hey man. i'm excited to be working with you. i hope you enjoy the program!let's get started...I currently play 15s/30s ST on stars, and am being coached by filthyvermin. I'll start off with some general theory questions I have.Playing small pairs from the SB: The consenseus nowadays seems to be to openshove these at any stacksize. What other options do you consider with 55-22, and what factors influence you to take these actions?vs regs i will minraise 55 as a standard. regs tend to 3bet shove more frequently than fish, so having 55 in our minraising range should have some decent inducing value from hands that would otherwise fold to an openshove (K2s, A2o type stuff etc). having more combos in your raise/calling range makes your pfr a little harder to exploit too, though 6 combos for 1 pp isn't a huge deal i guess.if a player is 3betting me a lot, i will add 44 to my minraising range. 22/33 i'm just jamming at all stack depths. the only exception being:- someone who is playing <45% oop i prefer raise/folding 22-44 at deeper stacks, raise/calling when committed at mid-stacks, just jamming them shorter <18ish. not a huge risk of being flatted a bunch vs a range that only consists of ~25%ish flats. - also someone who non-allin 3bets a decent amt as a bluff, i'd add 44/55 to my minraising range vs this player too.Cbet sizing: Most people cbet 1/2 pot. I've been cbetting 37% on most boards, going for 1/2 pot on wet boards. I find the benefits of this to be:- I have a better risk:reward ratio, my cbet has to work less often- When my opponents have good hands, they let me know right away since they feel they need to get value. This makes their calling range very weak, and allows me to fire the turn and river very profitably on a lot of boards.- Since it is not the 'standard', I get into many more spots that I am used to but my opponents are not used to. This allows me to make better decisions. It can also cause them to spaz against me occaisonally.What are your thoughts on this? Are there any spots you would advocate cbetting >1/2 pot? if you don't feel your opponents are playing back more frequently, then i think it sounds alright. basically, they don't need to play back too much more frequently to make up for the difference between how often 40% and 50% needs to work - so i'd just make sure ur aware of that obv. also you are giving some more hands correct odds to flat that might otherwise fold, but again, it needs to work less. i can see some pros/cons to both sizes. at 24/25bb stx, do you feel like you might be costing yourself some value by not being able to setup effective stacks quite as easily for an optimal value shove on river? i'm imagining you cbetting t32 villain calls pot is t144, you are barreling something like t90 on the turn? so t324 eff stx w t340 behind (probably not the best stack:pot for a river jam, i'd like villain to be a little more committed for value) i guess you can go with a slightly bigger turn size though.i do a lot of 40% cbetting at <20bb stx, mainly bc the stack depth is short enough that i'm able to bet 3 streets easily and get stacks in...i could def be convinced it could work a little deeper though. only thing i'm worried about though is the stack room we allow villain to c/r bluff more often bc he has to risk less as well - i think the avg player doesn't c/r bluff nearly enough for us to worry when we cbet a more standard size of t40. let me know your thoughts...i'll consider it more.i definitely think that getting your opponent out of his comfort zone is an advantage of cbetting a unique size, but really couldn't we just accomplish this by cbetting t39 or t41? it's still an added benefit though.against fish, i would definitely recommend cbetting >50% of the pot on wet/connected boards when you have a good hand. we can be exploitive vs fish, most of the hands that villain would c/c t40 on a wet board will still c/c t55 or t60 - we encourage more of villains range to play aggressively on the flop, and if flatted villain is more committed to pot and likely to stack off lighter than in a t40 cbet pot. The two spots I am most unsure about are with total garbage on the first hand of the match and with A high. The first time I make a small cbet I think there is a very high % chance at getting played back at. So I might want to go to 1/2 pot with say 64 on a 3TK board. On the other hand I still have the benefit of being able to fire multiple barrels when they call.With A high the situation is a little bit different, because I expect my actual equity to be pretty good. So even though they are calling with worse hands, in theory I should be making money. However it can be difficult for me to play on the turn and river as they can often play perfectly against me. 3betting light 20-25bb deep: I understand the theory here, but I have trouble implementing this into my game. Do you 3bet light readless? M1ke (25/50 CAP player) recommended to me not to 3bet light readless, or at least not to 3bet/fold readless. If this is the case at what point should I decide I have enough reads to 3bet light? I never seem to feel the spot is right to 3bet light. What size should I be using for my NAI 3bets? Right now I am betting 90 at 10/20.mers and i have recommended to not 3bet bluff readless for a while now, but i've been becoming more and more convinced recently that it can be best with some of the suited junk at the bottom of our flatting range or slightly outside (94s, J2s, 73s, 84s type stuff). it's close i think. i mean, it's really not too hard for 3bet bluffing hands like the ones i mentioned to be better than folding, even against the avg unknowns opening range of ~60%. most of those hands, aside from maybe J2s and 84s are too weak too flat (but their exp isn't great), so otherwise we are just folding or having pretty poor flatting exp...so we don't need to 3betting to be that great for it to be the best option. this is the general point of most people arguing me on this. it makes sense to me tbh.i'm going to ask mers about this though and get this thoughts too. he mentionted in his latest vid that he's starting to think 3b bluffing some readless can be best as well. i'd just 3b t40-90 fwiw. if you aren't comfortable 3betting readless just yet, i'd definitely start adding it to your BB gameplan when you begin realizing that villain is opening a wider frequency than the avg player (we will usually have more fold equity bc of this). hand selection is important too: make sure that you choose hands that have better expectation in the given situation as 3bets as compared to flatting. the weaker suited hands are usually pretty good, as well as some 67o 86o type stuff.i prefer sticking more to the suited hands though, as they are less total combinations of hands than offsuit hands and it keeps my range a little more under control that way (not too weighted to 3b bluffs)...also, the suited hands usually will have better postflop expectation.Playable hands 10-12 bb deep OOP: Say I have KT or QJ when facing a minraise. It is obviously an extremely profitable shove, I am way ahead of his range. However these hands also play extremely well postflop. What is my best option in this situation vs a reg and vs a fish.the expectation of 3betting those hands is goign to be better than your flatting expectation, unless villains minraising range is super nitty. with stacks being so short, you really don't need much fold equity to have pretty great expectation w these hands - also, they are ahead of some hands that can minraise/call as well.if you find your opponent is opening REALLY tight, think top 30% of hands or so, they will be better as flats most likely. kind of hard to estimate flatting expectation though, so you will have to trust my intuition on it - mers' too, you can find a bunch of range stuff like this in old thread's he posted in (specifically jhub's thread...it is stickied at the top of the forum in one of those threads) some pretty broad questions there though. let me know if i can expand any further on any of them. could go on about each of them a bit more.

25bb from the sb, you mr and get 3bet to 100/120 first hand. What range do you:shove?raise?call?i think t100 and t120 are pretty different, mainly bc i don't think t120 is a bluff very often. so vs t100, i expect to have some fold equity when i jam...not much probably though:shove: A7s+, A9o+, 22-QQ...can see an argument for just jamming KQ too, it's close.raise: nothingcall: KK+,KJs-K8s,Q8s+,J7s+,T7s+,97s+,87s,KJo-K9o,Q9o+,J9o+,T9oagainst a 3b to t90: i'd add to my...jamming range: A8o, A6s, A5s (mainly i think there tend to be a good amount more bluffs in a t90 range)raise: nothingcall: a few more hands, T8o J8o 76s type stuff. against t120: i would flat a few less hands, 4bet shove a few less weak AX bc i expect less fold equity, and flat a slightly tighter range bc i'm getting worse odds.

 also someone who non-allin 3bets a decent amt as a bluff, i'd add 44/55 to my minraising range vs this player too.- Issnt it exploitive to jam 22/33 vs regs at higher stakes? Saw chadders minR 22, but dont know if thats his standard play with low PP.  - About CB-size. Why not making it 30-60-(overbetjam) with air and 60-95-jam with value (against fish)? And if we have outs our CB needs to work even less often. i definitely think that getting your opponent out of his comfort zone is an advantage of cbetting a unique size, but really couldn't we just accomplish this by cbetting t39 or t41? it's still an added benefit though.– Does it really sum up for all the time that we spend to mess with the size?   The two spots I am most unsure about are with total garbage on the first hand of the match and with A high. The first time I make a small cbet I think there is a very high % chance at getting played back at. So I might want to go to 1/2 pot with say 64 on a 3TK board. On the other hand I still have the benefit of being able to fire multiple barrels when they call.With A high the situation is a little bit different, because I expect my actual equity to be pretty good. So even though they are calling with worse hands, in theory I should be making money.  – Can you explain that a bit more. How do you mean by they playing back? If you mean by cr, are you gonna call a cr on that board with A-high because the likelyhood that the smaller betsize induced?  - Reacting to 3B: can you explain why you would 4B KQ? We make him fold all his air and often just being called by better, or? And wouldnt you consider a small 4B with JJ+ against fish? Im pretty unsure of what to call the 120 size with, but this is my range. Is it to nitty? As you said, it often not a bluff and I dont want to be dominated, but then again, if i think that the 120 range is strong then it would be better to call with low SC insted of the QJ/JT. My range:  KJs+, QTs+, JTs, T9s, KJo+, QJo, JTo  And how about the 90 betsize. Cant we flat with A6-A8o, A3-A7s? Getting value when villain doesnt put os on Ax on Axx boards and we can play back on dry boards KK3.  

i thought about it more, and i like it <20 and don't like it most boards very much >20. there is just too much stack depth for people to play back vs your small cbet on dry boards at >20 stacks. i really don't think the benefits you listed outweigh the negatives either. at <20 i'm cbetting 40% of the pot on dry boards fwiw, so it's not like i'm totally against the underbetting stuff. it's just a stack depth + pop tend thing for me.

T3: i would be leading this flop a lot, but i'd prefer to do it with 2 overs so we have a little more equity. also, if your opponent is stabbing a lot when checked to limped, i'd be checking to c/r bluff or for value a lot more, and leading a lot less. but ya, i agree...leading limped is really important. most players do not fight for limped pots (esp when they are oop, but ip too) - they don't feel committed to them, so they give up very easily. the common thought process of "well i don't see the point in getting it in with just 2nd pair in a limped pot, so i'll just fold" is the exact reason why bluffing is so great!i would just check T3 down here though most of the time. unless i had some specific read where villain doesnt float my lead much. i would be leading a lot though.96: this is a board i would be leading with atc. it's a very different board texture than 422! on 422 board, almost all of villains range has 2 overs, so it's a common board for players to float since they have 6 outs to top pair. on Q33 though, there are so many hands where both cards are between Q and 3 and will just snap-fold to a lead. when we stab 20 into 40 it just needs to work 33% - it usually will.TT: ya i'd raise to t60 pre. not a huge deal though imo.flop i would cbet a little bigger, t60-65, none of the gutshots/pairs that called flop here are folding to t65 imo.if you are playing someone who is aggro, i might consider checking the turn. it's going to be hard to get value on this turn card, so if you think he's likely to bluff his gutshots/draws/floats when checked to on turn. i'd c/c and c/c river. in general though, i don't think the avg player bluffs enough for us to justify giving villains range free equity by checking turn. so i like the way you played it bc of that.83: i don't think there is any value in leading the flop. also, it's a board that hits the typical limping range anyways. i would just c/c a small flop stab and reevaluate. if flop checks through and the turn is a blank, i'd prob stab into a weak range at that point to protect equity.42: again, not a lot of value in raising really - more than in the 83 hand though for sure. the big problem here though is that if villain raises we have to fold imo - it's not a board we get bluffed on tons, and villains overall range he'll get it in with is pretty far ahead of us imo. also we are going to get floated a ton, and we don't do great on a lot of turns. like the previous hand, i just c/c flop and reevaluate. QJ: my problem here is basically that:a) i think most players that 3x pre are doing it with a relatively tight rangeand b) villains do not cbet flops very wide in general, esp in a 3x'd pot imo. i think your c/r "might" be slightly +ev at best, but imo you are goign to get continued against a ton here. you are right though that you have some really great backdoor equity, and c/c isn't an option. i prefer donkbetting t50 and barreling off a lot. it's a little 'outside-the-box', but i think villains flatting range will tend to be pretty weak. the top of his range will play fast, we'll be able to realize our backdoor equity for cheaper than c/r the flop, and we'll have a lot of barreling opportunities both for value and bluffs on the turn/river. i'd be donkbetting J8s/J9s type gutshots as well. 76: i would just call flop and get in on non-club turns. i don't think many villains are continuing bluffs on a club turn on this texture.i think you are adapting your ranges way too much to a few c/r's over a small sample though. ya, i think it's unlikely he has much Ax here (maybe none). but he can also have better 7X/56/all flushdraws - a decent amount of combos. even if that range has some bluffs in it, you don't have enough fold equity to just be jamming "any 2 overs". i would def continue with 76 though vs that range for sure. 

Good insignt on how to play in limped pots OOP, they difference between 442 ans QQ3. Also so many more hands that I lead that were CC. One thought, do you really have a 3x range pre, with the TT hand that you said you´d raise to 60?

T7: i like a turn check. i don't think you get any better pairs to fold by betting. i also don't think you get much value from a bet either (not many worse pairs), but villain can have some better 7X+8X. overall, i think is range is real weak - mid-weak 8X, some 7X, and some weak draws. i think you end up valuetowning yourself too much, or just get a ton of folds...i'm tempted to bet to protect equity vs draws, but in reality the draws in villains range don't realize equity vs us that often - i would expect a flush draw with one over to 2nd pair to play faster on flop a lot, along with oesd, and JT J9 probably sometimes too. at deeper stacks, turn check would be super standard imo. a little more complicated shorter.i like preflop limp and flop stab though.98s: i don't see any real benefit in raising the flop. you fold out pure bluffs, but it's not like any hand with a club is folding anyways...if you really think he has that many bluffs in his range i'd just call flop and call turn/river pretty liberally. imo most players that mindonk a wetboard like this, esp A high boards, do not do it with a plan of bet/folding very much. i mean even if he has one over + a club we are about 50/50 vs that. going to see some wierdly played AX. i just think you get yourself in way more trouble than it's worth here, and you are basically turning your hand into a bluff mostly. J8: too deep to be c/jamming imo. imo the point that you should start jamming is the point where the average player (or a specific opponent, if u have enough reads to know this) starts thinking it is a stack depth where you don't non-allin c/r bluff much at. a fish doens't think this way, so i'd be happy to nai-c/r a fish down to pretty short eff stx (ask me for specific examples i guess)regs, on the other hand, realize that at 16bb eff stx postflop it is highly unlikely that you have a nai-c/r bluffing range - so what value do we get from a nai-c/r if they are just going to see it as only value (and mostly not draws, i think is how most regs perceive it). a check jam at this stack depth is typically perceived as "drawy", so if we have a value hand like J8 on this texture at that depth, i prefer check/jamming bc I think it's perceived as weaker and gets called by a wider range. i think its rare that a reg faces a nai-c/r at that depth and 3bet jams a wider range than they would call a chk/jam with though (not perceived as bluffy). rambling, i know...sorry! hahaso basically, this is a stack depth where it is still realistic for a thinking player to assume you have c/r bluffs in your range. there is value in a nai-c/r bc villain will call with a bunch of hands that would fold to a chk/jam most likely. we do not need to "chk/jam to protect our hand"...there are plenty of fine turn cards to continue on. against a fish at this stack depth, it's even more important not to check/jam. fish will flat a nai-c/r with sooo many hands that will fold to a chk/jam. once you get a fish more committed to the pot on the turn, obv they will end up stacking off ridic wide - since that's just what fish do! loldoes that make sense?A4: i like how you played it up until the river. i really don't think it's that bad of a card! a bunch of villains range is going to be 6X/2X like you said - you can rep Qx + flush somewhat (and vs a fish we don't really need to rep it credibly, we just need the board texture to be scary for villains range). i expect you will be able to fold out a good amount of hands that are ahead of you with a big bet, so i like that. t260 into t240 needs to work a little less than 55% of the time (260/500). the reason i prefer a slight overbet vs t180 is just bc fish get scared off by bigger bets. t180 would be the best size for value here imo, possibly a little smaller even. i don't think betting t260 or jamming the full t380 gets us enough extra folds to make up for the extra % of the time that t380 needs to work in our favor. i think if villain is c/c t260 w 7X, he's calling t380 most of the time too.96dd: i think turn is close. if we had a slightly better kicker i'd like a bet. the 9 kicker is going to get counterfeited on the river a ton anyways vs weaker 6X, and we are v towning ourselves into a bunch of 8X too - plus the rest of villain's range has some decent equity prob. but ya, close...i could see myself being wrong about this tbh...but my gut says ~Q6 would be my value cutoff here.

How close to nash do you play <8bb deep. Right now I am following it exactly at very short stacks but I'm sure that's not optimali still minraise/fold a few hands 8 deep (vs all players, unless i find a reason not to - i.e., flatting too much, 3betting too much, foldign way too much to jams so ill just jam a little wider than NASH). i balance that with minraise/calling some hands where i think villain is never folding better to a jam, but they might induce some wider 3bet shoves (and also fair well vs a flatting range). JT/J8s/T9s are decent examples (obv mr/calling these hands). the type of hands i would mr/fold still would be hands that i can't profitably jam, but have some card removal to villains 3betting/flatting range - basically Q5o-Q2o J6o-J2o maybe T6o too. i think most players fold a little too much at this stack depth, so having a bluffing range with some card removal is going to be good.i limp AA/KK between 6-9bb pretty much as a standard. people stack off (correctly) soo light post limped, even if they are skeptical of the strength of your limp. they will jam your limp with a pretty wide range still too. i would need villain to be continuing a pretty huge % vs my pfr to minraise at this depth with these hands.other than those types hands, i'm just jam/folding. it's good that you are trying to do better than NASH though. too many players start autopiloting <10-12 stacks.

at which bb depth do you stop NAI 3bettingi stop nai-3betting when my opponent will stop perceiving a nai-3b as value. or at a stack depth where against villains opening frequency and mr/calling frequency, it is more likely that the exp of just 3b jamming is > exp of nai-3b. give me some examples of hands, frequencies, stack depths...a lot to consider here.  What range do you 3bet 20bb deep againt a 65% opener?I'm getting like K7s+, K9o+, QTs+, QJo, JTs, T9s as +EV jams. Obviously should be flatting some of those. Want to make sure I'm doing it right.Although maybe I should be assigning a tighter calling range which quickly widens my shoving range a ton, but these are +EV no matter his range.your 3bet shoving range should be A LOT wider than that. the key is that you just solved for "which hands are +EV". you need to be deciding whether a 3bet shows a better exp than folding though! (folding is -1bb obv). then compare that expectation to flatting. use this program: http://www.husng.com/content/free-software-3-bet-shoving-equity-calculatoras you can see with that program, there are a bunch more hands that are going to show better expectation than folding by 3bet shoving them. of course, then you need to consider whether flatting shows better expectation than 3bet shoving. a lot of the hands you listed (T9s - KTo basically) are likely to show better expectation as flats - but it's close for a lot of them, and if villain maintains this pfr frequency or close to it as stacks decrease they will definitely become jams. mess around with that program some, focus on 'better than folding exp' and not '+ev exp', and then ask me some more questions about this. def a lot more to say on this topic but i think it's best you do that first.fwiw, i used 'loose calling range 1' on that program for villains mr/calling range - i think that's pretty std for a 65% opener at 20bb. the exp of KQ KJ KTs and QJs is great enough that it def outweighs flatting expectation (some other hands are close)...don't just 3bet shove these hands though! nai-3b them 40-120 and get flatted by a range that you dominate (and by some hands that would definitely just fold to a jam). this will def show better expectation, and unless you are playing a really great player most players will respond poorly enough to it (even if its obvious to some what we are doing) that it will show better expectation still than flatting or jamming. 

@mrbambocha:One thought, do you really have a 3x range pre, with the TT hand that you said you´d raise to 60?ya. i'd raise TT-AA and hands that dominate a limp calling range, KQ - T9s type stuff (mid-connected, J8s Q8s Q9o etc too). and then a bigger size 3.5-4xbb (4x deeper and 3.5x shorter) with hands that fair worse limp/called: A9+ 77-99 and any bluffs in our range.

What do you think about HUPLO? Seems like a lot of concepts we have for holdem should transfer, specifically the expectation oriented thinking, and there are far less people who know what they are doing there. also hu cash as well i think there are less people aware of the best plays 25bb deepthe few times i have messed around with HUPLO, i was surprised to find myself thinking about spots a lot better than i expected myself to. thinking about hand combos, card removal, expectation...all really important concepts. and ya, HU cash players tend to be awful <25. i dunno, i've always just stuck to what i'm good at. i'd love to take some time to venture into other forms of poker eventually, but for now i think the money is still great in HUSNG that it's not worth my time.

What do you think the best way of studying is? I see a bunch of people asking questions like "what should I be flatting against a 55% opener at 17bb", I don't think that carefully about those things. I feel like I'm asking about too many postflop spots, which come up with less frequency.let's start with the worst form of studying: reviewing your own play. if you didn't think it was a leak in your session, most of the time you aren't going to think it's a leak out of session too. session review is definitely still more +ev than not studying at all though, but i think it's by far the least efficient. i've basically never done this fwiw.good forms of studying:- watching videos: the key here is that too many players watch videos like they are watching a tv show or movie. you have to be immersed in the video to really get something out of it. put yourself in hero's spot...think about your thought process in that spot, then listen to what the coach has to say and think about that. focus on the WHYs and not the WHATs - by that i mean, focus on WHY a particular play is best, not simply WHAT play is best. there are a limited number of situations in videos. if you only focus on WHAT to do, and you just watch and say to yourself "ya, i would have done most of what hokie did there...nice"...then it's pretty likely you missed out on some value in the video. if you listen to the explanations in videos (the WHYs) and really pay attention to the thought process behind the decision...would you think about the situation as clearly as me? how would you think about it differently? why? if you think about the why's of a particular spot, you can then start applying the thought process in that spot to a bunch of different situations. see what i'm getting at? -review with friends: find some motivated poker friends that are serious about improving and also use useful tools for improving (husng.com, 2p2, etc). bounce ideas off each other, review your session w them, etc. getting other opinions and debating about poker is really useful in improving your poker mind. mess around with programs like the 3bet shove fold equity calculator i listed above, pokerstove, variance calculator on husng.com, etc.hope that helps some. 

"One thought, do you really have a 3x range pre, with the TT hand that you said you´d raise to 60?ya. i'd raise TT-AA and hands that dominate a limp calling range, KQ - T9s type stuff (mid-connected, J8s Q8s Q9o etc too). and then a bigger size 3.5-4xbb (4x deeper and 3.5x shorter) with hands that fair worse limp/called: A9+ 77-99 and any bluffs in our range."- I thought you were out of your mind. I could belive what you we´re saying. Only fish raise 3-4x pre, but after a few minutes of rereading it over and over again and wondering wtf this "new stuff" was all about I got it that it was inlimped potts OOP, I thought we where in SB :) About studying. I find FTP to be the best way. here I get professional answers direct instead of searching for them on 2p2 and guessing whos right, if any are. And in videos I dont find that many intresting spots, and in that 30-45 minuates I could have gone trough more hands here and got an answer directly then waiting for the answer a few days. And If I want to see a video Id like it to be more about similar spots, conceptvideos like itried made on bluffcatching or something similar (checkraising, facing checkraise). So I can see the problem from many different angels and understand how to play that spots under different curcumstances (different holdings, boardstructure, stacksize, betsize, villain), and from that I can build a picture and looking for similar spots in HEM and see which explanation fits best in on this hand and test myself that way because now Ive seen how the coach weigths the information. Ofcourse I wont get an explanation for all spots, but then I can post thoose specific hands and learn what I´ve missed in my though process. Would love to see a videoconcept series. 

"last 4 SB hands he had 3bet 3 times and I openfolded last time. His last 4 BB he had opened huge/shoved 3 times and limp/folded last time.   Given all that, is it reasonable to limp this hand here? With stacksize dropping, and all his previous aggression, I think that an open looks very strong and he is very likely to shove on my limp."I tend to be very skeptical of these type of mean-reversion gameflow reads, but I have no hard evidence just as people have no hard evidence in making the claims. I think it's very likely to be a minraise/call. I like the hand the rest of the way except I just jam over on turn with that little behind.

vs a random what should be my approximate pfr/limp %25bb deep20bb deep15bb deep i'd just read jhub's thread beginning to end. will answer  A TON of range-based/frequency questions like this. it really is a must-read for all you guys.http://www.husng.com/content/jhub30-hh-threadafter reading through that, if any ?s w this topic aren't answered plz ask

should I be donking monotone boardsway too vague. post some hands. i wouldn't be donking in very many situations (if ever) if villain is cbetting a reasonably wide range (and opening a decent amount pre)...just too much value in stealing the cbet with a flop c/r bluff since that villain has so much air. what about in limped potsDonkbetting and leading are two different plays. Donkbetting is when you call a raise and lead out the following street. Leading/stabbing limped we did not call a raise. Villains will treat these 2 plays very differently because: a) we are taking iniative away from them in a raised pot, and b) they are more committed to a raise pot so will be willing to stack off lighter (think about this in relation to raised pots vs 3bet pots vs 4bet pots, etc).  

 At deeper stacks, say 60bb, does it still make sense to be minr and cbet 1/2 pot?minraising is definitely fine. i would increase the cbet size to 60-70% though - 50% or less is giving villain too good of odds to float/continue w a wide range in a lot of cases.40bb readless, he minr do I shove 77? AK?would probably non-allin 3bet 77 vs a thinking/spazzy player since it has some inducing value, otherwise i'd just jam - doesn't fair very well vs a wide flatting range.it's too deep to just be jamming AK though. unlike at <25 stx, villain isn't mr/calling a lot of hands we dominate (folding A6s A8o type stuff etc). a non-allin will def show better expectationAt what stacksize do you stop 3bet shoving?against a really wide opening frequency, you can jam a minraise 50bb deep with small pairs (so vs a 2.5x i'd jam ~60 stx, and a 3x i'd jam up to 75bb deep). its important that villain is opening a real wide range tho (~80%+). otherwise flatting will have better expectation.what sort of hands should i be 3bet bluffing with at deeper stacks?http://www.husng.com/content/how-and-when-3-bet-light-hu-poker How do opening ranges change? I should probably be wider, but can i be opening like 95% at 60bb 90% at 40.it's fine to open that wide at those stacks. just pay attention to your opponents oop frequencies. if he's 3betting a lot i'd tighten up your sb pfr some. if he's spazzing/being a station post i'd tighten up some pre too. both so that we have a higher % of hands that continue well/connect well post. I think it makes sense that I have to get tighter OOP as well. you don't have to play tighter oop. if anything, you should play more hands oop since implied odds are better (and villains ranges are typically wider anyways)

Where is the value in jamming the turn? He is never folding and all the money is going in regardless of my play with his value, so the only value is vs his bluffs, which he will fold to a shove even with so little behind but might shove the river.the problem is that a lot of players aren't continuing bluffs on river. missed draws will c/f some. draws are committed to call jam on turn, and it sucks to allow a range that doesn't continue a lot on the river generally free equity. i mean pot on river is t420 and stx are t200 - not a very ideal bluffing stack:pot i much prefer mr/calling pre.

Nice chart.Its gonna be intresting to hear what hokie´s saying. I think it looks a bit to wide on the 3B side. THink pushing KXo, QXs-rag, JXs-rag, and the low suited cards is a bit to loose against average villain. And I dont know about 3B AA/KK, we have such a massive cardblocker effect som maybe better to call and cr most flops all in?  

14bb oop:i'm not sure i understand your charts.the first graph. is that villains opening %? seems reasonable if so, tho i'd expect A9o A8o A8s A7s to be minraising i'd think.if the second graph is villains mr/call range, that seems alright too.i would definitely flat a few more hadns vs that range: Q7o Q6o J7o J6o T7o T6o type stuff. your 3bet shoving range looks good to me.i definitely wouldn't nai-3b AA/KK. it's just too transparent imo...doesn't add enough value to get villain so skeptical. i would just jam at that stack depth given the amount he is mr/calling - also, i dont expect too many of the hands that you have mr/folding to flat a nai3b at that depth anyways....maybe a few do, but then at the same time you lose value from the hands that would mr/call a jam but miss flops and fold to a cb in the nai-3b pots

A2: we need to be right ~36%. considering the only realistic hands we beat are QdX, JdX and maybe a few other random diamonds, i don't think that is going to be enough for us to call considering villain reps QJ/TX and even slowplayed flushes and KT so well. 85: this seems more reasonable for bluff catching. i wouldnt cbet the flop though, it really crushes a 3b calling range. just remember, you don't always have to cb in your 3b-bluffed pots. you didn't 3b pre bc cbetting all boards was +ev, you 3b pre bc of preflop fe and cbetting some boards was +ev

What are your thoughts on raising limps to 2.5x with hands like JT? Allows us to raise a wider range, which is great considering that many opponents will play fit-or-fold when we raise their limps, and lets them call with a lot of hands that we dominate.i like it bc those type hands dominate a limp/calling range more. def don't like to raise to that size w hands like AK/77 tho. How does this raising limp range at 25bb look?88+,A7s+,A9o+,K7s+,K9o+,Q8s+,QTo+,J8s+,JTo,T8s+,T9o,97s+,87sdefinitely looks good, tho i'd be raising 3.5-4x with the hands that don't dominate limp/calling range as much for sure.Shoving 22-77, checking back all the weaker aces

J9 :: I think you should check back turn and realise your eq for free.Q5 :: CB, that misses his range often enough, we just need 33% of his range to c/f the flop, and since we have araound 12-14% eq if called we only need it to work 20% of the time if we CB half pott (we have 12-14% if he calls with pair and we have 48% if he calls with draws). But im not sure how to calculate our average EQ on this flop. (Combination of pairs * EQ + Combination of draws * EQ)/2. Anyways, I think we can CB here with ATC till we have a reason not to.   Edit: If you look at the last post in my thread Ive made a table of how often a CB needs to work.