Am I too tight here?

It's an easy fold.
It gets trickier if it's JJ, probably a fold as well unless you got some reads.
In this specific spot it's probably QQ+/AK+ only to 4bet. The rest are folds vs unknowns.

You can 4bet light if you know v1 opens light and v2 3bets super light on btn.

Yeah, KQs OOP facing a 3-bet and not closing the action? This is definitely not too tight a fold. In your other thread, I said it wasn't a candidate for a 4-bet bluff. This hand is closer, given the positions involved. The HJ open could be pretty wide and the 3-bet might be a resteal. I wouldn't try it early in the session, though. As I said before, you need ironclad reads before 4-bet bluffing at live low stakes.

Easy fold. If you were the raiser and getting pot odds it would be closer. I would probably call with 99-QQ, partly for a set probably 3-way and partly to play postflop on other good flops.

I wouldn't think twice about this fold. Yeah, it's a hoodie raising the HJ and a guy in the know 3betting the Button, so obviously we're tempted to continue more than we would in a typical 3bet configuration versus ABCs, but it just isn't worth the aggravation, imo.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Super easy fold, not even considering that the 3-bet is 10% of the effective stack size.

Fold against low stakes players with no significant reads out of position. What you may want to do is start thinking about relative hand strength vs. absolute hand strength. KQs has an absolute hand strength in this situation, but has little relative hand strength.

Folding is fine. Cold 4betting from the blinds you're generally best off going roughly linear so that "bluffs" will be hands like AQs, AJs, ATs, AQo, with KQs coming in somewhere after those.

In the scenario you give - 2x unknowns, HJ vs button (worth taking into account, as Garick points out), big 3bet size - I'd probably 4bet JJ+/AK, AQs and maybe some AJs. Opening up a few more hands when things become clear (for example: does button have a cold calling range or is he 3bet-or-fold only even from the button? That will determine whether he has hands like 77 or 98s in there).

I don’t think it’s a snap fold but it’s a fold nearly every time.

You can consider* cold 4betting if V2 has ~8%+† hands.

Narrator: He doesn't.

*Even then, I don't see the merit in having a bluff range in described game against described player. In that case, villain would need more like a 16% range that we can do this as part of the merged portion of a linear range.

† Which a bot does in this config‡.

‡With normal sizings**

**This isn't normal sizings.

You're either dominated or flipping, and Hoodie could easily still have a hand. Easy muck.

standard fold, KQo looks nice but OOP in a bloated 3bet pot vs 2 ranges you prob just torch money. Calling here is asking to flop second best a lot. i’d wanna see at least AQs/TT+ before getting involved in that spot

I fold. I start thinking harder at TT/JJ/AQs.

I am willing to bet my uncle's diabetes medication that you are not making back your 14bb investment on an OOP cold call with uncapped action pending with KQcc.

And what is the typical 3b frequency for this config in your games if you're cold 4bing this hand for value?

Honestly, even my own range widths are overvaluing KQs at <2:1 SPR.

i agree with all of this but im sure i would still make it 100 in the moment

it does look like the 4b is marginal / not winning much with perfect assumptions and the op lives in an imperfect world

the value thing is v confusing as we are obviously folding to a jam vs either lol

Yeah the terms value/bluff are gonna get us in a lot of trouble preflop. It obviously doesn't have 50%+ (or 1/n) equity when called. In the original context, I meant "A hand that plays purely aggressively in an underfolded environment" or "a hand that is +EV regardless of immediate fold equity."

If you nodelock a 16% 3b range for BTN and force them to call a 4b 90% of the time, then KQs still pure 4bs. (It only goes up from there if you have BTN never fold; this was essentially a worst-case-scenario of flatting every hand that's racing or is playable IP against KQs.)

It does pure fold bet to a 5b, as the merged portion of any linear range does at equilibrium.

But definitely not a value bet in the strict theoretical sense of the term, so definitely correct to take issue with my wording. I edited my post accordingly.

It's all moot because I flubbed the hand ranking given the SPR because of the big sizes. The screen grab above is a 3:1 SPR, but suited broadways are going to move down in rank at <2:1.

I guess this all means I could put even more footnotes on my original post, but I think the bit has run its course.

(Why yes, I did finally get my hands on a preflop solver with nodelocking capabilities, and yes I am going to be like an obnoxious grade-schooler who just learned a new vocab word.)

Be obnoxious! I'm certainly not buying one, so if I can freeride off your knowledge, why not?

What do we make of the large 3! sizing? Just exuberance and std LL live things? Or indicative of a hand that doesn't want the blinds coming in, like some med PP or broadway offsuit?

Reading the OP, my first impulse was to 4!. But at these stacks, a reasonable 4! is a shove, right? A bet to 100, like sub mentioned, is basically a minclick, right? (Though a less weird one than the 38 to 74 or whatever in that other thread). Shoving 355 on top to win ~60 bucks seems excessive. Especially on the first hand. Go to 130-140?

Easy fold in a 1/3 game, regardless of reads. At higher stakes or in some tournament situations, you could consider cold 4!. Problem is the 4! could get flat called by hands that dominate KQ.