Constructing a Balanced 3-Bet Range for MTTs

OutlierOutlier Red Chipper Posts: 158 ✭✭
I'm working on my tournament game in preparation for the WSOP and side events around Vegas this summer. My cash game does not include a lot of light 3-betting, so it's something I'd like to work on. I was watching some videos on another training site and was really surprised by some of the hands the author used to populate the bluff side of his 3-bet range.

Example:
Villain opens UTG for 2.5x, hero on the button with QJo and 3-bets a full 3x, 30 BB effective. His range in this spot was roughly AJo, KQo, A2s-A4s, 76s-98s (4% bluffs); value: JJ+,AK+ (3% value).
-I understand using hands like AJo and KQo as light 3-bets for their blocker value. What I couldn't believe was that he threw in the suited connectors 76s-98s. He didn't really give too much explanation on why he included those. In the comments under the video, a discussion broke out over whether the bluff part of the 3-bet range should favor more playable hands or hands that block villains having big hands (KQo, for example)

Questions
-What does your 3-bet range look like?
-How do you construct the bluff part of a 3-bet range?
-Do you prefer blocker value or playability post-flop?
-How does board coverage play a part?
-Do you give any consideration in constructing a 3-bet range to having a balanced range with which to call if villain 4-bets? (assuming sufficient stack depth). In other words, if villain 4-bets, do I want to have some hands in my calling range that aren't pure value?

Comments

  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Jordan Young covers this in his video "Establishing an MTT 3-bet range"... which is also part of the MTT Crash Course.
  • tripletiretripletire Red Chipper Posts: 323 ✭✭✭
    Well first I'd be really careful about making sure you're balanced for the WSOP, almost none of your opponents are going to deconstructing your ranges enough to find your imbalances.

    I'd be changing my strategy quite a bit based off who I'm 3-betting. As a default, I like to 3-bet for isolation/as a bluff with KQo, ATo, QJo, our blocker broadways we could call with but wouldn't be all that happy with. This would against any opposition I assume has a Fv3bet range, which most do. Once I know they are either weak or are opening too loosely and will be overfolding to a 3bet, I would throw in suited connectors and some small pairs as well, along with more Ax to block his value.

    If villain 4bets you, you can typically comfortably fold all of your junk. I guess this is where you're worried about being exploited, but I wouldn't advise to think that way. It's ok to leave yourself open to exploitation sometimes, they're not going to see your folds. And once the villain you light 3bet 4bets you a second time, you can start to focus on value 3bets against him.
  • OutlierOutlier Red Chipper Posts: 158 ✭✭
    Thanks @tripletire. Why would you add suited connectors to your light 3-bet range vs an over-folder? Is just a convenient way to widen your range incrementally? Or are there other reasons why you'd pick suited connectors over, say suited K-x hands?

    I realize balanced 3-bet ranges aren't really relevant issue vs most competition in smaller buy-in tournaments, but I want to have a "next gear" available if I make a deep run and run up against better competition.

    @kagey I've watched Jordan's video and have pretty good notes on it. I'm more curious about the thinking/theory behind the construction of the bluff part of the 3-bet range.
  • tripletiretripletire Red Chipper Posts: 323 ✭✭✭
    edited May 2017
    It's a convenient way to widen your range for sure, plus it helps to even out your holdings and make you less predictable. I suppose if you're only 3-betting an opponent who will never read into those things, you could just use A and some K blockers, but like you said it's a great range building skill to work on for when you do run into strong opposition.
  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Outlier wrote: »
    I've watched Jordan's video and have pretty good notes on it. I'm more curious about the thinking/theory behind the construction of the bluff part of the 3-bet range.
    @Outlier ... tourney 3-betting range is tricky.
    especially when you compare online to live tournies....

    when you're playing around with the "bluff" part of it... I'd say you want to reach a leverage point where you risk the least to get the most...

    for example - blinds are 1k/2k with 300 ante... so 6 k is in the pot... a wide opener makes it 6k out of his 40k stack... you're on the button with (whatever) and you make it 17k out of your 50k stack... obviously he's now thinking should I call or should I shove? You've reached a leverage point... he can't call 11k more and fold on the flop.

    now what hands would you do this with?
    me?? I'd like to have at least an Ace in my hand. maybe even a suited Ace in case my read on V is he's got a medium pair but he's saying F-it!

    I believe the general theory behind 3-bet bluffing in tourney typically relies on position, card removal, stack depths and table image. (but for $250 you can ask Matt & Chin yourself tomorrow at the S4Y tourney webinar! LOL)

    Personally - I've rarely found the need or use for 3-bet bluffing because (except for my recent Monster Stack tourney) I rarely seem to be in a situation where the stacks are deep and we've got a crazy amount of BBs. In one of the few Jonathon Little vids that I watched - I think the only time he was 3-betting (bluffing or for value) was during his Main Event run.

    hope this helps.
  • SaintsTigersSaintsTigers Red Chipper Posts: 244 ✭✭
    kagey wrote: »
    Outlier wrote: »
    I've watched Jordan's video and have pretty good notes on it. I'm more curious about the thinking/theory behind the construction of the bluff part of the 3-bet range.
    @Outlier ... tourney 3-betting range is tricky.
    especially when you compare online to live tournies....

    when you're playing around with the "bluff" part of it... I'd say you want to reach a leverage point where you risk the least to get the most...

    for example - blinds are 1k/2k with 300 ante... so 6 k is in the pot... a wide opener makes it 6k out of his 40k stack... you're on the button with (whatever) and you make it 17k out of your 50k stack... obviously he's now thinking should I call or should I shove? You've reached a leverage point... he can't call 11k more and fold on the flop.

    now what hands would you do this with?
    me?? I'd like to have at least an Ace in my hand. maybe even a suited Ace in case my read on V is he's got a medium pair but he's saying F-it!

    I believe the general theory behind 3-bet bluffing in tourney typically relies on position, card removal, stack depths and table image. (but for $250 you can ask Matt & Chin yourself tomorrow at the S4Y tourney webinar! LOL)

    Personally - I've rarely found the need or use for 3-bet bluffing because (except for my recent Monster Stack tourney) I rarely seem to be in a situation where the stacks are deep and we've got a crazy amount of BBs. In one of the few Jonathon Little vids that I watched - I think the only time he was 3-betting (bluffing or for value) was during his Main Event run.

    hope this helps.

    20bb and 25bb stacks are too short to make this play. Also, sizing to 17k risks 34% of hero's stack. Why risk so much of your stack on a bluff v. a player who shouldn't be opening light? If you do 3bet bluff, stacks should generally be at +30 bbs, preferably more.

    To OP, I think you got some bad info from the video. The UTG+1 raiser's range should be pretty narrow since he's in EP. Instead, look to 3bet bluff v. the late middle position and late position players who are more likely to be stealing. Also, my default for 3bet bluffing is to have a blocker unless we're deep stacked. You're not looking to play multiple streets with suited connector type hands off a 30bb stack. You're risking too much of your stack. Just make it a one street play and 3bet with a blocker.
  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 2017
    Also, sizing to 17k risks 34% of hero's stack. Why risk so much of your stack on a bluff v. a player who shouldn't be opening light? If you do 3bet bluff, stacks should generally be at +30 bbs, preferably more.

    bluffing should be part of your balanced 3-bet range
    sample stack was 50bb
    not recommending you do this without a solid image, a strong read on V or blockers...

    was simply providing a sample hand that showcases "leverage"
  • SaintsTigersSaintsTigers Red Chipper Posts: 244 ✭✭
    Can you give a better example of a 3bet leverage play? I've read that example a few times and it looks like $2k big blind, villain has $40k or 20 bigs, and hero has a $50k stack and the example says 3bet to $17k (so basically a jam on villain).
  • MonadMonad Red Chipper Posts: 1,004 ✭✭✭✭
    Don't 3! this pre. Don't even call with it at your stack size. "Exploiting" early position opens is generally a stupid thing to do.

Leave a Comment

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