Brokenstars

You'll find people tend to overfold and underraise in this configuration. You can run a filter in your database for players at your limit and take a look at how often they fold turn after not c-betting flop.

There are coaching listings on 2+2 (including my own) @ https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/290/coaches-amp-schools/

You only have pot odds of 33% if he is utilizing a pot sized bet. I don't see anything anywhere about specifically stating the size of the bet.

tbeckett if you were on the river with a bluff catcher and had precisely 20% equity and the bet sizing used by villain was such that your pot odds were 20%, then because your equity is equal to or greater than the pot odds you could call. This assumes your equity would not decrease due to rake or blocker effects. In this instance because pot odds = equity, the EV of such a call would be exactly 0.0000.

The sizing utilized by villain assuming he was only making a bet for you to have 20% pot odds would be a 33% bet size. (0.3333/(1.0000 + 0.3333 + 0.3333)). In this example, because your calls are effectively 0 EV (equity = exactly pot odds), then the frequency you should call would be calculated by making IP have his bluffs be 0 EV bets. This is done by calculating the frequency he needs you to fold when utilizing his bet size. In this example we've calculated his bet size as equal to 0.333 of the pot to give you 20% pot odds. This means when he bets 0.3333 he needs you to fold equal to or greater than (0.3333/(1.0000+0.3333)) = 25% of the time for him to auto profit with any bluff ignoring rake and blocker effects. As such, you would call with your bluff catchers 75% of the time.

To answer the original question, though. Steve is correct and his definition is good. Your equity is your share of the pot with your hand or range against a specific hand or range at any node in the game tree under the assumption that the rest of the hand is checked to showdown. As I said in one of the previous posts; you have equity, but you don't necessarily realize it all because there is betting going on in future nodes. Your equity is your pot share assuming you checked it all the way down. Your equity realization, is your EV/pot share divided by that value. It's basically stating what percentage of your equity do you actually get to realize in aggregate over all future nodes.

I look forward to your next review!

I think doing HH review for the community is great. I watched a decent bit of the recording, so thanks for putting it onto Youtube. This type of format is good, and I think overall would be a great boon for all low stakes and microstakes players to hear how players better than themselves are thinking about hands.

My main point of constructive feedback would be to attempt to keep the pace up, as there were many points during the review that really seemed very slow (taking 5+ minutes to just get to the flop or turn action).

I hope you do it again and that other coaches can host/share their thoughts on other hands. Thanks again and as always ~~ Good luck at the tables!

Yes, these would be good videos tbeckett I remember watching these from Steve Paul in the past.

Hope you're doing well Steve, cool to see you are still around :). I don't frequent this site often anymore.

There is a video by Cameron Couch, "constructing bb defense ranges". If I recall correctly, he does something like this (though its been 8 years since I watched it).

Your equity is only one part of the equation. You can overrealize or underrealize your equity. Some hands to tend to have better equity realization than other hands because they can and will be played aggressively. Lets say you're playing 6-max nlh and the btn opens to 2.5bb and you are in the BB. It's 1.5bb to call and play for a 5.5bb pot, so pot odds are 1.5bb/5.5bb... and therefore you need equity = or greater than 1.5/5.5. However, you need equity > 1.5/5.5 because you're not going to realize all your equity. A lot of flops you will check and fold, so you will not see the turn or the river.

Solvers these days can calculate equity realization, which is basically just your pot share (EV) divided by your equity. This is because all the EVs are known. If you have PIOsolver or some other solving software you can get a decent idea of what a reasonable equity realization is going to be (0.8-0.9 would be reasonable approximation depending on your skill level compared to opponent). So, your equity to call would need to be 0.9*(equity of hand/call) = > pot odds.

You can likely find some older pre-solver-era videos on runitonce that attempt to do these calculations/estimations. They will be from like ~2014-2016.

Calculate pot odds, estimate equity of hand vs. RFI range, and estimate equity realization.

Seems silly to want to attempt to figure it out when software is available to do it for you relatively quickly and at high accuracy, though.

You're converting a ratio to a percentage. I strongly prefer the % because it's much easier to understand (for me).

There is a lot of variance in poker and your downswings will be primarily governed by your winrate and standard deviation. A lower winrate and/or higher standard deviation will yield a higher probability along with larger potential downswings.

You can play around with the online poker variance calculator found on Primedope.

https://www.primedope.com/poker-variance-calculator/

You'll want to post more relevant stats. Right click in your position ribbon and configure report and add the following stats and post a screenshot of them. Also, include the aggregate values (so the averages at the bottom--don't cut those off).

Raised first in (RFI)
Steal Success (Stole)

3Bet vs EP
3Bet vs MP
3Bet vs CO
3Bet vs BTN
Cold Call (CC%)

BB vs SB Call
BB vs SB Fold
BB vs SB 3B

Call vs BTN Open
Fold vs BTN Open

Fold to PF 3Bet After Raise (2Bet PF & Fold)
Fold to PF 3Bet After Raise IP
Fold to PF 3Bet After Raise OOP

WWSF
WTSD
WSD
River Call Efficiency

Welcome back.

I don't think the 3b is bad, but you could likely size it a bit larger. Both the flop and the turn are actually not great cards for you as BTN can have all the flopped sets, lots of pair + draw type combos (98s/87s/76s/66 etc.) and floats the flop vs. your sizing with the vast majority of his AX. You should likely either check flop or check turn and size up pre if you're opting to 3b.

I agree with Steve. You could also size up preflop since people tend to over call and under 4b after RFI from UTG.

I did consider it. I wouldn't make deviations based on the fact they rake preflop at this moment in time.

Here is a preflop sim vs. a CO RFI of 27.7% and 2.5bb sizing. Rake is allowed preflop and rake is 5% capped at 3bb and here is SB response:

Pre is fine, but at low stakes where rake is high and you potentially are not playing well you could maybe fold I guess. Something like A8s should be close to 0ev theoretically, so if you're making a lot of mistakes and rake is high, then A9s might turn negative, but defaulting to 3betting with this hand is likely going to be a good idea. Sizing for your 3b is on small side, but because he has a shorter stack it makes the sizing actually good.

It should be noted that when playing against weaker opposition their fold to 3-bet when they have position is generally speaking going to be low and they will also not have many/any 4-bet bluffs. Our opponent having a lack of 4-bet bluffs allows us to 3-bet slightly wider. Conversely, the majority of our EV when 3-betting OOP for our weaker hands (i.e. weaker suited hands, weak aces, weak pairs, weak suited connector hands) comes from our opponent folding preflop. I wouldn't really put A9s in this bucket (though it is close) under the assumption our opponent is likely calling all of his weaker aces. That being said the weaker hands in our preflop 3-betting range would include weaker aces, hands like QTs, 66/77, weak suited connectors. Those hands would lose EV assuming our opponent is overcalling preflop and also played perfectly postflop. Under those assumptions our weaker hands would go from very slightly +EV to likely negative.

Because we're in a 3bp with a linear range and on a very dry and static board most of our strong hands will continue to stay strong. There are not any flush draws, 2's shouldn't be in our opponents range, and there are not many relevant possible straights on future streets. This leads to a situation in which we are relatively polarized from the flop and the likely preferred and optimal sizing will be close to a geometric one. Geometric means that it will be a sizing that allows us to bet the same % of the pot on all three streets (or two streets) to get all in by the river. This maximizes the EV of our range in situations where these variables are true because it forces our opponent to defend the maximum number of combinations while also retaining our ability to get it all in by the river. Because the stack depths are short in this hand you have the option of a geometric sizing to get it in on three streets or over two and both are probably good strategies for most hands in your range.

Betting the flop is good and you'd probably want to bet all/most of your range vs. a player that is likely wide from preflop.

As played on turn, you actually have decent showdown with your hand vs. some weaker hands that would have peeled the flop. So this is sort of a classic spot where you won't get better hands to fold and you won't really get worse hands to call. When that is the case typically checking is usually a good idea, so checking turn is correct. Now, facing the bet I think you also have a pretty easy fold. A lot of weaker players (though certainly not all) generally opt in to a more passive play style where if he did call the flop with some hands like K high they don't always bet when checked to on the turn, so when you face the bet on the turn there really isn't much to do other than to fold.

All in all, well played!

Raoul is correct here OP, checking a lot oop in general vs cc. and especially in multiway pots (if not always) is generally going to be a good approach. With your specific hand, on this specific board, and specifically against two likely weaker players betting isn't bad though---especially if you make the assumption they significantly under raise, under bluff when checked to, but also may call with worse when you do bet (which is all likely true, but goes off assumptions).

Well, that would reduce the number of potential bluffs he could choose from. I also don't think people raise their flush draws too much when they are IP to begin with.

What was the suit of the K? Honestly, I don't think IP would bluff raise on the board texture facing a 70% cbet and going 4-ways to the flop. I'd exploitatively overfold and would fold AK as well. Feels very weak-tight, but if you have IP having ~0 bluffs, then massively overfolding is the correct play. I'd put his range as mostly AJ/66 and the occasional very strong bluff (KQhh/QThh/KThh, etc.)

I'd just use a 67-75% ish sizing which should leave around psb for river or close to it. I'd likely be jamming on both run outs. There are a lot of two pairs and some sets (88), that will be calling turn very often to just fold river. If it was a paired river, then that is a situation in which I might actually decide to just give up as a lot of two pairs/sets would become boats and obviously not fold. Also, as I stated we have a lot of natural straight combos here and it's pretty difficult to over bluff in my opinion--especially on turn.

Aside from some like AX of clubs combos this is literally the bottom of your range and you have KJ/AJ at very high frequencies, so I'd go ahead and bet. I don't think you get many folds on this turn, but you can get some on a lot of rivers.

Flop call (or raise) is ok

Turn I think is pure fold

River is whatever, don't think I care one way or the other. Probably supposed to always call, but doesn't feel great. K blocks some bluffs maybe, T is a pair but kind of irrelevant, and I think people (probably (?)) underbluffing here.

Your initial goal when playing is to have fun. If you don't have that even to begin with, then you're unlikely to succeed.

AJo is indeed pretty weak 3bet here oop. To put it into perspective AJo is mixed/0ev in SB vs CO open. Your 3bet size is also arguably on the lower end.

You're right that the flop is generally speaking going to favor you has villain shouldn't have any 4x/5x and you have the overcard and overpair advantage so betting often is going to be good. You can likely just bet a geometric sizing here for range (55-65%) as this is looking to be quite close to a pretty polarized situation.

For barreling turns/rivers ideally you would block his best combos of hands which in this instance is the more middling pocket pair region like 88-99-TT-JJ-QQ. You could also have clubs. The next best combos would be the fourth suit of the flop, in this case that would be heart combos. The idea being maybe he floats flop with some bdfd combos, but then folds them on turn, so unblocking those folding combos would be mainly XXhh.

In this situation after you barreled turn (which is kind of on the wider side). I'd likely cut my losses and x-f, but if you think he is folding those 88/99/TT/JJ combos at much frequency then exploitatively over bluffing will be profitable.

The first step in that process is beginning with a strong fundamental base. Learn to walk before you run type thing. Doing the running before the walking is only going to trip you up and make you have to start over. To be fair though i dont know where you are in your current progression but getting at least 100k+ hands online for your own database and self analysis is a good start.

To put it blunty, this is likely out of your scope and should not be a priority at the moment. Your focus should be strong fundamental ranges if you are less than ~200nl. That isn't to say there is merit to studying it and what not, but before you start adjusting your base line game you need to have a strong understanding of it first. This will better help you understand how and why you deviate in the future.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Do you mean looking at population's call/fold/3b ranges, or do you mean creating your own call/fold/3b ranges as a function of population's RFI and 3b ranges?

Hi dm0sky,

Typically you'll be checking a lot when OOP to cold callers, especially on textures with two low/middling cards. AK can definitely still bet flop some as it's a strong value bet against all pocket pairs and weaker KX like KQ. Turn should be mostly blank, although it does add some connectivity to the board which is typically bad for OOP, but still mostly a blank in this case since IP shouldn't really have any new 2pairs or sets on the 2 turn, just gives 33/66 and AX hands some equity.

As played I think I prefer x/c river over betting. You're really only value betting against KJs or maybe KTs so I would prefer just x/c vs. some missed flushes or maybe some 33/66 turned into bluffs. I think you're in an objectively difficult position on the river as played because people typically do not bluff raise as much on the river as compared to if you had checked and he still can have a lot of sets/2p to value raise with.

You can and should start at the lowest stakes if you're starting out. 5nl is more than soft enough to beat for a good win rate even if the rake is very high. Last year I did a $100-$10k challenge on ignition starting out at 5z (see stats below). You can calculate the rake I paid in bb/100 with the data in the picture as well.

When learning poker it's important to practice solid fundamentals and branch out from there. I'd recommend getting your preflop game down first with a main focus on RFI ranges and how to face RFI (so BB defense and 3b ranges). It's also important just to garner overall experience and learn not to tilt/adjust gameplay based on good or poor results. After that you can put more focus in basic post flop strategy and deviations to make vs. your population. You're already doing a great job by starting here on the forums and having software to track your progress, so keep it up!