# atrij

1 points

So one resason for snowie's choice could be that fold equity differs. I think you could make an argument that a big portion of the value of squeezing comes from putting the initial raiser with the completely uncapped range into a difficult decision. He has to decide whether to continue with another player still being active behind. And this is where the spot with the BTN coldcaller sucks a lot more for the initial raiser. For one BTN being trapping with some strong hands is way more likely than the SB doing something like this. Then, even if the coldcaller didn't trap it's way more unfavourable for the initial raiser to possibly be OOP to the coldcaller if he decides to come along as well - whereas he will always have the best position no matter what happens in the example with the SB.

I tend to agree with this reasoning. BTW, I have watched those video's on 3-betting. But i wasn't able to relate the way you did.

### Jan. 9, 2019 | 10:20 a.m.

The first photo is Co open and BTN flat
The second is, BTN open- SB flat
I will reframe my question:
While squeezing, is it necessary to always use a linear squeezing range ?

### Jan. 9, 2019 | 7:49 a.m.

I was using pokersnowie preflop advisor to understand squeezing ranges from blinds. I observed 2 patterns

1. When the cold caller is not SB, software advises to use a polar range is suggested

Below is the squeeze range from BB when CO opens and BTN cold calls

2. When the cold caller is SB , a linear range is suggested
Squeeze range from BB when BTN opens and SB flat calls

Question:
can anyone explain why there is difference in strategies between the the 2 situations, i.e. Polar vs Linear

### Jan. 8, 2019 | 8:32 p.m.

Can you share the excel workbook for reference