Kd,8c,4s postflop strategy (K高干面(3bet底池), 3-bet pot)
On Kd,8c,4s (K高干面(3bet底池)), Button (in position) c-bets 18.1% of the time when Big Blind (out of position) checks, while Big Blind checks 0.0%. Flop range equity: Big Blind 58.7% vs Button 41.3% (our deterministic seeded Monte Carlo, 178,631 samples, 95% CI ±0.23pp). All frequencies below are TexasSolver offline outputs; exploitability 0.150%.
Range-level action frequencies
| Range / action | Check | Bet 74 (~33% pot) | Bet 169 (~75% pot) | Bet 890 (~396% pot) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Big Blind · OOP | 0.0% | 6.6% | 93.4% | 0.0% |
| Button · IP (vs check) | 81.9% | 13.7% | 4.3% | 0.1% |
Board reading
A K-high dry board in a 3-bet pot: BB's 3-betting range is built on big pairs and AK/KQs and connects well, while BTN's calling range of middling pairs and suited connectors mostly misses. Note the consensus of smaller pot-relative sizings in 3-bet pots.
Cross-check from our own engine
| Range | Flop range equity | Theoretical combos | On-board combos | Board-blocker loss |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Big Blind · OOP | 58.7% ±0.23pp | 100 | 91 | 9（9.0%） |
| Button · IP | 41.3% ±0.23pp | 116 | 106 | 10（8.6%） |
Method: seeded Monte Carlo (178,631 samples, 95% CI ±0.23pp); combo counts are live holdings after removing board blockers.
Solver frequency by hand class
Big Blind (OOP) frequency by class
| Hand class | Combos | Check | Bet 74 (~33% pot) | Bet 169 (~75% pot) | Bet 890 (~396% pot) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 99 | 6 | 0.0% | 7.3% | 92.7% | 0.0% |
| 65s | 4 | 0.0% | 8.4% | 91.6% | 0.0% |
| 76s | 4 | 0.0% | 6.9% | 93.1% | 0.0% |
| A2s | 4 | 0.0% | 3.9% | 96.1% | 0.0% |
| A3s | 4 | 0.0% | 4.0% | 96.0% | 0.0% |
| A4s | 3 | 0.0% | 10.7% | 89.3% | 0.0% |
| A5s | 4 | 0.0% | 1.8% | 98.2% | 0.0% |
| AA | 6 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 100.0% | 0.0% |
| AJs | 4 | 0.0% | 11.7% | 88.3% | 0.0% |
| AKo | 9 | 0.0% | 1.7% | 98.3% | 0.0% |
| AKs | 3 | 0.0% | 9.9% | 90.1% | 0.0% |
| AQo | 12 | 0.0% | 4.4% | 95.6% | 0.0% |
| AQs | 4 | 0.0% | 10.4% | 89.6% | 0.0% |
| JJ | 6 | 0.0% | 7.8% | 92.2% | 0.0% |
| KK | 3 | 0.0% | 27.0% | 73.0% | 0.0% |
| KQs | 3 | 0.0% | 0.1% | 100.0% | 0.0% |
| 6 | 0.0% | 12.5% | 87.5% | 0.0% | |
| TT | 6 | 0.0% | 6.2% | 93.8% | 0.0% |
Button (IP, vs check) frequency by class
| Hand class | Combos | Check | Bet 74 (~33% pot) | Bet 169 (~75% pot) | Bet 890 (~396% pot) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 55 | 6 | 86.9% | 10.2% | 2.9% | 0.0% |
| 66 | 6 | 92.3% | 5.0% | 2.7% | 0.0% |
| 77 | 6 | 93.4% | 3.0% | 3.6% | 0.0% |
| 88 | 3 | 50.0% | 35.6% | 14.3% | 0.0% |
| 99 | 6 | 96.8% | 2.2% | 0.9% | 0.0% |
| 54s | 3 | 96.5% | 3.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| 65s | 4 | 93.8% | 5.0% | 1.2% | 0.0% |
| 76s | 4 | 94.8% | 4.6% | 0.6% | 0.0% |
| 87s | 3 | 92.0% | 6.1% | 1.9% | 0.0% |
| 98s | 3 | 96.0% | 3.4% | 0.7% | 0.0% |
| A9s | 4 | 72.4% | 21.1% | 6.4% | 0.0% |
| AJs | 4 | 75.6% | 21.3% | 3.0% | 0.0% |
| AKs | 3 | 52.0% | 33.4% | 14.5% | 0.1% |
| AQo | 12 | 94.6% | 2.3% | 3.1% | 0.0% |
| AQs | 4 | 96.0% | 2.1% | 1.8% | 0.1% |
| ATs | 4 | 70.0% | 20.9% | 9.1% | 0.0% |
| JTs | 4 | 67.0% | 26.8% | 6.3% | 0.0% |
| KJs | 3 | 57.5% | 33.7% | 8.3% | 0.6% |
| KQs | 3 | 52.0% | 35.8% | 11.9% | 0.4% |
| KTs | 3 | 56.2% | 35.6% | 8.0% | 0.1% |
| QJs | 4 | 72.8% | 24.3% | 2.7% | 0.1% |
| QTs | 4 | 70.1% | 26.0% | 3.7% | 0.1% |
| T9s | 4 | 62.1% | 28.2% | 9.7% | 0.0% |
| TT | 6 | 95.5% | 3.3% | 0.0% | 1.1% |
Methodology
Solver: TexasSolver (console); 400 iterations, accuracy target 0.2, exploitability 0.150% (closer to 0 is closer to Nash equilibrium). Solving is done locally and offline — only data outputs ship, and the AGPL component is isolated from production code (not linked, no binary distribution). Range equity is computed independently by our own deterministic engine as a cross-check.
FAQ
What is Button's c-bet frequency on Kd,8c,4s?
18.1% (TexasSolver output at the node where Big Blind checks); correspondingly Big Blind checks 0.0% there.
How are these numbers computed? Are they GTO?
Action frequencies come from a local offline TexasSolver run (400 iterations, exploitability 0.150% — closer to 0 is closer to equilibrium); the range equities 58.7%/41.3% are independently cross-checked by our own deterministic engine. A solve is an approximate equilibrium, not a unique answer.
Related
Educational use; not betting advice.
Cite this page: Pailiku, “Kd,8c,4s postflop strategy (K高干面(3bet底池), 3-bet pot)”, pailiku.com/strategy/postflop/bb3bet-vs-btn-kd8c4s (2026).