Dr. Maximilious Exploitopoulos MD

yea that is my default ranges

im just wondering if you can exploit even further because your opponents are clearly not opening optimal wide ranges for that sizing, so how should we deviate?

you can play a super exploitative line in this spot vs wide calling range so all your options are available if you want to cbet for thin value or defend

but V makes a half pot size cbet so its easy fold for you with AK even if its exploitative because you should not be balancing here by checking overpairs or top pair vs a 40vpip player

you feel weak now but in the other spots where you have the top of your range your going to be super extra strong so acknowledge that trade off has to exist in the exploitatively strategy your using vs 40vpip players to maximize profit

its very easy once you check since most people will be bigger than optimal on these boards with too much value thin value, so easy fold vs anything bigger than a 1/4 pot size bet

vs a 1/4 pot size bet or smaller you have direct odds to hit one of your overcards so pure call vs that sizing

if you still feel compelled to call vs bigger bet sizes with AK here then it means your not checking back enough strong hands which is a symptom of your auto cbetting from the meta 10 years ago

hands like T9 J9 98 87 are being pure checked according to Snowie, so if you are auto cbetting any pair any draw any combo pair draws along with your overcards, backdoor equity bluffs and pure bluffs then your cbetting way too much and will find it hard to fold AK here

once you balance your range youll have better understanding of these spots, start by pulling the weakest cbets you would auto bet from 10 years ago and check calling them instead such as weak top pairs, second pairs, weak draws

you dont have to play pure optimal like a solver (snowie thinks AA is a mostly a check here but at 10nl its certainty better to bet), but you have to redistribute your range from what you were use to 10 years ago to meet gto halfway so that your still playing an exploitatively game but a bit more balanced than the meta you were accustomed to

yea it was really fun and easy to cbet 2/3-3/4 of pot on every board at a super high frequency on full tilt and show instant profit, but after solvers we can now learn how to bet at a lower frequency to balance checks, and using smaller bet sizes as the aspects that differ the most from modern games compared to 10 years ago

my first intuition is river fold is bad in theory since your folding too wide top of your range here

ran it throught snowie and it thinks the same, here are the details:

flop you can cbet and its fine, checking is minisculely better

turn bet is standard and calling the min raise is standard

river you can bluffcatch up to 1.5x the pot according to snowie be 0 ev so calling a pot size bet is good here, otherwise your definitely folding too much here esp if you dont slowplay sets on the flop and end up on the river with only 2pairs and top pair

if this were optimal heads up 6max your hand is good enough to stack off, but in heads up 10nl nit games you deviate by pure calling and bluff catching

three/four way this hand is absolutely fucking -infinity ev dead when you get check raised here

a decade ago when you played regularly you can totally get away with just betting here, but today with solvers we know how much stronger hand we need to put more money multiway and even TPTK multiway isnt strong enough to bet all the time

thus we end up checking some very strong hands multiway on the flop to instead build the pot on good turn and rivers when draws brick

if he is not topping up then he is not competent, so he is either raising very tight or very loose here

with no hud stats you ought to think about if 3betting is good vs those two tendencies and if your 3bet is +ev in both cases

vs very tight your 3bet is going to be close to 0 ev at best, vs very loose your 3bet is ok but you are better of merging and 3betting AJo/KQo

calling vs very tight is -ev, calling vs very loose is probably slightly ok but 3betting is better

if you put that analysis in a 2x2 pro vs con chart then its easy to see this calling is the worst option so 3bet or folding are your choices with folding being just slightly better

but you elected to 3bet which is reasonable and cbetting this flop is going to be +ev in a vacuum and check folding turn is fine, but with no reads we cant really learn anything from our line nor how to adjust since we dont have a baseline for comparison

your on the right track on the turn with your reasoning - you have no idea wtf is going so you check fold

but it seems like you had no idea what his range was preflop as well with no hud or reads, so use logical continuity and fold there as well until you have the information to deviate

close to 0 ev bluffcatcher here for sure, thus fold in practice

i really like raising the flop vs the small cbet, id rather be in a bluff catching spot on the flop playing for stacks than having to bluff catch on board run outs

im calling min raise and calling any non A or K river because i cant exploitatively fold vs turn min raise with this hand and i am also not exploit fold river getting 6:1 odds

ra al ghul trained me in the art of gto so i aint leaving this hand

looks fine to me, mp turned his hand face up on river with the sizing making the decision for you ez

even if u had a set of kings here your bluff catching, so folding top pair here is correct

a decade ago the standard sizing everyone used was 75% pot which is consider big today since we know solver optimized bet sizes are trending towards smaller and smaller sizes

personally my baseline default bet is 50% pot and if i only had a choice of one bet size postflop that would be it, a medium size bet

from that point on i just simply it down towards small thin value bets of 25% in high frequency spots (half of medium), and a polarized big bet of 100% pot in low frequency spots (double of medium)

it might sound too simplistic to pick your bet sizes like your ordering from mcdonalds drive through small medium or large, but it works in practice

finally theres a super size my meal bet size with 2x pot (4x medium) which solver does support but i rarely use this hidden menu item

so basically my simplified postflop bet sizes are incrementing in factor of 2: from 1/4pot to 1/2pot to 1pot to 2xpot

yikes i thought there was enough gto information out there to see some frequency of polar 3bet ranges but apparently no low suited Ax or suited connectors being 3bet for any resemblance of balance here

thx for your input

ive asked this question in various forums and have gotten a wide range of answers so i think its much more complex (like what you described) and simple answer wont suffice

some of the most common ones also contradict one another:
small raise less variance because less risk less reward
big raise less variance because you get more folds
the one that gets 3bet/called less is lesser variance
higher EV or closer to GTO sizing is less variance

my goal with the question is reducing variance in my game and starting from rfi ranges/sizes seem like a good place to begin

nah im not from greece

from those stats this guy is not folding vs 3bet so his range is going to be much wider than his vpip pfr appears to be so this spot is more similar to a standard bvb ranges

normal sb rfi opens 40-50 and defends half the time so they continue with around 25%

this guy opens 32 and does not like to fold and defends 2/3 of the time so ranges are going to be similar to normal frequencies

and with normal bvb ranges im happily stacking off with AA here

what is his SB rfi%, fold vs 3bet% and 4bet%?

his stats indicate super tight and passive which is a valid reason to fold, but if he is raising sets on the flop and 4betting QQ pre then his line is literally only Q9s and im not sure if someone that tight plays that but again its BvB so perhaps so

non diamond river i am calling, this runout i am folding
this is not solver gto play, just using experience and intuition here dudes got boats all day

stop auto piloting 4 tables with 5 rows of hud stats and actually pay attention to people's showdown hands

have enough basic understanding of gto play to know if opponent is allowed to bet that specific hand you saw using their sizes and frequency, then form counterplay strategy to punish

start playing hudless and your intuition will be stronger if u dont have hud numbers distracting you, also playing heads up helps a ton

It is still a concept that holds and with solvers, its application has been identified more accurately. Before solvers, people over evaluated their implied odds in spots like calling with small pairs in every position to set mine, but your opponent wont ever make strong enough of hands to justify your implied odds. In other spots where you open and get 3bet, your implied odds are huge vs stronger ranges that will stack off and make your drawing beyond immediate odds worth it.

10 years ago ppl thought that calling pocket 55 vs UTG was +ev and calling 55 vs blinds 3bet when your otb was -ev. Today we know its the opposite and calling smol pairs preflop is -ev but defending them vs 3bets late is +ev.

Theory snap call but this is under the assumption that villain is playing HU ranges. If this guy is just playing his blind vs blind 6max ranges then flatting the 3bet is fine too, but stacking is fine as well. In real time I have that thought of oh population under 5 bet bluffing but I still call here anyway despite that because theory + you will see enough random garbage more often in HU.

im ganna go with a number between the two winrates and say ~40/bb

which means i think vs passive pool tendencies your better off just blindly double barreling and making your decision at river when it checks to you instead of checking turn and having a to face river decision vs opponent bets

just to clarify, are you asking for the bb/100 for:

1. hero checks back turn after flop cbet
2. hero double barrel turn after flop cbet
   vs.
3. hero checks back turn OR double barrel turn after flop cbet

correct?

ill let OP answer first and refrain from input but i think i know where you are going with this analysis

your turn cbet winrate looks high, check your flop cbet and river cbet for comparison - if everything is high then your just betting too strong value

or it could your not cbetting flops enough and saving all that power for turn cbet

if that is the case, redistribute your range by cbetting more frequently with weaker hands on flop and rivers, and start checking some strong hands so you can defend your river check calls

goal here is to convert that 650bb turn winrate and turning 150 of it to your river check call so that at least your breaking even or winning there

The linear polar range changes you are describing is subjective and can be interpreted many different ways for and against like most heuristic.

The most important thing is that some of your hands that are forced to fold to an optimal 4betting SB get to realize their equity and win sometimes vs a SB that is flatting too wide, which is +ev for those hands. For example, you 3betting Kxs and low Axo and the SB flats QQ/JJ instead of 4betting, you will win the pot 30% of the time and not get that equity denied as opposed to someone that 4bets more aggressively.

The 3bet/4bet strategies BvB are so dynamic and mixed, I personally don't like to categorize it into the linear vs polar ranges that occur in other positions. You can choose to 3bet or call with tons of hands and the EV won't be that different. It's a buffet line range that you can pick and choose and make into a linear/polar/non-binary whatever range you like and still be within the realm of +ev.

The most exploitative lines require you to know what your opponents are doing with different hand types (3betting with A/K/Qx, suited connectors, small pairs? etc) and adjusting by deviating from this highly mixed GTO sim. That mean's not caring about how your range is constructed linearly or polar. Like if you are playing vs fish just drop the mixed strategies for the mid to lower eV hands and pure 3bet the highest EV hands. Your range will then be linear as the consequence of the most exploitative play and so be it. Let the highest ev exploit lines determine the consequence of your range and not the other way around is what I am getting at here.

Using the winrate alone won't tell you the full story since it might be a case of false-positive/negative. Look at the hands your opponents are betting and what your river calling range is in these spots. Cbet check call means you have a medium strength hand and if your opponents are not trying to make those hands indifferent by bluffing then you are overcalling vs value and hence the -winrate. If that is the case you are much better double barreling thinner for value with medium hands on turns and checking back rivers. If your opponents have unbalanced river bet ranges, you can just exploit using the other line previously mentioned rather than being compelled to fully balance a closer to gto river calling range with stronger hands. It's up to your playstyle whether you want to play defense in these spots with GTO or go aggressive with counter-exploits in other areas.

the best play here is probably the easiest line - just barrel and try to get it in with you hit a pair or straight and check give up when you miss

i am pure checking/calling as i think this is the theory default line here with no reads on a better exploitative line

regular table for sure because you can bumhunt and avoid all good regs until you get to a stake where your forced to play them