tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1869684927662694124.post3475333988668000951..comments2024-01-08T14:43:18.547+01:00Comments on Fredrik Paulsson: When Your Opponent AdjustsAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07901863272605053446noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1869684927662694124.post-20679855265594873072010-01-16T22:35:16.361+01:002010-01-16T22:35:16.361+01:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1869684927662694124.post-49608545987391106702009-08-05T10:42:28.811+02:002009-08-05T10:42:28.811+02:00Great post and nice discussion between you and zac...Great post and nice discussion between you and zach FP. <br />I enjoy your strategy posts, well thought out and well written. <br />Ty SirJurn8https://www.blogger.com/profile/12024496302952549170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1869684927662694124.post-15368672460867128672009-08-04T03:40:25.175+02:002009-08-04T03:40:25.175+02:00To clarify I would be 2 or 2.5xing a wider range e...To clarify I would be 2 or 2.5xing a wider range especially from the button. Even if they adjust it basically makes every option they have suck. They can 3-bet big and get worse odds on their 3-bet bluffs. They can 3-bet closer to pot-size and let you flat a wide range in position with a ton of money behind. Or they can call more which again they end up playing a pot oop without the initiative with deep stacks. I actually do this normally against decent opponents. Plus if you do decide to 4-bet bluff after getting 3-bet you can get such great leverage and a really cheap 4-bet bluff like 2 -> 8 -> 21 you put 21 BBs in and basically force him to risk his entire stack or fold unless he's going to flat the 4-bet oop.Zachhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00352205799814899565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1869684927662694124.post-30183133078376826332009-08-03T21:20:46.943+02:002009-08-03T21:20:46.943+02:00... and now I finished reading Cole's article,...... and now I finished reading Cole's article, which I thought was good (albeit a bit dated - it's funny how quickly strategy articles have that happen). His idea is fun and I might play around with it at some point.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07901863272605053446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1869684927662694124.post-54776426230890825192009-08-03T19:09:45.787+02:002009-08-03T19:09:45.787+02:00About light 4-betting: The reason I think that it&...About light 4-betting: The reason I think that it's a "more" exploitable adjustment is that your opponent will often be waiting for it. So when you do it, he's already a step ahead of you, so to speak. Or so I'd imagine, anyway, since I can't picture a guy who starts to 3-bet every chance he has and not give my next 4-bet slightly less credit than he normally would have, if you see what I mean.<br /><br />Regarding the use of the HUD: To confirm my suspicion, I double click on in the HUD (I use Hold'em Manager) to see what their stats are like for this session and this table. It lets me know if I'm just imagining them 3-betting me lots or if they really are, and it also tells me how exactly they play when I'm the one on the button and they have the BB, as opposed to their "generic" style.<br /><br />Regarding bet-sizing, I think that's not as straight-forward as just tightening up because it assumes that I'm dealing with someone who's 3-betting light BUT still folds way too often for me to pass up on steals. It can be an ideal adjustment, but it should be used carefully if you're also tightening up your opening range as a specific adjustment to a certain player.<br /><br />For instance, if I notice that the otherwise nitty player to my left has been 3-betting me 25% in this session (and it's a decently long session) then I can tighten up OR make my bet sizing smaller, but I'm not sure it's good to do both, because if I'm tightening up I don't want him to stop 3-betting me - quite the contrary. And there's an inherent danger to making bet sizing changes as a counter-adjustment: They might notice that you've changed something mid-session. Now I'm creeping dangerously far into "I know that you know that I know" country but I think you see my point.<br /><br />But against people who "always" 3-bet much, I do open smaller (2.5x; I don't have the minraise in me quite yet although I think I'll start toying with it at some point and against some players).<br /><br />Thanks for the input; I appreciate it.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07901863272605053446noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1869684927662694124.post-452599438616805932009-08-03T18:51:57.553+02:002009-08-03T18:51:57.553+02:00This is old but I think you'll enjoy this arti...This is old but I think you'll enjoy this article. It presents a third adjustment to counter light 3-betting: http://cts687.livejournal.com/14591.html<br /><br />Another thing though is that although light 4-betting is also exploitable, so is opening less. It's very similar to your passive adjustment but when you start opening less this opponent may start 3-betting less, in which case you want to begin to steal more again. It's all an endless cycle of adjustments and counter-adjustments.<br /><br />The other thing though that I don't think you mentioned that's pretty important is also the use of a HUD. Most players use them today and make some pretty big assumptions. For example say one of these light 3-bettors is on your left, just because the steal stat on your HUD is 80%, it could easily be 90% against most opponents and 25% against them. Even some players who only use hands in the last month on the HUD will just never believe you're not stealing from them as much which means it'll take them longer to adjust to that while the 4-bet light even if the stats don't show it they will certainly remember in their heads.<br /><br />Also another adjustment to make is bet sizing. If they're 3-betting you a ton and not calling much, do you ever start minraising or maybe 2.5x? This either decreases the price on their 3-bet bluffs or lets us flat a ton with deeper stacks in position.<br /><br />Good post.Zachhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00352205799814899565noreply@blogger.com