Big pre flop raises.

TAG LJ opens to 15, I'm in the BB. My normal defense right now is around 18% call and 5% raise.

If you're playing in a typical rake pot game I don't like these numbers. In fact, you shouldn't even have a calling range.

Imputing x5 open raise from the LJ in a live rake game 100BB deep, the BB's optimal play is:

Even at 300BB effective the solver is doing very little calling in the BB (mostly with hands like JJ/AQs/AJs), and it's still mostly folding PPs below TT.

I find GTO wizard in theory to be good however in practice at low limit tables not as effective too many variables. A basic to advanced understanding is helpful, but I personally find that at these 1/3 tables you are playing the players more then you are playing the hands. GTO is a great addition to anyones game knowledge however once again at these limits it is hard to gauge just how wide your Villains are going to open or call or even 3 barrel bluff. You should spend more time focusing on learning how to read the other players to extract more money from the table then simply playing GTO.

Seems like everyone out there at least at my poker room has a general understanding of GTO, but only 15% of the room can actually play well post flop. If you are trying to get better at your current stakes you will need to really focus on those main two things better player readings and better post flop play.

Honestly, I'd snap fold all of those hands and not worry too much about it. Playing HU OOP to non-moran aggressors in a raked game with no other dead money is highly unlikely to be profitable (except with ~premiums). I mean, against looser opens you could maybe 3bet KQo... but do you really need the headaches associated with this?

Gandobviouslytablechangeifmosthandsenduplikethis,imoG

You may not realize that you're contradicting yourself, but you just wrote the equivalent of:

"GTO isn't helpful because low-limit players are too terrible to reliably range...so you should get better at hand-reading."

P.S. If what you're suggesting is focusing instead on behavioral tells, I'll just say that playing suboptimally while relying on physical tells for exploitation probably won't improve one's win rate.

Also any of those hands can be 100% profitable from the right position with the right reads and preflop action. For example if you have say 5 callers from an utg raise of lets say 10$ you can easily squeeze with pocket 66's from small blind for 65$, but you need a plan if you have one or two callers and how your going to play post. So lets say you squeeze and get one caller on the button and you make an agreement with yourself to only C-bet if no picture cards show up you need to

1. Figure out the investment of the player on the button in comparison to the stack size to coordinate your c-bet.
2. Have your eyes on the player the entire time the flop comes out to check for indications/reactions the board isn't going any where.

not completely.. but I can understand how it sounds contradictory

@always fondling
I am simply trying to tell the OP that having a plan for your attack is just as important as the hand they choose to play and how they will play it. Hand range can only go so far.

But since you're implying that GTO doesn't apply and that he should consider having a calling range from the BB, you're recommending that he consider playing in both a non-optimal way AND in a manner that will leave him OOP with marginal hands that the average player is more likely than not to misplay against a decent opponent.

I really wish when someone posts a solver recommendation that people wouldn't come flying in with some version of "This is low-limit poker. LOL at even mentioning GTO", especially when they can't actually explain why they disagree with the solver's recommendations.

As mentioned, there are so many other factors to consider, but this is a base line:

My normal defense range of 18% call and 5% raise is based off a smaller pre flop raise size not the 15 open. The way I wrote it was confusing. Do you still think I shouldn't have a calling range if it is a 12 dollar open or 10 dollar open?

call with 22, 55, fold the rest. OOP + high rake = overfold the BB.

You can't ignore the rake, and if it's a typical 10% to 5 (or 6) + promo drop + tip, you do not want to be playing OOP with a marginal hand when you know that more than 10% of the pot is disappearing before the winner stacks his chips. One of the benefits of raising is that you not only might win the hand immediately, but if your 3-bet is called, you're already at max rake but with a chance to win more from your opponent without paying more rake.

In addition, from a GTO standpoint, calling rather than raising allows your opponent, who is in position, to maintain and potentially realize his equity with crappy hands like Q8o that would have snap-folded to a 3-bet.

Calling to setmine HU OOP with no dead money in a raked game against all but the worst players in the pool is torching money, imo. You'll need 3 postflop bets to go in on average in order to make money, and that ain't gonna happen (as your opponents will often have nothing to pay you off with, savvy/MUBSy enough to check a street behind / not call a check/raise, meanwhile our hands are mostly tied with 6th pair, plus losing with sets is a real thing too).

GcluelessNLnoobG

Ok I did not say GTO is not important what I said is it doesn't apply the same way and is not as effective at low limit tables. It doesn't mean that he should be opening with garbo... I don't know why your spinning my words.

For a $12 bet ima call with pp's from the BB and $400 stacks, even if it's heads up.

HU there's little chance that calling an extra 3bb with 55 or 22 is the best option, unless you are very good or you hit a lot of sets on good runouts. For an extra 4 or 5bb it's basically zero. Like you'd need to stack the single PFR roughly every other time you hit a set just to break even.
I say this knowing that for robot LJ opening 2.5bb robot BB is calling those 100%.
I also understand that it's fun to hit sets, and esp. to win big pots with them ... but understand you are doing it for fun and not because it's good.

On the upside this is a low probability event at 1-2 or 1-3 anyway.

KQo is maybe the most interesting, and I think you could mix all three options. Not having a calling range is also fine.

Agree with calling the PPs in the instant case. Especially at 12 to call vs 18. Also agree with 3! KQo. Tempted to sometimes call, rarely, low SCs like 65s/76s. Really need decent IO though. J9s...if you have the discipline to not go nuts flopping e.g., top or second pair.

But mostly, these are leaks. We rarely realize the full IO we require to play these hands, for reasons GG ably laid out above. We're OOP, is the giant problem with calling out of the blinds. OOP is really not good.

My question, to those who also will call PPs here: what else are you balancing with for your calling range? And where does your 3! range start with PPs for a LP/MP opener? I was thinking 88, and then mixing in some suited wheel aces. 77-22 are 36 combos, so we need 9 different suited Aces or SCs if we want to equal our PP calls. I guess A2-A4s, as well as QJs-76s gets us there. 3! 88+, A9s+, KJs+, A8o+??? And mixing frequencies. 70 suited combos+PPs, 72 offsuit.

Hmmmm. 142, >10%, seems excessive.

The internet is, kindly, all over the place when I simply google 3-bet ranges BB vs LP. I'm not calling K2s in the BB, sorry. And I'm certainly not 3!'ing it. Maybe I should?

I'm with Playbig, but the KQo is sketchy -- definitely not raising w/ it every time and depends on opponent.

I fold all the hands listed, more or less.

For a 7x raise I'm not calling anything. 3betting a tight range, with the odd small hand here and there (so 76s might make it in there as an occasional 3bet) and folding the rest.

For 5x it's closer and I'd say calling some hands is defensible, although pure 3bet or fold may still be best. That calling range would probably be stuff like AJo, QTs, 77 and so on though, and even with those it's probably best to 3bet.

Of course, if there was one caller (or two) then overcalling any hands at all would be very bad.

Would calling a small pair or Ace suited be bad in the situation where there was a call or two after the raiser? Would we raise with hands like 98s or ATo?

I think it would be better if you just assume that it rarely is going to be good to overcall outside of the BTN or BB, and only then after considering rake, range, and reads on opponent(s).

I agree that larger RFI sizes are typical in most live games (i.e., 4x-7x). So much depends on the player type. Generally versus RFI's from later positions we should be 3betting more, especially if they RFI 5x+. (I'm not sure if the chart @Always posted is for 6max or full-ring. If 6max then LG is effectively UTG, which is significant.)

In the second example, versus MAWG reg, in a full-ring game, I don't mind mixing a 3bet with KQo or QTs. If you have notes/reads on the TAG in the first example (e.g. tends to fold to a 2nd barrel) then 3betting KQ is likely +EV.

Another relevant data point is that typically in live games the action would NOT be LJ RFIs and action folds to BB. Rather it'd be two limp, LJ RFI's 5x, BN calls, etc., in which we are in a squeeze spot with KQo or QTs or a more attractive set-mining spot with 22 or 55.