Optimal fold vs 3b @ 50nl (GTO Wizard)
100bb deep, 6-max, 50nl rake. I compiled how much we have to fold vs 3bets in all positions according to the solver. Is anyone even close to this? Also if someone is way looser than this, are you losing less than 2.5bb per hand on average when you call 3bets with hands wider than suggested, over a large sample?
The difference between 50nl and 1knl is massive in how much we defend vs 3bets. Rake is a crazy thing.
11 Replies
Rake matters a lot yes, so does stack depth.
I just didn't know the difference is _this_ huge. This should mean it's likely good to have closer to 65-70% fold vs 3b and likely bad to be closer to 50-55% fvs3b at micro and low stakes, unless you think you have a massive edge in 3b pots vs 3b ranges that are slightly tighter than optimal to begin with.
In my database I have regs 3beting 9,7% and folding to 3bets 53% over 600k hands
On most sites players will receive some rakeback, so you can call wider.
But yes in nl50 Sim COvBTN when you add EVs of both players they take 90% of the pot, but in nl500 they take 95%. Which means rake at nl50 tletas up 10% of the pot!
On most sites players will receive some rakeback, so you can call wider.
But yes in nl50 Sim COvBTN when you add EVs of both players they take 90% of the pot, but in nl500 they take 95%. Which means rake at nl50 tletas up 10% of the pot!
That's something I never thought about, thanks for pointing that out. So that means that micro players with rakeback should look at something like 100nl and 200nl sims instead to get more accurate results including rakeback?
Probably guess it depends how much RB you get.
Hey ship, nice to see you back
The player who I believe to be the biggest winner at low stakes ACR has like a 20-25% ft3b, and that's why I assume their winrate is so high. And most of the defends are calling instead of 4betting
But I think a significant majority of the time, anyone defending closer to 50% is just leaking by calling with too many hands vs 3bets. At 50nl tho I'm sure you'll see plenty of regs who are folding 65-70%
Hey ship, nice to see you back
The player who I believe to be the biggest winner at low stakes ACR has like a 20-25% ft3b, and that's why I assume their winrate is so high. And most of the defends are calling instead of 4betting
But I think a significant majority of the time, anyone defending closer to 50% is just leaking by calling with too many hands vs 3bets. At 50nl tho I'm sure you'll see plenty of regs who are folding 65-70%
Hey :-) There are some familiar faces here still! I was offline a very long time. My friend mentioned poker a couple of months ago and I thought I'll just check 2+2 quickly. Now I'm hooked again.
My stat is round 60%. I thought this was very nitty. 20-25% sounds insane, but some crushers are just that. Do you know any of this guys other stats? Somehow I would imagine they can open and defend to opens much wider as well if they can squeeze out that type of edge calling 3bet?
I just didn't know the difference is _this_ huge. This should mean it's likely good to have closer to 65-70% fold vs 3b and likely bad to be closer to 50-55% fvs3b at micro and low stakes, unless you think you have a massive edge in 3b pots vs 3b ranges that are slightly tighter than optimal to begin with.
In my database I have regs 3beting 9,7% and folding to 3bets 53% over 600k hands
It's a bit misleading to say that actually.
1. Sizings in GTOw are on average likely larger than the average sizing for the same spot(s) in reality. Especially in BB vs IP PFR nodes.
2. As stack depths increase, you can typically call a bit wider. Stack depths for these solves are all 100bb eff and your average stack depth in reality is >100bb.
3. Even if you disregard (1) and (2), if you simply called all ~0EV hands at 100% frequency, then you would also get to that ~53-55% Fv3B value. *lots* of hands are very close to 0EV as calls. Any edge or other criteria can easily push it from ~0EV in theory to >0EV in practice.
You'll find the most winningest players often have relatively low Fv3B values... at least compared to your 65-70% statistic.
It's a bit misleading to say that actually.
1. Sizings in GTOw are on average likely larger than the average sizing for the same spot(s) in reality. Especially in BB vs IP PFR nodes.
2. As stack depths increase, you can typically call a bit wider. Stack depths for these solves are all 100bb eff and your average stack depth in reality is >100bb.
3. Even if you disregard (1) and (2), if you simply called all ~0EV hands at 100% frequency, then you would also get to that ~53-55% Fv3B value. *lots* of h
The BB 3b sizes are definitely bigger than what you see out there. I was missing a lot of factors in my "statement" and I think point 3. is the one that really sticks out. I'm really glad you helped me out. Things just never are black&white in poker. Thanks broken.
