3 betting with 22-66 at higher limits

[Paluka]

I've gone back to playing 30-60 and 100-200 on pokerstars a bit lately, along wiht 80-160 on UB. I've seen a lot of people 3 betting with small pairs preflop, and I'm not talking about the button 3 betting the cutoff. I'm saying I raise under the gun, and then some guy 3 bets me with 22 in a full game. I talked with El Diablo a bit about this yesterday, and now Nate tha Great has said a ton of smart stuff in some threads today that got me thinking more.
Mainstream 2+2 theory says you fold small pairs against early raisers. So I have a few questions:

a) is this just a breakevenish type play that some high-limit guys do to "mix it up"
b) if it is a winner, who is it good against and why is mainstream poker theory so wrong here?
c) what is the best way to punish the people who make this play?

[stoxtrader]

awesome post. let me do some thinking on this and attempt a thoughtful response.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

I am a big proponent of doing this given that there's a reasonable chance that I will get it HU with position agaisnt what i would feel is a predictable range of hands.

nate tha great and i have a history of doing this to each other, but i'm sure he can explain it better than i.

[sthief09]

yeah, and how bout you 3-betting my UTG raise from MP with 44 and me folding AQ on a QJT board to your stupid ass

[Chris Daddy Cool]

ok in my own attempt to answer your questions...

a) is this just a breakevenish type play that some high-limit guys do to "mix it up"

if not abused and done in right spots, i believe it is a marginally +EV play.

b) if it is a winner, who is it good against and why is mainstream poker theory so wrong here?

I wouldn't go as far as to say mainstream poker theory is "so wrong" in the sense that it's pretty EV-neutral and variance adding that it probably isn't worth doing. my theory is that it can work against tight predictable opponents. for example, say i see a typical 20/8 player raise in EP and its folded to me in the CO with 55. if i feel the blinds are reasonably tight i will 3-bet here more often than not. you will have a understanding on his range of hands here, AK-AT, KQ-KJ while he will not have a good grasp of your hands. also it adds to bluffing possibilities on the flop and you could get him to even fold a hand like TT on a A high flop. for the most part againgst typical raising hands, a poketpair will be a slight favorite since statisically speaking there are more big ace, broadway type combinations than big pocket pair combinations.

so in short i would advise doing this agaisnt tight predictable not too aggressive opponents or perhaps someone who you feel respects your play/image. (raising against a loose raiser is actually okay too since there is a greater chance your hand is better than his but it makes it harder to play because his aggression may push you off your hand postflop)

NOTE: it is very important if you do try to do this that you are able to make this a HU hand because there is nothing worse than playing a 4 handed pot with 33 for 3 bets.

c) what is the best way to punish the people who make this play?

punish them with aggression and put them to the test. however it sucks because you are out of posision and you won't always know what he has. in fact you really just have to conceede the pot to him in most instances on most flops if you have something like AJ or KQ and you get 3-bet and brick on the flop despite his history of 3-betting you with 77-22, there's also the greter risk of domination and an actual premium hand as well. but if you actually flop a made hand or a good draw i would push it harder against him than normal.

i would also suggest perhaps capping wih a wider range of hands as well agaisnt these types of players.

[1800GAMBLER]

This is just a blend of a ton of theories.

1. It's weight, somewhat, by hot and cold you are putting money in -EV. The obvious EV theory.

2. However, doing this with x,x isn't that far away from breakeven. You're risking about 2:1. Normal bluff theory

3. Then the lowball theory of the person who only opens with the best hand, a UTG raise either has a pair or high cards and by the flop you know exact which, and thus play perfect then.

4. Game theory, without this it wouldn't work, if utg knew the button would raise AA 22 AT and play perfect against it (something like calling the flop and betting any turn card) then it wouldn't show a profit.

So for it to work, in order you need 1. an opponent who doesn't know you will raise this hand and thus can't play accordindly 2. an a opponent who will drop hands pretty quickly so your bluff EV isn't far from breakeven yet made up to +EV since you can still win with a pair 3. An opponent who you have great control over postflop and wont mix things up with Ahigh 4. An opponent who you aren't totally effed against preflop, i.e. something who would only raise AA KK.

These reasons are why it only happens at high limits and isn't in book books.

The reason it only happens from the CO or button is because the play is so close that even if a few players still have cards the equity has gone.

[Luke]

Really good post Paluka. I'm sure the others like stox and Nate will smoke me with their responses, but I'm still going to offer some thoughts to the questions.


a) is this just a breakevenish type play that some high-limit guys do to "mix it up"

My guess is that there is an element of "mixing it up" but the good players are fairly selective in choosing when and against whom to make these 3-bets so that they are profitable.


b) if it is a winner, who is it good against and why is mainstream poker theory so wrong here?

I think it can be a winner if the original raiser is tight and fairly straightforward. By that I mean if they're not going to cap with a wider range than AA-JJ, AK, and there are going to a lot of checking and folding on the flop and turn with unimproved big cards or pocket pairs facing overcards, then this play might be a winner.

I think this 3-bet can also be profitable if the raiser is the type who is LAGish preflop but tightens up postflop to aggression. But against most loose players, it's going to be tough to make this play as they will be constantly making correct calls to their overcards postflop.


c) what is the best way to punish the people who make this play?

If they're not doing it very often, then I don't think there's a whole lot you can do or want to do to alter your strategy.

As you notice them doing this more frequently, I'd start checkraising a more liberally on both the flop and turn. To keep this strategy profitable, they're going to have to bet these hands down to the river to protect against overcards and this is where we need to extract some money.

Luke

[ggbman]

In my humble opinion, a move like this should only be done in certain circumstances. First of all, you have to be pretty sure that you will get heads up most of the time. Position is also important obviously, because if you do this from MP2, there is much more of a chance that someone will pick up a hand. The game your playing in must be pretty tight overall, because some players simply don't fold 88 on a K 10 3 flop. If you can't get people of medium pairs on these boards, your equity drops a lot. Also if it's a loose-passive game, it's probably better to encourage multi-way action and try hit your set. I think 3 betting can be profitable in some circumstances, but they are very situational and this should by no meands become a defualt line with small pairs.

gabe

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
i would also suggest perhaps capping wih a wider range of hands as well agaisnt these types of players.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems like the obvious defense mechanism. I'm trying to de-program myself from making auto decisions about whether to cap or not preflop.

[goofball]

Me too. For about a week this was a very good play to make on party poker, people were giving a lot more respect to you if you open raised from teh CO and capped when the blind 3bet then if you just called the 3bet. Now it's gotten so everyone and their mother is making this play. As always, when you find yourself in the majority it's time to pause and reflect.

I've also noticed a lot of people not capping only their premium hands the last couple of days. I think the good thing to do for now is to move back to value capping. People won't believe you when you cap and might just actually giveyou more credit then you deserive if you just call the 3bet.

[J.A.Sucker]

I think a better play is often to call 2 bets cold, especially near the button or on it. You should also mix this up with a few other hands, which I know you can figure out. If you are headsup, then great. If the blinds/button tag along, then great.

I can tell you a worse play is to play these small pairs up front yourself, though. You get isolated with a cold-call or three bet too often by good players.

[theBruiser500]

This is pretty obvious, but seems like the most salient point here to me. The advantage of getting HU vs. two overcards is small compared to the bad situations that can occur from 3 bet isolating, and these bad situatoins aren't infrequent. Getting capped from behind, and getting capped from the guy you're isolating and finding yourself up against a higher pair or being bluffed out even when they just have overcards on a board like TJx where you can't do anything.

[antifish225]

I think this is an excellent move, if used selectivly, especially in live action games if you have a very solid table image....assuming it is UTG or UTG+1 raising and you are next to act you really have a 3-bet or fold decision as you do not want to take your mini-pair into a field - the more solid your table image the more likley that this isolation play will work......I use this move very selectivly if a few circumstances are present; (a) The original raiser is predicatble and I can put them on big cards AND the original rasier will most likley only CAP with a big pair and call with two unpaired big cards, (b) the blinds and remaining LP's are tight players who will likley not call cold unless they have a very premium hand, (c) My table image is solid (I generally have a very solid table image, when I thre bet most of the table will be putting me on a big pair). If you have a looser table image I think this will be a much harder play to make as condition b is vital to make this play work....jmho (and 80% of my play is live, so no real opinion as to how this would differ in the P15 game as I only play infrequently)...

[Michael Davis]

After a recent post I made when I responded somewhat churlishly to Mason's post, I did go back and reread Feeney. I suspect many high limit players are overusing this play, just as I was (at much lower limits). However, since openraising standards tend to be lower in the big games, perhaps it's a better play there.

-Michael

[mach3]

[ QUOTE ]
Me too. For about a week this was a very good play to make on party poker, people were giving a lot more respect to you if you open raised from teh CO and capped when the blind 3bet then if you just called the 3bet. Now it's gotten so everyone and their mother is making this play. As always, when you find yourself in the majority it's time to pause and reflect.

I've also noticed a lot of people not capping only their premium hands the last couple of days. I think the good thing to do for now is to move back to value capping. People won't believe you when you cap and might just actually giveyou more credit then you deserive if you just call the 3bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent observations - at least for Party 15/30. I remember seeing this for the first time and thinking it was somewhat clever. Now people are capping w/ low PP's left and right from LP. Ditto for the second part as well.

[elmo]

Assuming a tight image, I feel like full games that have become short recently offer some of the most appropriate opportunities to make this play.

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
This is pretty obvious, but seems like the most salient point here to me. The advantage of getting HU vs. two overcards is small compared to the bad situations that can occur from 3 bet isolating, and these bad situatoins aren't infrequent. Getting capped from behind, and getting capped from the guy you're isolating and finding yourself up against a higher pair or being bluffed out even when they just have overcards on a board like TJx where you can't do anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not thinking like a limit player yet.

[kurosh]

See the post I made a while ago about cold-calling with mid to low pairs against EP raisers. Mathematically, it's -EV but I didn't take into account position.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a better play is often to call 2 bets cold, especially near the button or on it. You should also mix this up with a few other hands, which I know you can figure out. If you are headsup, then great. If the blinds/button tag along, then great.

I can tell you a worse play is to play these small pairs up front yourself, though. You get isolated with a cold-call or three bet too often by good players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your play is quite a bit better play live than online

[Softrock]

Paluka - I'm probably echoing some of what a number of people have said. At mid-limits I find a number of people who make this play way too often. The thinking seems to be some form of "I'm supposed to be aggressive" plus a "pocket pair is a favorite over two overcards". As has been pointed out though a pokcet pair is only a small favorite against overcards and a big dog against a bigger pocket pair. Furthermore, this hand is hard to play of you get 2 or 3 overcards on the flop. I see some players who just call down to the river no matter what.

My approach is to make them pay when I hit my hand and selectively represent an A or K or even Q when one hits the board. I believe I make money if I have AK or AQ and get 3-bet by 66 because I know when I've hit my hand and my opponent doesn't.

[NMcNasty]

a) Its a marginal play which can very easily be misused. Three-betting with 22 against a 2+2er who raised UTG I believe is slightly -EV.

b) Its a winner against mediocre and bad players. It doesn't really matter if they are loose or tight. Against tight players your flop semi-bluff is more likely to win the pot than it will against loose players. Against loose players you are less likely to be dominated and will win more when you hit your set. What matters is that you know your opponent, since you are very likely to have difficult decisions to make. The river is usually your toughest decision since you will frequently have to decide between betting for value, betting to bluff, or just checking. If you don't know if your opponent is the type of player to call down with unimproved AQ or fold TT with an A on the board, you probably shouldn't play your pair at all.

Mainstream poker theory looks at pocket pairs solely from a domination perspective. It basically says that they dominate you anywhere from a fourth of the time to half of the time, you dominate them almost never, and its a coinflip the rest of the time so there is almost no reason to play the hand. There are several factors however that bring what looks like a clear -EV play into the slightly +EV range:
1. You have position
2. If you make this play you either have a read on or are slightly better than your opponents
3. Your play has some advertising value without necessarily being a -EV play. Some people think three betting with 22 is the equivalent of 3 betting with T9s or A9.
4. Its not exactly a coinflip when your opponent has overcards, you are usually a slight favorite.
5. You're playing the hand aggressively which has advantages in itself.

C) There's no way to punish people who make this play. Your opponents adding small pairs into their 3-betting hands list isn't enough for you to dramatically change your play. You can loosen up on the flop a bit but thats about it.

[IndianOcean]

Paluka excellent job bring up this good post.

I am the guy who 3 bets with 44 (80% of the time)

[Lestat]

I think this is a play to be used every once in a while to mix it up. It costs less to make this play with a small pocket pair than with a mid-suited connector like T9s. It can also be a profitable play if your opponents are weak/tight. But to say it's positive EV if done routinely against a legitimate UTG raiser who is also good player is wrong and these people will go broke soon when the good players catch on. Especially the good players in back who will punish this foolishness and cripple any pre-flop equity a baby pocket pair has.

[ike]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a better play is often to call 2 bets cold, especially near the button or on it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not at all intuitive to me. Could you elaborate a little?

[ike]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe I make money if I have AK or AQ and get 3-bet by 66 because I know when I've hit my hand and my opponent doesn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think you make money with overcards against a pair out of position you're insane.

[Gabe]

The best defense against a player like this is to sometimes play your pairs like AK, and sometimes play AK like a pair. For example sometimes if I have AK and an Ace flops, I throw my cards at the dealer and call her a sharmuta.

[Lestat]

Hi Ike,

Position is important, but small pairs have a much harder time receiving a favorable flop than do big cards or middle to big pocket pairs. You're position is not likely to make up for this fact against a good UTG player. Maybe a mediocre player.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
c) what is the best way to punish the people who make this play?

[/ QUOTE ]

Play looser up front and raise with two suited face cards. Check raise often.

Another option (maybe)is to change seats.

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
Play looser up front and raise with two suited face cards. Check raise often.

Another option (maybe)is to change seats.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, and no.

[Boris]

Why do you say that? You can tighten up once the other players start coming in behind the 3 bettor.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
If you think you make money with overcards against a pair out of position you're insane.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. In limit poker you can get a lot of money in the pot after the flop AND after you have outflopped your opponent. So while the small PP guy will often put in 1.5 bb preflop as a small favorite, you can often get him to put in 2.5-4 bb after the flop as a massive dog. Also, once you get the small pp player trained, you can steal a fair number of pots from him.

[Lestat]

Very well put. And I believe also very accurate.

[Softrock]

If you think you make money with overcards against a pair out of position you're insane.


Why? If it's someone who plans to just call to the river if he gets it headsup, you don't think you'll make a profit by deciding when to continue and when to fold? Or, if you're playing with someone who will lay the hand down, do you think you can't pick your spots to represent having hit the flop?

The reality is that playing these small to medium pairs against overcards is difficult. I don't make the play of threebetting unless I have an opponent who I can read like a book (ie someone who will check fold if he misses the flop and will usually only put money in if he's hit the flop). With a decent player it's very hard to know what to do if two overcards flop and you're bet into - at least it's hard for me.

[LarsVegas]

a) is this just a breakevenish type play that some high-limit guys do to "mix it up"

Yes. It's definitely of marginal value. If you keep your three-betting standard at 88/AJs/AQo or better (against what looks like very legimate open-raises, I *still* advice folding 88, AJs and perhaps even AQo and 99, but I realize I might be in the minority here), your average 3-betting hand will be AQs/JJ which is very very solid and will make people very uneasy about being 3-bet by you. You will still play LOTS of hands behind a raise.

But of course there is some strength in itself in that one can possibly be holding a full on a flop such as 2-5-5 despite 3-betting preflop.

b) if it is a winner, who is it good against and why is mainstream poker theory so wrong here?

Limit Texas Holdem is evolving a lot these days. Even Ciaffone/Brier's Middle Limit Holdem seems outdated these days. There are numerous reasons for this. One being that the advice, unless otherwise stated is to be applied under normal game conditions - which has changed dramatically over the last few years.

In particular, far more people have understood the concept that raising can have great merit even though one will win less than 50% of the hands or even though one "can't get anyone out of the pot anyway". Which has led to a lot of players pushing far smaller edges. Which in turn punishes the true fishes a lot more, so the games are probably as good as ever for the average "very good" player (although the average "very good" player has improved a lot, I think).

c) what is the best way to punish the people who make this play?

It's quite simple. Operating with standard open-raising standards, an early raise from me is minimum 77/AJo/KQs/ATs. ATs and 77 are very borderline and usually folded UTG and perhaps UTG+1. If an early raise from me is 3-bet in a game with lots of 3-betting (where one can suspect that for instance, a lot of three-betting is being done with the said pocket pairs 22-66), I will cap down to AQs/AKo/JJ. This means I will be capping HALF my raising hands. And 66-22 will be forced to put in four bets preflop. With 24 combinations for a big pocket pair, 16 for AK and 4 for AQs, continuing on flops without an A,K,Q will have about neutral EV for a small pocket, given that even when ahead on those flops, they will lose quite frequently to AK/AQ improving to a pair, a flush or double-pairing the board to counter-feit their baby pocket (on average, 44).

All flops that contain an Ace, a King, a Queen or even the JTx combination (the chance of EITHER being behind - possibly BADLY - or being draw out (at least 10 outs against as well as possible flushdraws/backdoor flushdraws or the board pairing twice), the 3-betting guy with 66-22 will have fold IMMEDIATELY having put in FOUR bets preflop (unless he makes a set with the other two cards on the board - a 13 to 1 shot). Not a good proposition if you ask me. Ok, folding immediately at the JTx flop is perhaps debateable, but it's so close that it goes into the category "can just as well fold".

As for the times he catches me with AJs/AQo/KQs/TT-88, he will win the pot immediately (3 small bets from me preflop) vs my TT-88 if an Ace or a King flops or turn unless I make a set or a draw to go, in the rest of the pots there is only a question of how many chips he will be spewing with his small pair (unless of course he makes a set to beat me without me making a higher one).

Against AJs/AQo/KQs he will win the pot on the turn unless I have paired up or picked up a decent draw (four small bets). Again, if I improve, it's only a question of how many bets he will lose unless he makes a set with the 2, 3 or 4 other board cards (depending on how far we play).

Also, remember that even though my counter-strategy might not be enough alone to make his play (slightly) profitable, there WILL be times where someone else will come in behind, usually with a four-bet, but playing this hand 3-way for 3 or 4 bets is quite a disaster anyway.

The implied odds of flopping a set and having it hold up, which will happen about 1 in 11 or 12 I guess (you flop a set one in 9, but it won't ALWAYS hold up) is NOT enough to make up for that.

lars

[ike]

You're talking about this as though the overcards know they're up against a small pocket pair. In fact they know they're up against a 3bet, which even from someone who 3bets their small pocket pairs half the time is still a small pocket pair considerably less than a third of the time. You're not going to make money against the small pocket pairs in this situation unless you play in such a way as to lose alot against the other hands.

[haakee]

[ QUOTE ]
sharmuta

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL

[Ulysses]

Great post, Lars. I think the following passage is especially important:

In particular, far more people have understood the concept that raising can have great merit even though one will win less than 50% of the hands or even though one "can't get anyone out of the pot anyway".

[SA125]

That's a great post. Hand combo's, 3 betting - capping, bets lost, plays on the streets. It's long but reads as easy as a good book. Nice job Lars.

[ike]

You don't loosen up because this one guy sometimes threebetting some hands you might be a little better than breakeven against is not a good enough reason to loosen up.

[theBruiser500]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a better play is often to call 2 bets cold, especially near the button or on it. You should also mix this up with a few other hands, which I know you can figure out. If you are headsup, then great. If the blinds/button tag along, then great.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean by, "You should also mix this up with a few other hands, which I know you can figure out. "

[theBruiser500]

Oh and also could you explain what ike asked about? BTW, I read "waiting for godot" and thought it was okay, I'm not a big fan of that wacky abstract writing.