GPS Sheffield with Paul Jackson

[Honeybadger]

I dunno how often Jackson 4bet bluffs V a 3bet from a 22bb stack, Im not sure he ships wide enough for value either to make 3b/call a good option.  Other people will know his game much better than me but I feel like he is pretty aware of stacksizes normally and is way way way more likely to 4b bluff when you're much deeper, if you 3b and he 4b's he has to call it off v a shove and I think he knows that.

For that reason I actually dont mind the flat, I agree with Pleno in that your stack is too big to just shove and I dont think his calling range v a shove differs too much from his 4b/call range.

I was presuming a 4bet from Paul Jackson would be a jam. Nothing else would make sense given effective stacks.

It is possible that flatting is better than 3betting - I have no strong opinion on this. But if we do 3bet then 3bet jamming definitely dominates 3bet/calling, as I explained above. [N.B. Unless I have done my maths wrong, which is always possible]

Pleno's suggested line was to 3bet/call rather than 3bet jam, and the reason that he gave was that this would allow PJ to 4bet bluff. But the maths says that we don't actually want him to 4bet bluff (unless he is going to be shipping in 22 or 98s type hands often enough to compensate for the times he jams stuff like QJ or A5s).

Obviously if PJ might ever 4bet small/fold then this changes everything. But I'd expect him to know that this would be a bad mistake.

[aaron1867]

You are all forgetting there is another player!!! lol

I called, because I knew seat 20 was going to 3 bet, then was going to shove, unfortunately (?) PJ got the old 4b out and I was stuck then

[Deadman]

3bet/call defo worst option here for several reasons, 1:it looks pretty strong from ur stack size and unless u have a mental image I doubt he's goning to 4bet pile garbage. 2: As Honeybadger says if he does 4bet jam its not going to be 95o is it? its going to be QJs KQo etc, which we don't want him to jam(would be better off jamming to make him fold these hands). 3: PJ is good but plays different to a lot of players, he may even peel a 3bet here and this isn't good for us either as 1010 is pretty vulnerable. Personally I'm flatting here too to set a 3bet from aggro BB, and i'm also not folding once PJ 4bets, like u said the guy from BB is 3 betting loads so I doubt PJ is opening without the intention of 4betting light if BB 3bets, he won't be worried about you at all. You set the hand up perfect and the spot is great for you IMO, if PJ had a better hand here then its a cooler in my mind with the dynamics in this situation.
Also seat 20? call the floor ;-)

[pleno1]

hes alot more likely to pile 55/axs than qj imo.

[Honeybadger]

hes alot more likely to pile 55/axs than qj imo.

Not sure I agree with this (substitute KQ for QJ if you prefer) but I don't feel especially strongly about it and have no specific knowledge of how he constructs his ranges. So if this is your read then fair enough... or perhaps not actually.

As I said before, we do not want him to jam ~30% equity hands like Axs. And he probably won't fold 88 or 99 to our 3bet push anyway. So when we 3bet small we are only really targeting a very small part of his range (22-77) and hoping he grows a pair and jams with these hands. All his other 4bets (KQ, QJ, A5 etc etc) are jams that we don't actually want to induce him to make.

Obviously if we think he may spazz 4bet jam 98s or suchlike then all this changes. And also, if we think there is a chance of him 4betting small then folding to a 5bet jam then this all changes too. But I'd strongly suspect that neither of these are the case.

[pleno1]

Hey stu

It's late but can you clarify, you don't want to have a 3b value range or 3b bluffing range and just jamming, calling and folding ranges?

It may be slightly +ev to jam but we need to take into account the value of all our range that we now 3b jam rather than call and only the hands that fall into the hands that we may prefer to 3b/call. For example we are always Piling 77.

[Honeybadger]

Hey stu

It's late but can you clarify, you don't want to have a 3b value range or 3b bluffing range and just jamming, calling and folding ranges?

It may be slightly +ev to jam but we need to take into account the value of all our range that we now 3b jam rather than call and only the hands that fall into the hands that we may prefer to 3b/call. For example we are always Piling 77.

I'm not absolutely certain what you mean by any of this Patrick - am I just being dim or have you worded it really badly? Or both? Anyway, I'll try to answer what I think you are asking, and if I have misunderstood then please ask again...

Should we have a range for making small 3bets rather than just 3bet jamming, calling or folding? I don't play many tournaments as you probably know, but I try to keep myself fairly knowledgeable about theory in every part of poker. And from what I understand a stack size of around 20bbs (say 18-22bbs) is pretty much the optimal stack size for 3bet jamming over an opponent's open raise (when there are antes). We are not risking TOO much to make the jam, yet at the same time we are not giving opponent such a great price that he has an easy decision with his mid-strength hands. Plus we cannot realistically 3bet/fold with this stack size - except of course as an exploitative adjustment e.g. vs a player who is far too tight. So really all our 3bets vs decent opponents should be pushes when playing this stack size.

As regards whether we have a bluff jamming range... well surely these spots are all merges in the latter stages of tournaments? e.g. We jam A9s over a raise...  he might call us with KQ or A8 but fold 22. Or we 3bet jam 88 and might get a fold from J9 but a call from 66. Isn't this how we play tournaments in the short-stacked stages? Very few outright bluff jams, but a lot of merged jams where we don't really know whether we want a call or not ... but at least we got our chips in first. Or am I completely wrong in this? All I know is that this makes sense from a maths point of view, and it also corresponds to what I have read about tournaments from some excellent players.

Don't really understand the last paragraph at all so can't really answer it tbh. If you rephrase it I will discuss further.

[smashedagain]

This could be interesting if you two don't agree on something as two of the most respected theoretical players on the forum. ATM I understand the above post but got a sneaky feeling I am gonna get whooshed somewhere down the line so please keep it simple for us all to understand.

I like the way that theories on optimal stack sizes change over time, "i'm ok, got plenty of chips and don't have to start panicking till I get down to 10 bigs" etc.

One thing I laugh about is the the popular standard open going from being 3x or 4x then some clever twats standardise the 3.5x which throws us maths noobs and nowadays these twats who tell you limping is the worst play in poker but only want to min raise the little shits.

Right rant over. Feel like this could be my last one ever. Good luck all.

[Honeybadger]

This could be interesting if you two don't agree on something as two of the most respected theoretical players on the forum.

Tbh, whenever Patrick and myself get involved in a discussion about a poker hand we always seem to disagree. It seems we just think about poker in a different way, that's all. Obviously I am always right, and he is always wrong lol

In reality, I really like the way Patrick thinks about the game, and there is most definitely a lot more that we agree on than that we disagree on. Also, the debates that Patrick and myself have had on PHA are good examples of how two people can disagree strongly about something whilst still maintaining total respect for each other.

ATM I understand the above post but got a sneaky feeling I am gonna get whooshed somewhere down the line so please keep it simple for us all to understand.

I try really hard to keep all my theory stuff as simple, and clearly explained, as possible. Often this leads me to write very long posts in which I explain things too much, and repeat myself in several different ways, just to make it as likely as possible that those who are unfamiliar with the concepts I am talking about can 'get them'.

I like the way that theories on optimal stack sizes change over time, "i'm ok, got plenty of chips and don't have to start panicking till I get down to 10 bigs" etc.

This sort of weak-tight attitude prevailed back in the day. IMO this was a key reason that one of your heroes, Ali Mallu, was able to do so well in small buy-in tournaments for such a long time. People were opening 99 or AJ from a 15bb stack then folding to his jam because they 'didn't want to go broke' with a medium pair or just Ace high... and other such ridiculous stuff. He was not a very sophisticated player, but he had a style that just happened to naturally exploit the population tendency of the time. He wasn't doing this as part of any well-thought out plan though IMO... his natural tendency just matched up well with the overall texture of tournaments in those days. Things are a little different now of course.

More importantly....

Right rant over. Feel like this could be my last one ever. Good luck all.

WTF?? Don't do it Jase... it can't be that bad!!

[pleno1]

It's hard to explain at 4am in my phone will post later though

[smashedagain]

This could be interesting if you two don't agree on something as two of the most respected theoretical players on the forum.

Tbh, whenever Patrick and myself get involved in a discussion about a poker hand we always seem to disagree. It seems we just think about poker in a different way, that's all. Obviously I am always right, and he is always wrong lol

In reality, I really like the way Patrick thinks about the game, and there is most definitely a lot more that we agree on than that we disagree on. Also, the debates that Patrick and myself have had on PHA are good examples of how two people can disagree strongly about something whilst still maintaining total respect for each other.

ATM I understand the above post but got a sneaky feeling I am gonna get whooshed somewhere down the line so please keep it simple for us all to understand.

I try really hard to keep all my theory stuff as simple, and clearly explained, as possible. Often this leads me to write very long posts in which I explain things too much, and repeat myself in several different ways, just to make it as likely as possible that those who are unfamiliar with the concepts I am talking about can 'get them'.

I like the way that theories on optimal stack sizes change over time, "i'm ok, got plenty of chips and don't have to start panicking till I get down to 10 bigs" etc.

This sort of weak-tight attitude prevailed back in the day. IMO this was a key reason that one of your heroes, Ali Mallu, was able to do so well in small buy-in tournaments for such a long time. People were opening 99 or AJ from a 15bb stack then folding to his jam because they 'didn't want to go broke' with a medium pair or just Ace high... and other such ridiculous stuff. He was not a very sophisticated player, but he had a style that just happened to naturally exploit the population tendency of the time. He wasn't doing this as part of any well-thought out plan though IMO... his natural tendency just matched up well with the overall texture of tournaments in those days. Things are a little different now of course.

More importantly....

Right rant over. Feel like this could be my last one ever. Good luck all.

WTF?? Don't do it Jase... it can't be that bad!!

lol. I did log out after I spat my dummy this morning but it only lasted half an hour. Seems I need to hang around to get some expert posts out of you. I know we are both busy with families etc.

My next thread will be about how to encourage 19 year old lads to leave home if you can sort that for me

[swinebag22]

It's hard to explain at 4am in my phone will post later though

Waiting in anticipation.

I have to say I'm in the 3bet jam camp here......so far

I just feel this stack size is great (top end admittedly) for 3 bet bluff shoving (I assume 3 bet folding is a mistake here - though I have seen a lot of players do this live)

If you then go and 3 bet small with this stack size you are pretty much saying that you have a decent hand rather than a bluff. Does this not make your future bluffs easier to pick off?

As I said at the start, waiting for Pleno to explain fully his thinking here, as his posts are normally really helpful..

[rfgqqabc]

Think the current debate is very much style dependent. Pretty sure i do both dependent on mood and i think this is probably best. Should be pretty balanced.

As an aside i got 3b small day 2 of a deepstack from a 20bb stack, I had AK and still cried a little inside as my 25bb stack went over the line. Certainly can't imagine a massive chunk of 4b bluffs in this spot, maybe 77 will pile but can't imagine KQo thinks its a great spot and I certainly wouldnt expect PJ to cram KQ here.