PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.


No announcement yet.

3 Betting

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 3 Betting

    If you 3 bet 1 player that raises to 6c a 3 bet would be 18c but if, villain raises to 6c and someone calls do i raise to 18c or 36c

  • #2
    I've found 3bet a bit of a misleading name, it means re-raising a raise. not betting 3x. Then in the coursework it also says to raise three times their raise. The confusion might just be me though.
    I guess if you 3bet a raiser followed by a limper, then it could be 24? one 3bet + limper. Or 18 - one 3bet. I think they call it a squeeze.


    • #3
      A typical size for a 3-bet is coincidentally 3x the size of the first raise, but sometimes you might add an extra blind if you have a monster hand and you're very confident villain will call with worse, because you want to build a big pot while you're almost certainly ahead. You might also add a couple of cents if you're out of position to add a bit of fold equity and get the stack to pot ratio closer to your ideal. (A low stack:pot ratio makes it easier to make commitment decisions on the flop).
      If there is a call of the open, before the action reaches you, then a 4x 3-bet would be better, so if there's a raise to 6c and a call, I'd go with something like 24c, as Evoke said. The main reason for this typical sizing is that it's close to a pot-sized raise, meaning that the pot lays odds of close to 2:1, so villain needs 33% equity to continue. If you've got AA and villain has QQ, then he only has 20% equity, so he's making a bad call. When villains makes -EV calls, we make money.
      Bracelet Winner


      • #4
        Cheers arty, how does QQ have 20% equity?


        • #5
          Oh 20% equity vs AA i just realized but how does 33% = 2 1 i thought it would be 3 1?


          • #6
            Converting ratios, odds and percentages often confuses beginners.
            2:1 (pronounced "two to one") is equivalent to 66:33, meaning one hand has 66% equity and the other has 33% equity.
            3:1 is equivalent to 75:25.
            A hand with 20% equity is an 80 to 20 dog. 80:20 = 8:2 = 4:1.

            To convert an odds ratio to percentages, you have to divide each side of the ratio by the total of the two numbers.
            e.g. 3:2 is the same as 3/(3+2) to 2/(3+2) = 3/5 to 2/5 = 60% to 40% = 60:40 = 6:4 = 3:2
            Bracelet Winner


            • #7
              Ok so if two players had aces that would be 50% equity each so it would be 1 1?

              i would say 20% was a 5 1 but when tou put it like that 20 80 4 1 makes sense so i geuss 33% equity / 66% equity if we half that 66 it would be (33 and 33) and if you got 33 that mean the percentages i got in brackets are 2 and im 1

              The way i worked that out is probaly miles off but am i understanding that correctly in the way you get to 2 1?
              Last edited by mike2198; Sun Apr 21, 2013, 05:55 PM.


              • #8
                If it's 50/50, then the ratio is indeed 1:1.

                80:20 is 4:1, which is like saying "If there were 5 races, the 80% hand will typically win 4 of them, and the 20% hand will win 1 of them", because 4:1 means "4 wins for one loss"

                66:33 is 2:1, because the 66% hand will win twice for each time that the 33% hand wins.
                Bracelet Winner


                • #9
                  AA vs AA isn't 50% equity Mike. Both players are going to win like 98% of the time. The only time someone loses is when there is a 4-flush on the board. Your hand equity is 50% when you have a 50% chance of winning the hand by showdown.


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by RockerguyAA View Post
                    AA vs AA isn't 50% equity Mike. Both players are going to win like 98% of the time. The only time someone loses is when there is a 4-flush on the board. Your hand equity is 50% when you have a 50% chance of winning the hand by showdown.
                           Equity     Win     Tie
                    AcAs    50.00%   2.17%  47.83%
                    AhAd    50.00%   2.17%  47.83%

                    AA has 50% equity vs AA. In the long run, two black aces will win 50% of the money wagered against two red aces. Mostly the pots will be tied, but there will be occasional flushes which will be won by either hand an equal number of times over a large sample.
                    Bracelet Winner


                    • #11
                      Oh yeah equity is tied to the money as well. Forget what I said LOL.


                      • #12
                        Hi all,

                        Hope all is well.

                        Something that has been causing me confusion that is related to this is when it's appropriate to call preflop, post flop, etc.

                        For instance, if a villain UTG raises 3xBB preflop, then assigning a range would be something like TT+, AK+.

                        To call, to see a flop with around 2:1 pot odds, we therefore need a preflop hand that has 33% pot equity or greater to see the flop.

                        question is, how does this approach change, if at all correct, with position i.e. with x number of opponents left to act?

                        Now instead if we have a hand that has greater than 50% any range that has raised, you should re-raise, since are assumption is that we are the favourite.
                        Again, how is this affected by x number of opponents left to act.

                        One last thing, if in front, villain 1 raises (Early position), villain 2 (early position) calls giving 3:1 pot odds for the next person.

                        So assuming both hand ranges TT+, AK+. Do we need to consider opponents left to act in terms of pot equity, or just only consider the equity acting against only the other two already in the pot?

                        I hope this makes sense, and I am not losing the plot. Lol


                        Last edited by pullin1988; Mon May 13, 2013, 12:33 AM.


                        • #13
                          Hi Pullin!

                          We only look at the immediate pot odds if we are likely to be all in and will see all the community cards for one price. When we're contemplating a pre-flop call of 3bb, we're not going all in. We're just putting in a very small proportion of our stack. What we have here is "implied odds". We might call 3bb, because we believe we could win a whole 100bb stack when we smash the flop.
                          If someone raises UTG with AK/TT+, then I'm generally always calling with smaller pocket pairs in order to go set-mining, and I'm sometimes calling with suited connectors like 76s, hoping to make two pairs or better.

                          With small pairs, I like to have implied odds of 15:1 and with suited connectors I like odds of 20:1.
                          This means that if villain opens for 3bb, I need the effective stack (whichever is smallest, villain's stack or mine) to be 15 * 3bb = 45bb when set-mining and 20 * 3bb = 60bb when I'm specualating with a suited connector.

                          With small cards, I'm not planning to go to showdown often. I'm only going to be putting 100bb in the middle if I have the effective nuts. i.e., if I flop a set, or make a straight, I'll try and win a stack from a player with an overpair. If I miss the flop, then I won't put another cent in the pot.

                          With these speculative hands, I prefer it if there's already another caller in the pot, because that means the final pot will be padded with more dead money, and I'm also more likely to be paid when the pot is multiway.

                          In short, I'm willing to pay a small price to see several flops and mostly fold, because when I finally make a monster hand, I should be able to win much more than I've spent with the earlier calls.

                          Regarding position, it's far better off to be in late position when you're speculating, because being in position means you get to control the pot size post-flop. You can fold when the price is too high, but you can raise for value when you have the best hand.
                          I'd be more inclined to call on the button with a suited connector if there is a loose-passive player in the blinds, because I want him to also call, thus improving my implied odds.

                          Hope this helps!
                          Bracelet Winner


                          • #14
                            Hi Arty,

                            That's extremely helpful, thank you.

                            Implied odds is one area that I need to study up on.

                            If a villain raises UTG with the range TT+ AK+, I now understand that we might want to set-mine or hope to hit a flush or/and straight draw with our speculative holdings, so calling is good given that we believe we have the implied odds.

                            But what's the strategy with regards to calling/raising when we think we have hit there range. Would it be something like call with cards in that sits in the low /mid end of an opponents range, and 3-bet when we think we are at the top end of our opponent range?

                            I understand that you may not want to stick to this since it may be a pattern that an opponent may pick up on.

                            I am conflicted since calling seems like telling your opponent I have a hand that I am not sure about, but would like to see a flop, and might assume you have a speculative holding, set mining, or a holding that might be weak within his range.

                            Cheer Arty,



                            • #15
                              I'm actually gonna write a blog later this week entitled something like "Pre-flop strategy when facing a raise", which should help you a lot. But for now I'll just say that I'll tend to call with speculative hands when I have good implied odds, and I'll tend to re-raise (3-bet) when I think villain will either call with worse hands than mine (so it's a value-raise), or will fold better hands (so it's a light 3-bet bluff).
                              If a villain is very tight, then his range is narrow/strong, so there's not much scope for re-raising for value, but if a villain is loose - and especially if he's opening in mid/late position - then you can re-raise with a wider range for value.
                              e.g. If a nit opens UTG, I'm usually only 3-betting KK+ (and sometimes I'll even flat with those hands), but if a LAG opens in middle position and doesn't often fold to 3-bets, I might 3-bet hands like AQ or TT for value, because I expect him to call with worse aces and lower pairs than 10s.
                              Bracelet Winner



                              X Cookies Information

                              We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.