Theory post: When is it correct to three bet flop OOP?

[Maier]

I can't think of any instances in which it's correct to three-bet flop.

With AA on a KT4 board, it seems more correct to call the raise and then check-raise turn.

If you have a stronger hand, say a set, a three-bet allows your oppenant to release a weaker hand.

Also related, When is the right time to check-raise turn OOP and when is it right to stop-and-go turn?? Is the only difference when you believe your oppenant raise on a flush draw on the flop?

Bottom line: I feel like I have a general idea when to use different betting lines, but my reasoning behind them is murky. The purpose of this post is to clarify it for all.

I think this can be an interesting thread. Let it begin.

[TheWorstPlayer]

I'm sorry, but this is a very simple question. The decision as to when to 3-bet the flop is exactly the same as the decision to be the flop initially. The only thing that is different is that the villain's hand range can now be defined (to whatever extent possible, given the specific villain) by the fact that he/she raised the flop. And now the pot is bigger than it was initially. The correct action to take (call, 3-bet, fold) is completely governed by fundamental poker theory.

[wtfsvi]

It is correct to threebet when you think your oponent is semi-bluffing. Or when you have a big draw and some folding equity (when you're semi-bluffing yourself). Or when you have no draw and a lot of folding equity.

Or when you have a monster, and think villain will put you on a semi-bluff if you three-bet. And so on.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]

With AA on a KT4 board, it seems more correct to call the raise and then check-raise turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is false, if there is one PSB ish left after villain's raise, it's raise or fold time. if you decide he'll raise many more hands then just kt/set, you 3bet all in.

[ QUOTE ]

If you have a stronger hand, say a set, a three-bet allows your oppenant to release a weaker hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

Ks 9h 8h

i have kk: i bet opponent raises i will reraise here.

[ QUOTE ]
Also related, When is the right time to check-raise turn OOP and when is it right to stop-and-go turn?? Is the only difference when you believe your oppenant raise on a flush draw on the flop?


[/ QUOTE ]

in an unraised pot with top pair, if i get raised on a flop with lots of draws i'll call and lead a non draw card. it's a stop & go that has many bonuses.. the "information" aspect allows me to let it go to raise; the "protection" part lets me protect my hand if my read if right.

in a raised pot, where a c/r is all in, i may chose that option. (or check fold. all things depend)

[chuddo]

not sure if you are differentiating between a flop check, player A bet, player B raiser, then you 3-bet.

or a bet, player A raises, and then you 3-bet.

in the first instance it usually happens if i flop a set on a co-ordinated board and two or more loose-agg players are behind me and i can expect at least a bet, and maybe a raise. then i can go ahead and jam and expect to be called by any decent draw or moderately strong hand.

in the second instance it is a line i often take when i flop a set against a preflop raiser. typical bet 3/4th pot, get raised nicely, and ship it in there and expect a poor player to call with an overpair. strong draws played this way as well dependant on the players and stack depth.

so yeah, not uncommon for me at all. in fact i wish it were more often, as it is always a big hand.

[Maier]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

With AA on a KT4 board, it seems more correct to call the raise and then check-raise turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is false, if there is one PSB ish left after villain's raise, it's raise or fold time. if you decide he'll raise many more hands then just kt/set, you 3bet all in.

[ QUOTE ]

If you have a stronger hand, say a set, a three-bet allows your oppenant to release a weaker hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

All right, but say the oppenant has about 3-6 pot sized bets left after the flop raise, What should be the course of action? What about 10-13 pot sized bets and you're OOP?

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
All right, but say the oppenant has about 3-6 pot sized bets left after the flop raise, What should be the course of action? What about 10-13 pot sized bets and you're OOP?

[/ QUOTE ]

if they have 10-13 pot size bets left after raising the flop (Im assuming this is a raised pot with kk..) you're playing mega deep. and i'd definately reraise.

3-6 i still would, just you have to play some turns now.

[Maier]

All right Bobby...

Just to play devil's advocate here, When would you call a flop raise with the intention of raising the turn? There is constantly discussion about why three-betting the flop is a poorly play in comparison to a turn-check raise for getting more money in the middle. Why are you a clear advocate of three-betting? It makes sens to me, and I'm sure you too, that three-betting just allows worse hands to fold, thus lowering your ev on the hand.

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't think of any instances in which it's correct to three-bet flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

UTG raise, two callers you call on BB with A7/images/graemlins/heart.gif

4/images/graemlins/club.gif5/images/graemlins/heart.gif6/images/graemlins/heart.gif

bet, pray for a raise and push.


now do the same thing when you hold 67 or 55.

fim

[Alex/Mugaaz]

Stack sizes and the amount of the bets matter here.

[Richie Rich]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't think of any instances in which it's correct to three-bet flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
UTG raise, two callers you call on BB with A7

456

bet, pray for a raise and push.


now do the same thing when you hold 67 or 55.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well put.

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
All right Bobby...

Just to play devil's advocate here, When would you call a flop raise with the intention of raising the turn? There is constantly discussion about why three-betting the flop is a poorly play in comparison to a turn-check raise for getting more money in the middle. Why are you a clear advocate of three-betting? It makes sens to me, and I'm sure you too, that three-betting just allows worse hands to fold, thus lowering your ev on the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
Dude, just think about it: calling the raise and checking the turn will always allow your opponent to raise the flop and take a free card on the turn with a draw. If your opponents are always doing this, you should counter by 3-betting the flop when they raise. I don't understand the problem. This is system poker theory. If your hand range is sufficiently ahead of his hand range and your hand needs protection then you should bet. How do you decide when to bet in the first place? It's the exact same thing for deciding when to 3-bet.

[Maier]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All right Bobby...

Just to play devil's advocate here, When would you call a flop raise with the intention of raising the turn? There is constantly discussion about why three-betting the flop is a poorly play in comparison to a turn-check raise for getting more money in the middle. Why are you a clear advocate of three-betting? It makes sens to me, and I'm sure you too, that three-betting just allows worse hands to fold, thus lowering your ev on the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]
Dude, just think about it: calling the raise and checking the turn will always allow your opponent to raise the flop and take a free card on the turn with a draw. If your opponents are always doing this, you should counter by 3-betting the flop when they raise. I don't understand the problem. This is system poker theory. If your hand range is sufficiently ahead of his hand range and your hand needs protection then you should bet. How do you decide when to bet in the first place? It's the exact same thing for deciding when to 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]



IT seems that stopping-and-going when a nonflush hits, since you can't be 100 percent sure he is on a flush draw, or turn-check raising always seems to be a better alternative in cash games than 3 betting. 3-betting seems to allow your oppenants to get away from superior hands while stopping and going creates some confusion, as they need to take in account the turn card, and turn-check-raising gets more money in the middle from them when they believe they're ahead.

3-betting, with the exception of the hands fimbulwinter posted, always seems to be a worse alternative.

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
3-betting, with the exception of the hands fimbulwinter posted, always seems to be a worse alternative.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is just so wrong it is painful. This is fundamental poker theory. If 3-betting allows your opponent to easily lay down made hands, as you claim, then you should 3-bet with draws or even complete air. And once he realises that you are 3-betting draws and bluffs then he won't be able to lay down made hands to your 3-bets. If he can, then it is a reason to do it more, not to do it less. I really don't understand how someone in the MH forum doesn't understand this.

[Maier]

all right worstplayer

i agree with your post althoguh I guess I was thinking about the typical, MH, unknown player who hasnt seem you three-bet before. Typically, I guess they would be inclined to release inferior holdings once you three-bet, but once they see you three-bet draws, they will clearly give you three-bets less respect. That changes things doesnt it?

However, just like any other theory post, you can make any argument given prior action or "whatever the *%$# your oppenant thinks of you". For argument purposes, lets say you're playing an unknown player with a solid understanding of the game. Then, it seems 3-betting should be made at first with big draw hands to mix it up, but 3-betting with overpairs OOP on a draw heavy board and sets seems to cut into your EV opposed to turn-check raising and stopping and going.

[Matt Flynn]

Maier asked me to respond here. I agree with what has been said about game theory, etc. Maier's point is basically about how to extract maximum value from hands when you have the made hand and you think it is best. The safest play is usually to reraise. That is not always the most profitable if they end up folding too often.

I do not have much time now. Key points:

1. You want the money in as fast as you can get it there.
2. Any slowplaying increases your risk and may also kill your ability to extract money, particularly if the draw gets there - even if your opponent has a made hand and not a draw, he now won't want to put a lot of money in.
3. You will often be in situations where you have a big hand and your opponent has a marginal hand. It is extremely useful to figure that out, because that is when you want to slow down.
4. If they always lay down to "three bets" on the flop without the near-nuts, then you should bet your draws on the flop and then come over the top on the flop when raised. You have serious fold equity and need to make use of it. Obviously if they don't raise the flop without the goods you don't go coming over the top of them. I say obviously, and yet again and again we make that "obvious" error.
5. I slowplay too much and so do you.

Matt

[Leptyne]

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=184256&page=&view=&sb =5&o=&vc=1

As I understand it the term "stop and go" was coined here on 2+2 by Greg (FossilMan).

[Jason Strasser]

The answer here, in my view, lies with Shania as do so many answers. If you contantly 3-bet the flop OOP with a wide variety of hands it can be extremely effective. I never do it, which I think is fine. It's kinda like how I rarely check raise the river.

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
I never do it, which I think is fine. It's kinda like how I rarely check raise the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
How can either of these things possibly be fine? If you never 3-bet the flop, it removes one thing preventing people from raising your bet on the flop. That can't be a good thing. And if you never c/r the river, that removes one thing preventing people from betting the river against you. That can't be a good thing either. Why would you ever voluntarily remove any weapons from your arsenal?

[Liv Tyler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I never do it, which I think is fine. It's kinda like how I rarely check raise the river.

[/ QUOTE ]
How can either of these things possibly be fine? Why would you ever voluntarily remove any weapons from your arsenal?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's saying that reraising the flop occasionally may be worse than reraising frequently or reraising never. In order to keep your "true" flop reraises from being readable, you have to reraise with some other hands too. Reraising a lot, you get better Shania. (Hmmm. Then whatever the opposite of Shania is, that must be what you get when you never reraise the flop.)

[TheWorstPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
(Hmmm. Then whatever the opposite of Shania is, that must be what you get when you never reraise the flop.)

[/ QUOTE ]
Liv, you are extremely wise (and beautiful). Why would you want the opposite of Shania - which I agree is seemingly what Strassa gets by not 3-betting the flop or check/raising the river? Isn't Shania what we all strive for?

[Maier]

I'm lost on the last few posts about Shania... /images/graemlins/frown.gif

I guess another thing about 3-betting the flop that seems wrong is that unless you're 100 percent sure you're ahead, you can easily get stacked. After you 3 bet, say for value with a mediocre holding like AA or AK, if you aren't ahead after he calls your 3-bet, you may have to make a 2/3 pot bet which after your 3-bet is a hefty amount, and your oppenant can come over the top with his often better holding. If he does call your 3-bet, this may freeze you up, and you may check/fold the pot away.

It seems like OOP, it is your responsibility to exercise as much pot control and info-gaining bets on streets as you can to find out where you are, while not risking your stack. It seems like stopping and going and check-raising the turn, gains your the most equity/info in the cheapest way possible. By making bets when more cards are out, it seems like you can gain more info than just 3-betting the flop, leaving you safer from getting stacked. This to me seems like the major advantage of not 3-betting for value on the flop, unless you have a big hand, in which I still think turn-check raising against unknowns is a sounder play, given no scary turn cards come.

[TheWorstPlayer]

For this reason, 3-betting the flop with hands OTHER than monsters can be a very strong move.

[Liv Tyler]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm lost on the last few posts about Shania... /images/graemlins/frown.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Try this (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=&Number=533592&page=&view= &sb=5&o=&fpart=).