the min -> 2x 3bet

chicknMelt

Traditionally seen as a fishy move. Im starting to wonder if it could actually be a useful tool that is rarely used properly...

So it seems that preflop play has started to become a bit more passive. People dont 3bet hands like TT/JJ, AJ, AQ etc that much any more - the theory being that it folds out weaker hands that you dominate, but gets called by hands that do well against you.

but what if you were to start making very small 3bets in position with a fairly wide, merged range of hands. your villain will call with the vast majority of their range + you have the betting lead in a bigger pot whilst in position.not only that but they are likely to play a bit more ABC post flop because bet sizes are bigger etc and a 3bet of any size looks smaller than flat allowing you to take down the pot more when you miss. All good things no?

you would have 2 3bet ranges, one that is polorized,  and bigger for when out of position, and another that is merged and smaller in position. instead of 2.5x, it could be something like  2x the raise, and even less when shorter stacked.

I havent thought this through properly, so it could be that there are big flaws in my thinking...so it'd be interesting to see what ev1 else thinks...

77Chris91

In Response to the min -> 2x 3bet:

Traditionally seen as a fishy move. Im starting to wonder if it could actually be a useful tool that is rarely used properly... So it seems that preflop play has started to become a bit more passive. People dont 3bet hands like TT/JJ, AJ, AQ etc that much any more - the theory being that it folds out weaker hands that you dominate, but gets called by hands that do well against you. but what if you were to start making very small 3bets in position with a fairly wide, merged range of hands. your villain will call with the vast majority of their range + you have the betting lead in a bigger pot whilst in position.not only that but they are likely to play a bit more ABC post flop because bet sizes are bigger etc and a 3bet of any size looks smaller than flat allowing you to take down the pot more when you miss. All good things no? you would have 2 3bet ranges, one that is polorized,  and bigger for when out of position, and another that is merged and smaller in position. instead of 2.5x, it could be something like  2x the raise, and even less when shorter stacked. I havent thought this through properly, so it could be that there are big flaws in my thinking...so it'd be interesting to see what ev1 else thinks...
Posted by chicknMelt

You will get 4-bet a lot

Are players not 3-betting small IP in MTT's already?

chicknMelt

yes, they do 3bet small in MTTs already. but normally 2.5x ish IP normally. sometimes as low as 2x when playing 30bb or so.

I'm talking about making it even smaller, 2x when deeper and all as small as a min 3bet when shallow.

re 4betting: yes, your right, but it would probably take some time for people on your table to notice what you are doing, then when/if you start to get 4bet too much , you can just adjust accordingly.

THEROCK573

In Response to Re: the min -> 2x 3bet:

yes, they do 3bet small in MTTs already. but normally 2.5x ish IP normally. sometimes as low as 2x when playing 30bb or so. I'm talking about making it even smaller, 2x when deeper and all as small as a min 3bet when shallow. re 4betting: yes, your right, but it would probably take some time for people on your table to notice what you are doing, then when/if you start to get 4bet too much , you can just adjust accordingly.
Posted by chicknMelt

do you watch any training videos chicknmelt? there all doing these small 3 bet sizes. they all have really high 3 bet percentages though so would that be the reason they are going so small you think to preserve more chips for when they are 4 bet cos ur pretty much pricing people in to call when deep enough to.

77Chris91

In Response to Re: the min -> 2x 3bet:

yes, they do 3bet small in MTTs already. but normally 2.5x ish IP normally. sometimes as low as 2x when playing 30bb or so. I'm talking about making it even smaller, 2x when deeper and all as small as a min 3bet when shallow. re 4betting: yes, your right, but it would probably take some time for people on your table to notice what you are doing, then when/if you start to get 4bet too much , you can just adjust accordingly.
Posted by chicknMelt

I understand where your coming from... Now I think about it you may not get 4-bet light that often as players may take a view that it's -ev to get into 3-bet/4-betting wars in the early stages of MTT's.

If you had posted this in 2010 you may been labelled a genius

chicknMelt

In Response to Re: the min -> 2x 3bet:

In Response to Re: the min - /> 2x 3bet : do you watch any training videos chicknmelt? there all doing these small 3 bet sizes. they all have really high 3 bet percentages though so would that be the reason they are going so small you think to preserve more chips for when they are 4 bet cos ur pretty much pricing people in to call when deep enough to.
Posted by THEROCK573

tbh, I havent watched many NLH training vids in the last few months. I do watch them though.

I'm a member of cardrunners, the NLH videos I have watched recently are mostly leakfinders, or the pro's explaining their thought process as they play. Dont remember seeing any really small 3bets like this - they are normally > 2x. maybe I haven't been watching closely enough though?

but yes, the small 3bet size is probably mandatory if you have a wide 3bet range for the reasons you say.

Maybe I am just a bit behind, i dunno.

It seems the fashoin is to play strong and speculative hands passivly, and 3bet monsters and weaker blocker hands etc.

if you are almost forcing people to (at least) call with your 3bet size, then you probably dont want a polorised range anymore, since you will be seeing alot more flops.

chicknMelt

In Response to Re: the min -> 2x 3bet:

In Response to Re: the min - /> 2x 3bet : I understand where your coming from... Now I think about it you may not get 4-bet light that often as players may take a view that it's -ev to get into 3-bet/4-betting wars in the early stages of MTT's. If you had posted this in 2010 you may been labelled a genius
Posted by 77Chris91

not really sure what your saying...

these are thoughts that would have seemed correct in 2010, but not now.

these are thoghts that people had in 2010, and are now common, where have you been for the last 3/4yrs

77Chris91

In Response to Re: the min -> 2x 3bet:

In Response to Re: the min - /> 2x 3bet : not really sure what your saying... these are thoughts that would have seemed correct in 2010, but not now. these are thoghts that people had in 2010, and are now common, where have you been for the last 3/4yrs
Posted by chicknMelt

Was referring to 3-bet sizing in general.

What I was trying to say is that small 3-bet sizings are really common now. A few years ago everyone was going like 3x plus.

F_Ivanovic

When playing cash I've experimented with tons of different stuff and this is something I've tried in the past too. As chris has allured to; you definitely end up getting 4bet a lot more by the regs. And it can be really annoying to 3bet stuff like 7c8c and have to fold to a 4bet. 

The main benefit of small 3-betting IP is to gain initiative but in cash games when the stack sizes are still pretty deep having the nitiative is of less importance since we have more potential manouvering post flop. In a tournament with shallower stacks (say 35bbs) floating and raising flops can get costly especially up against an opponent who makes large c-bets. If we 3-bet though and take over the initiative we can then control the size of the c-bet and better control the action post-flop.