Flop Cbet Range Construction

Martin DMartin D Red Chipper Posts: 50 ✭✭
Backstory to this post:-

So I'm going through the core program, I am at the section on double barreling. Watched the video where Splitsuit makes a comment about not taking a b/x/b line while working through examples of double barrelling for value.

I decide to work through a turn barrel spot then and there, fire up HM2 and one of the first hands I find is one where I take this b/x/b line. Awesome, seems like a good spot to study and pull out a mistake. However I come to the conclusion that villain is continuing with ~66% of his range and that his range has me smashed. Seems like checking turn was a good idea.

So I went back to the flop to see if cbetting there was a mistake. I am currently trying to increase my average flop cbet% as at ~40% its far too low. So I have an interest in increasing my betting ranges beyond what I would normally consider solid.

***

I'm playing 10NL on iPoker. Villain is a reg at these stakes. I have 1.5k hands on him, he plays 27/21/10 and is to my mind slightly under aggressive post flop - 27 afreq%, cbets all streets at roughly 50%, folds vs flop cbet 60% of the time. He doesn't autobet against missed cbets. I've noticed that while some players change tables when I'm playing with them and there's no obvious targets with us he specifically doesn't, often joins my tables and is happy to play HU with me. So he probably thinks I'm some kind of fish.

Here is the action up to the decision point I'm looking at.

IPoker, $0.05/$0.10 No Limit Hold'em Cash, 5 Players
Poker Tools Powered By Holdem Manager - The Ultimate Poker Software Suite.

SB: $11.35 (113.5 bb)
BB: $10 (100 bb)
Hero (MP): $12.21 (122.1 bb)
CO: $10.33 (103.3 bb)
BTN: $7.10 (71 bb)

Preflop: Hero is MP with Jdiamond4.gif Jspade4.gif
Hero raises to $0.30, CO calls $0.30, BTN calls $0.30, 2 folds

Flop: ($1.05) 9spade4.gif 2diamond4.gif Kspade4.gif (3 players)
Hero bets $0.60, CO calls $0.60, BTN folds

This is the sort of hand that I used to check back a lot, but in an effort to get my betting frequencies up its one that I've been throwing in semi regularly in boards about this wet or wetter.

I expect to have a range advantage here. I have more and stronger Kx, more big PPs, all possible sets. I expect him to call a cbet with Kx, 9x, JJ/TT, flush draws and gutshots. Maybe BDFDs. JJ has approx 48% equity against that calling range.

Here is a flopzilla screenshot of my preflop range and my postflop combos. The hands selected for the filter are what I would by default cbet. Top pair and better, and all my draws including BDFDs. Oh look, its 40% of my available combos!!

pDhxAMC.png


So, where would you find extra combos? I note that I've already got more made value hands than draws/bluffs.

Betting JJ, TT and maybe A9s gets me up to about 50% cbet frequency. That's approximately my current solution to the problem. But they aren't massive winners despite being "value" hands. Should I be betting these, or should I be betting stuff with less showdown value?

I could get a similar number of combos by betting all my AQ runner-runner straight draws which also have a strong over and block Kx slightly. Would that be a better option?

Or should I be doing both, since villain folds to cbets a lot and that would get me near 60% betting frequency? Or neither since I'm OOP vs a moderately strong player?

I don't really fancy a check heavy range on this board but am I wrong not to do so?





I appreciate your efforts in reading this wall of text, and look forward to any comments

Comments

  • AlpineCurtAlpineCurt Red Chipper Posts: 25 ✭✭
    edited June 7
    Happy to jump on board this exercise! What about trying this: with this board and your range, find how many value combos you have, then add in the best bluff candidates at the appropriate ratio of approximately 2 bluff combos for every 1 value combo (bracing for rebuttal on that ratio). This is your CBet frequency in this spot. What does it look like? Your CBet frequency will change depending on your range, opponent's range, and the board. Sometimes your range will connect so hard with the board that your value combos do make up 80%+ of your CBet range which when combined with bluffs leads to a situation where your CBet frequency is 100%. Other times your range misses the board just as much and your value combos + bluffs results in a CBet of 25% or less (Looking for feedback here: is that a good way to assess range advantage?) Don't feel like you need to continue with a specific frequency in every spot. If my thinking is way off base here, someone please call me out on it!

    Remember to save some value combos for your checking range so it doesn't become too weak and face up. (Is every top pair a value combo? Would it be better check some of these for turn and/or river bets on likely runouts?) Doing this would also help fix the issue of already having more made hands than bluffs/draws.

    Taking a b/x/b line isn't automatically bad. Doing it too much or in spots where it isn't ideal is the problem. Don't feel like you need to always avoid it. In your example hand vs most players, you are unlikely to get called on three streets by a hand worse than a pair of kings. You'll have to check somewhere.

    Please take everything I'm saying with a big grain of salt. I'm still learning and experimenting with this as well. More than open to feedback/corrections on my thinking here. Wanted to show your post some love.
  • PapaGiorgioPapaGiorgio Red Chipper Posts: 55 ✭✭
    I've been waiting for other replies since spots like these are also leaks in my game. But, I'll add to the discussion. I think @AlpineCurt is on the right track on how to build ranges and examining overall CB frequency. In this hand, though, you are OOP, which will make you less likely to CB your value hands. A 50% cbet is probably OK, but those other times when you check need to include some check-calling combos. I like CB with hands that can play for big pots on good turn cards, such as AsX or JsJx. TP hands could be good x/c hands since you really only have 1-2 streets of value. Moreover, the delayed CB might induce a call from 9x or 88, both of which might have folded to a flop CB and now add value to your hand.

    What range do you think CO calls with PF? What is CO's flop calling and flop raising range? CO's range may give you a better picture of how you should proceed in the hand.
  • AlpineCurtAlpineCurt Red Chipper Posts: 25 ✭✭
    In this hand, though, you are OOP, which will make you less likely to CB your value hands. A 50% cbet is probably OK, but those other times when you check need to include some check-calling combos.

    This is what I'm getting at with why you need to save some stronger holdings for your checking range. You need to have hands that can stand up to pressure from the CO. Especially if the opponent is very aggressive and likely to bet when they see weakness. Your stats and reads that this opponent doesn't automatically bet missed cbets just makes your job easier. Your checking range just doesn't need to be as strong as it would vs an aggressive player.
    Moreover, the delayed CB might induce a call from 9x or 88, both of which might have folded to a flop CB and now add value to your hand.

    This is an excellent point and I regularly employ this.

    So, @Martin D, after constructing your value, bluff, and checking ranges, where does JJ fall? Do this process again for the turn, keeping in mind your opponent's range has narrowed based on the action.

    As always, someone please refute me if you sense the blind leading the blind here.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,427 ✭✭✭✭
    First of all I'm going to address only your range construction question. There were plenty of questions in your OP, but I'm going to focus on it.
    Martin D wrote: »
    pDhxAMC.png


    So, where would you find extra combos? I note that I've already got more made value hands than draws/bluffs.

    First thing first, you have to know WHY you are betting. What do you try to realize ? Against which range ? What do you expect as reaction (and with which V's range) ? Whom does the board favor?
    Sometimes you'd rather check; sometimes you'd rather bet.

    Now let's continue assuming you need to bet more

    *****

    In your flopzilla screenshot - also click the button to validate your choice, it makes easier for us to read on the graph which combo continue - you don't c-bet with any pair below KX. Why?
    A bit further you propose to c-bet A9. Why not Q9 ? 98? 97?
    If you c-bet 9X, why not c-bet 88? 33 ?

    On the other side, you propose to add ALL bckd FD... but some are really weak. Do you really c-bet :6D: :5D: only bc you've bckd FD ? Do you know that in that case you've 7% equity? I can be ok for a combo draw with :DIAMOND: bckd FD, but a naked bckd FD ?!

    Out of the blue, this is what I'd c-bet with based on your preflop range and without much consideration about Villain's profile - this is just for you to see further combos to add in a c-bet range
    Also since there are easily gutshot and FD, I don't intend to only fire 1 barrel what so ever.

    ekrg3kmirazv.png


    Last but not least, don't forget what range you're targeting. If Villain continue with many bad made hand (42s, 66, 98o, etc.), then I'm on board to c-bet JJ.
    But if Villain is rather sticky on draws, then :JS: :JD: is more meh to c-bet, because you homogeneously block draws: :SPADE: FD (AsJs, QsJs, JsTs, Js8s, others?) and gutshots (QJ, JT). :JD: blocks some nice combos as well, like :JD: :9D:


    And for some last thoughts: your PFR is IMHO not great. You open Q9s but not KJo ? Why not QJo ? JTo ? Why discriminate A3s and A2s (personally I prefer A2s-A5s to A6s-A9s) ?
    Especially in a 5-handed game and not full ring ?
  • AlpineCurtAlpineCurt Red Chipper Posts: 25 ✭✭
    @Red I understand equities of many hands in a range at the flop can be pretty close which can cause some choices to be a personal preference. That said, I have some questions about your choices for your CBet range here.

    Why are you choosing to check Adxd? It seems like those would be good BDFD bluffs with decent equity, plus could you see them as value bets vs a draw heavy range?

    Why are betting every pocket pair? Is this based on the assumption that, again, opponent's range will be draw heavy and you don't want to allow any free cards?
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,427 ✭✭✭✭
    edited June 9
    In my bluffing range I usually have a mix of good to nutted draws (like AsXs here) and hands without showdown value (like 44 here).
    Hands like Ad7d have only bckd potential (weak draw) and have SDV (A high). I'd rather check flop with - and happy to have it on turn to bet if a :DIAMOND: or A comes

    This is but no universal rule, only my way to build my ranges
  • Martin DMartin D Red Chipper Posts: 50 ✭✭
    @red I'm on mobile and I'll put more detail in later (I put a bit in on his calling range in the OP?) but as to why I want to bet - he folds the flop 60% of the time on average Vs a Cbet, so in a vacuum cbetting ATC is profitable.

    Additionally I frequently find myself without any bluffs come the river. This is due to being too tight on the flop. Hence why I'm looking for more hands.

    Now I don't want to do that, but I do want to find more than 40% betting hands.

    However, the 65dd Vs 2 random overs question is one to look at. As is the random pp as a bluff question. I'll take a look when I get home from work.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,427 ✭✭✭✭
    Ok. Waiting for all the details tho
  • Martin DMartin D Red Chipper Posts: 50 ✭✭
    So this is how I see his preflop range calling here - I'm not 100% he might be a little tighter or a little looser.

    m3fpdCm.png

    I've got him calling here somewhat more than his average fold vs cbet - thats probably fine as hes IP. Not convinced he doesnt throw away the gutshots at least sometimes though. Nevertheless I have a profitable cbet.

    As to not betting PPs lower than KK, I think I mentioned that this would be my default and that I have a bad habit of not cbetting flop at a high enough frequency, especially a spot like this where this cbet is vacuum profitable with ATC. One of the things I tend to do is check back too much of my range otf especially 2nd pairs and PPs <tp.

    I believe I can add in (against an averageish reg like this one) atleast all PPs greater than 9x and A9s.

    I do not want to bet worse 9x and middling PPs eg 88 because they aren't ahead of his calling range and I expect him to mostly check back his complete air rather than bluff at the missed cbet (although he probably bets his stronger draws), so I can get closer to a showdown without narrowing his range at this point. This could be wrong, feel free to let me know what you think.

    As regards hands like 33, and in particular the choice between them and 65dd for the BDFD, its about turn barrelling opportunities.

    65dd hits a FD on the turn 20% of the time, a gutshot 16% of the time and a low pair (call it a 5 out 2pr/trips draw) 12% of the time. So 48% of the time I hit a turn draw that I'm *potentially* happy barrelling again. If I don't hit one of these ott thats fine, my hand is now air and I can X/F.

    33 is a 2 outer to a set. Sets are a lot stronger than the draws 65 turns, but its only 4% of the time. Every other card in the deck degrades its value. Judging by the flopzilla screenshot I put there I think his flop calling range is value heavy and only about a third of it is draws, and I'm not all that comfortable firing a turn barrel here even though my hand is the best sometimes.

    So that's why I'm more comfortable cbetting 65dd than 33. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I should be barreling both.

    I mentioned potentially cbetting all my combos of AQ as a bluff in the OP. this is because (a) they block KQ, which is his best TP, and (b) hitting the ace nearly always gives me the best hand, and hitting the Q is pretty decent too. It does block a lot of his gutshots too, and I'm not 100% sure he always calls a cbet with them, but thats only 8 combos and I'm pretty sure he has 12 of KQ (prior to blocking). I'm pretty sure this is a decent idea and I should probably be bluffing more with hands that block villains best top pair in these sorts of boards.

    Please feel free to disagree with me, I'm posting this to have a discussion :)




    As regards PFR - I think theres some personal style going on here as regards Q9s vs KJo etc. I tend to play suited to keep the total number of PFR combos down in earlier positions, and while both of them are prone to domination at least I've got more boards I can bluff at with the suited hands. In tournament/shorter stack situations I'm trying to undo this and just look for more raw pair power, so my range dumps a lot of the suited stuff and hands like KJo drop back in, but this is cash.

    Choosing between A6/7s and A3/2s is a bit whatever, but I've gone back and had another look and I would get better overall board coverage by playing A3/2s. So thats another thing to think about. I do find however that on wheel draw potential boards people get perhaps more paranoid about the wheel than is strictly necessary. Struggling to put that thought into numbers right now.



  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,427 ✭✭✭✭
    Martin D wrote: »
    So this is how I see his preflop range calling here - I'm not 100% he might be a little tighter or a little looser.

    m3fpdCm.png
    This chart is weird.
    Why would he call with A4s-A5s? Or why wouldn't he with AJo ? (Plus some other marginal like why not KJo or QJo or... ?)
    Also - but I can't tell since you gave no info / stats about Villain - a 12% calling range seem swaaaaaay too tight to. (But I might be live-game biased)

    Finally and just for presentation: it's bizarre that the selection is enable (the green dot saying "75 out of 141..." but the chart doesn't show the choices (like AQo should be in grey for ex).
    Martin D wrote: »
    I believe I can add in (against an averageish reg like this one) atleast all PPs greater than 9x and A9s.

    I do not want to bet worse 9x and middling PPs eg 88 because they aren't ahead of his calling range and I expect him to mostly check back his complete air rather than bluff at the missed cbet (although he probably bets his stronger draws), so I can get closer to a showdown without narrowing his range at this point. This could be wrong, feel free to let me know what you think.

    ...

    You really have to think about WHY you are betting. Some things make no sense in these paragraphs. It looks like betting is only value betting (putting money in the middle by getting called by a worst hand) to you... and you forget the bluff (making a better hand fold).
    That for example the point of betting worst 9X and middle PPs: you are not looking to get called, you are looking to find a fold with JJ for example.

    Now if Villain is a station, you don't want to bluff him. On the other hand, if Villain is weak folder, you want to overbluff (sometimes up to any two cards).

    I strongly advise you to dig into Ed Miller's 1% which will surely helps you a lot. RCP added pro videos about this book recently too.

  • Martin DMartin D Red Chipper Posts: 50 ✭✭
    I think you might be live game biased. To be honest that calling range looks somewhat wide to me and includes a number of hands both top and bottom that could be 3betting instead.

    I mentioned this in the OP but it probably would have borne repeating "Villain is a reg at these stakes. I have 1.5k hands on him, he plays 27/21/10 and is to my mind slightly under aggressive post flop - 27 afreq%, cbets all streets at roughly 50%, folds vs flop cbet 60% of the time. He doesn't autobet against missed cbets. " So he's got an average calling range across all spots of 6%. I'm not sure exactly what factor I should put in for calling in position in the CO versus an opener that he likes to play against, but with 3 players to follow..... but doubling that percentage seems like a starter for 10. Also notice that he 3bets more often than he flats.

    As regards A4/A5s..... I don't know exactly how many suited aces he plays here. Some people might only play ATs+, some will play all suited Aces. I dont know for certain, but I do know a lot of online guys would rather play A4/5s than A6/7s because they are equally easily dominated but have the wheel draw. What would you give him?

    I'm not sure why his folding range isn't greyed out, sorry. I tried this time ^^

    As to why I'm betting, I have quite a clearly defined range here. A9s or better I'm betting for value, although in some cases (specifically A9) the value is thin as I'll only be beating worse second pairs and draws. This is also why I'm drawing the line there, if worse second pairs are no longer value

    My other hands (AQ, all draws including BDFDs) are bluffs. They are all bluffs that have some equity, and some of them can stand a raise, but they are still bluffs. Side note, I've expanded my bluffs to include anything with a

    As a side note, I'm going to go away and see what percentage of this cbetting range can stand a raise. This particular villain raises flop cbets more than 10% of the time and I dont want to increase my betting frequency at a cost of being *too* vulnerable. Second Sidenote, I should recalculate my turn barreling odds taking out hands he might have raised flop with sometimes, but I'm not entirely sure where to draw the lines there. I dont really know if he balances his raising flop range or just bets his sets, probably the former with that percentage.


    So I now have the following range:-

    JSbA7UW.png

    Maybe I should be polarising even more and checking back a few more hands in the middle of my range.

    On the other hand, I still have a not quite 60% betting frequency, and a ~1:1 bluff value ratio. Checking more midrange hands back would help with one but hinder the other.

    I need to do more work here



Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file