 2 pages on the effectivenss of 3betting and exactly WHY it is effective. i think it would help a lot of people in this thread (not all).

[/ QUOTE ]
So you write about poker in order to tell others you have ideas but choose not to share????

When to c-bet, raise, float, etc comes down to basic range reads.
You need to ask yourself on each street,

What is my opponents range?
What range am I communicating?

Based on the ranges and the board you can make good decisions. For example, you have standard TAG opening stats and raise from MP and get called by the BB. Flop = 6A2r.
What range am I communicating? AT+, 66+, KJ+, etc
What is my opponents range? 66-99, KQ, etc…. obv based on the opponents style.

The important thing to note is that Aces make up a big chunk of your perceived range, therefore 6A2r is a good flop to c-bet.

If the flop was 678r, not so much. Hands that hit that flop are a smaller part of your range. i.e. over pairs, sets, and 56,67,78,89,9T.

It is not an exact science, so I’m not sure what is meant by, “Some people know, but they chose not to share b/c no one else is sharing” I wouldn't expect someone would be able to write up "Here is how you c-bet, float, and raise".

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Um, the idea is that if you are doing this x% of the time, you might as well go ahead and wait until you have a top x% hand. Makes it real easy, and more profitable and stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

But some of the top % are more playable and so should see more flops.

[/ QUOTE ]
Isura, can you expand on this a bit? When you say “see more flops” do you imply maybe lowering your 3bet frequency in order to see more flops?

Re: abusing bad TAG players preflop [theory]
 

Hypothetically if this was the last hand of poker you were going to play, or you knew you would never see these villains again, sure its +EV to repop IP pre and fire away on the flop.

But you have to consider the optimal long term frequency of 3 betting you engage in at these games. And if you're including 84 in there that frequency is gonna get exploitably high. Its getting more standard to 4 bet light (esp after CTS vids) when its pretty obvious the 3 bet has a very wide range, same as the 3 bet became pervasive once people started pf raising with all kinds of stuff.

I strive for a 3 bet range of "I can't at all rule out a light 3 bet (97s, 55, etc) but he prob has it". Lately I've actually tightened up my 3 bet range (esp from blinds) vs aggro CTS wannabes, since they think everyone else is 3 betting light because that is their way of playing, and they project that onto others. If villain thinks you're horsing around and decides to play back when in reality you're just being patient waiting for it that is a great +EV spot.

Fold the 84, wait for something halfway decent if you decide to pick on a weak opponent. You c-bet, get called, oops. If you barrel the turn you really want a fold not just for the pot, but showing down 84o is [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img].