Having a postflop 3-bet bluffing range on a range-advantage board

splashbrossplashbros Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
6 max 10NL $10 effective
Hero raises to $0.30 in MP with 77s. Both blinds call. Flop is Kd 9h 5s. Hero c-bets for $0.30. SB folds. BB raises to $1.20. Hero 3-bets to $3. BB folds.

My rationale taking this line: Flop is range advantageous for me, however being multiway, I'm splitting my frequencies between betting/checking. With 77s, I think betting 1/3 pot is better than checking back for protection purposes. When BB decides to raise 4x my bet, my thinking is that he shouldn't have too many value flop raises in this spot. Villain has roughly 15 value combos (99, 55, K9). His bluffs/mergey protection raises would come from the 5x and 9x region. Villain may also be raising some KX such as KQ and KJ, though less likely. I obviously can't call with 77s here despite having a backdoor straight and the naked 7 to improve so I choose to 3-bet as a bluff since it is one of my lowest equity hands. Didn't think I needed to 3-bet too big as villain is going to be quite inelastic here.

Any thoughts? I feel that a lot of players tend to overfold such spots on a dry range advantageous board.

Comments

  • AkashicAkashic Red Chipper Posts: 100 ✭✭
    edited June 15
    I liked the play. Most players think the 1/3 pot on the flop is the "bet for information" play because most players do that. So they are conditioned to raise when they see an underbet sizing. BB should be respecting that you have range advantage on this king high flop. He won't be connecting hard on this flop. He should have waited for a turn check-raise or a future probe bet.

    You could have also double-barreled for a larger sizing on the flop and turn (again thanks to range advantage). There are a lot of overcards to come out to your pair, but you would still have range advantage either way. This line would likely reduce the chance BB check-raises.
  • splashbrossplashbros Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    Akashic wrote: »
    I liked the play. Most players think the 1/3 pot on the flop is the "bet for information" play because most players do that. So they are conditioned to raise when they see an underbet sizing. BB should be respecting that you have range advantage on this king high flop. He won't be connecting hard on this flop. He should have waited for a turn check-raise or a future probe bet.

    You could have also double-barreled for a larger sizing on the flop and turn (again thanks to range advantage). There are a lot of overcards to come out to your pair, but you would still have range advantage either way. This line would likely reduce the chance BB check-raises.

    Thanks for pointing out ''players conditioned to raise when they see an underbet sizing'', didn't think about that aspect which would definitely lend him to having more bluffs.
    I agree with you that a larger sizing on the flop reduces BB check-raising frequency. However, using that larger size would also narrow his continuing range and he would be more condensed to hands that have 77s beat. The protection bet (betting small) benefits outweighs the negative event in which BB check raises.
  • RyanH1995RyanH1995 Red Chipper Posts: 89 ✭✭
    I agree that you typically want to be betting smaller in multiway pots but don't see much of a reason to bet this hand. You block some of the draws you want protection from like 76 and 87 and value own yourself against Kx and 9x. 77 doesn't block any of BB value range and is in pretty bad shape when your 3bet gets called. It looks like your small size may have induced a bluff but I think this favors the argument for checking. Why give your opponent the opportunity to x/r you especially when you have a marginal hand when you can just check back?
  • splashbrossplashbros Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    RyanH1995 wrote: »
    I agree that you typically want to be betting smaller in multiway pots but don't see much of a reason to bet this hand. You block some of the draws you want protection from like 76 and 87 and value own yourself against Kx and 9x. 77 doesn't block any of BB value range and is in pretty bad shape when your 3bet gets called. It looks like your small size may have induced a bluff but I think this favors the argument for checking. Why give your opponent the opportunity to x/r you especially when you have a marginal hand when you can just check back?

    I agree with you that 77s isn't exactly the best bluff to pull from given that I do block some gutshots, would rather do this with say 44s. However, checking back 77s there and letting 2 opponents see a free turn where half the deck is bad for me doesn't sound that good to me. I'd much rather try and fold out the cumulative equity share of 2 opponents by betting small. If my 3-bet gets called, I'm shutting down barring a miracle 7. Pertaining to the last point about just checking back to avoid being check-raised, if I check back, I don't really see a way I can reach showdown or win the pot as I can't really bluff-catch with 77s given its unblocking qualities you have listed facing a bet on the turn or river.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 3,833 -
    Might this be a case in which trying to win the pot through aggression is simply -EV?
    Moderation In Moderation
  • RyanH1995RyanH1995 Red Chipper Posts: 89 ✭✭
    It will be difficult to get to showdown or win with 77 here but how many hands do you get to fold here? Probably 22-44 and some Ace highs that you're already ahead of. If BB were to just call and the turn checks through you will have a hard time bluff catching rivers so why create a bigger pot when you're very likely to fold later on in the hand? You will have plenty of Kx and other PP to continue with on turns and rivers so I don't think you have to prioritize winning with a hand like 77 that is towards the middle/bottom of your range in this situation.
  • splashbrossplashbros Red Chipper Posts: 11 ✭✭
    RyanH1995 wrote: »
    It will be difficult to get to showdown or win with 77 here but how many hands do you get to fold here? Probably 22-44 and some Ace highs that you're already ahead of. If BB were to just call and the turn checks through you will have a hard time bluff catching rivers so why create a bigger pot when you're very likely to fold later on in the hand? You will have plenty of Kx and other PP to continue with on turns and rivers so I don't think you have to prioritize winning with a hand like 77 that is towards the middle/bottom of your range in this situation.

    Folding out those hands you mentioned seems like a good enough reason to me. Sure, there will be times I get called and be beat. So we have to discern whether the underbet will generate enough fold equity to outweigh the times we get called and are beat, and for me I think its a clear yes.

Leave a Comment

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