need to 4 bet?

[a_ntemage]

i started to think of the reasons we raise (and how these reasons fit into poker theory.)

poker theory states that the only reasons we bet/raise are value or bluff. the new thingie being a semi bluff (technically all bluffs are semi bluffs)

the main being for value (a.k.a raise ak knowing at+ is atleast usually calling) even if you raise 22 and are called by ak you are still making a very very thin value raise.

second reason being a semibluff (imo since no hand can be drawing dead to any hand preflop, no hand can be a complete bluff) that being hands like tjs... these hands are raised with multiple reasons...
1. everyone folds you win (the bluff part of the semi bluff)
2. someone calls, you bet (67% of the time you miss and you c-bet its a semi bluff right?) he folds you win (bluff part again
3. if you never raise these hands its hard to get value from your stronger hands (i almost always fold aj to a nit's raise online) (don't know how this fits into poker theory strictly)
4. these hands flop well (aka the semi part of the semibluff :p) and can stack people

but 2 and 4 are basically semi bluffs...

next being the reasons for three betting
1. again value. you hand beats his raise range, opponent raises, you 3-bet. its a value bet
2. 3-betting people who often raise fold/fit-fold flop...( again don't know how this fits into poker theory)
3.?????

heres my doubts... why do we 4 bet?
1. value... pretty simple... you hand beats his 3 bet range hence its a value bet.
2. to prevent yourself from getting coolered (over 200 bb stacks) your sitting with kk or qq... by 4 betting if your opponent 5 bets/5 bet jams you atleast can fold your hand (though kk is almost always all in here)
3.4 bet are considered super strong and people have no idea how to play in 4 bet pots... you can use this to abuse almost all players.... (again pretty useless unless stacks are deep)
4. to reduce positional advantage...(how does this fit in poker theory?)

my point being online, i find myself almost never 4 betting... my 4 bet range consists of exactly these 3 scenarios
1. i have kk and a nit 3 bets me i 4 bet here to get an idea of where i am (but most of the time im broke here)
2. i have qq/kk/aa and an absolute fish 3 bets me (i have only found about 10 of these fish online... these guys have stats of about 90/25/25)

in all other reasons i find flatting far better than 3 betting.. sure i give up some equity when i raise (aq+/jj+) get three bet flat and have to give up on some boards... but i more than make up for it when i flat in position and take away on many boards... plus i have an extremely large flatting range so i get tons of action when i flat kk and aa ip...

i have a limited bank roll of 130$ or something which is like 26 buy ins at 0.02/0.05 where i play and thus i understand that by flatting i cut down on variance a lot.

my point being against people who just cant fold or in tough spots where a 4 bet is nearly mandatory 4 bets are ok. other wise why ever 4 bet with a 100 bb stack???? this is a very major problem at my current stakes which i would like the answer to.


sorry for the long post and if you could answer the other questions in the brackets also it would be nice.

kthxbai

[RyckyRych]

Meh, cash is a different animal. I think people tend to call 3-bets a lot more often. Being around 100BBs in a cash game setting is messy, LOL.

I think it may be very player dependant. Against a player would likes to resteal often you may need to reraise as a re-resteal to keep them honest. Being so deep I wonder if flatting with your strongest and most speculative hands aren't best, especially in position. The medium strength hands, like AQ, TT, and the like, I can see 4-betting with against these players.

If the guy is always value 3-betting then I'm thinking you either call to speculate with proper odds (like a set with a PP or flopping big with a SCer) or 4-bet/jam with a hand you are willing to show down with. Fold the others and avoid problems.

Since this is cash I'd rather hear from TIME or the other ring guys.

[Tim]

poker theory states that the only reasons we bet/raise are value or bluff. the new thingie being a semi bluff (technically all bluffs are semi bluffs)

...

second reason being a semibluff (imo since no hand can be drawing dead to any hand preflop, no hand can be a complete bluff) that being hands like tjs... these hands are raised with multiple reasons...

Firstly, semi-bluffing is not new. Secondly, not all bluffs are semi-bluffs.

As for 4-betting.... it's not something you'll encounter too often so I wouldn't worry about it too much. In a 100bb game you'll usually only see 4-betting with a very narrow range, and of course it's almost always going to be an all-in bet. Whereas in a deep-stack game 4-betting can be a valuable tactic and the range will be far more polarized, particularly when you consider the leverage of stack sizes on subsequent streets.

[a_ntemage]

i have a very solid problem with these hands tt,jj,qq,aq,ak when i get 3-bet oop versus a good player i ususally just fold ttjj and aq and flat the other two but ip i feel the need to flat all of those... is this the right play?

[RyckyRych]

i have a very solid problem with these hands tt,jj,qq,aq,ak when i get 3-bet oop versus a good player i ususally just fold ttjj and aq and flat the other two but ip i feel the need to flat all of those... is this the right play?

Maybe in cash games I could see that. In a tournament, especially against weak players or resteal-happy players, I'm getting AIPF with all but AQ. I'll fold AQ unless I know the guy can resteal with weaker AX hands and KQ/KJ, then I'll hit up AQ too.

In other words, it depends.

[a_ntemage]

well in a tourney most of the time im sitting with 20 or less blinds and all i can think is "OMG I HAVE TT YESEYESYESYESYSYESY ALLL IN!!!!" or something along the lines of that...