Sept. 14, 2017 | 5:34 p.m.
@GT: the "one measure" is that KQJ9 makes better wraps and more and nuttier straights.
I'm not sure if "nutty wraps and straights" are relevant enough to qualify as a relevant measure since it intentionally caps the handstrength at straights. It would make more sense to me to talk about handstrengths that are both at least a straight and also the nuts. That would make them truly "nutty".
For starters, AJ98 makes the nuts by the river more often than KQJ9, 8.54% vs 7.69%:
On the flop AJ98 has the nuts that is at least a straight more often than KQJ9, 3.23% vs 2.89%;
On the turn AJ98 has the nuts that is at least a straight more often than KQJ9, 7.26% vs 6.52%;
On the river finally AJ98 has the nuts that is at least a straight more often than KQJ9, 8.64% vs 7.70%:
Lastly AJ98 has more equity against 2222 than KQJ9 because KQJ9 blocks its own outs:
Aug. 27, 2017 | 8:36 p.m.
You could use propokertools, remove 2-3-Q-K from the deck. Compare these results with a deck that has the 2-3-4-5 removed to see the effects of the high straights; compare these results with a deck that has the T-J-Q-K removed to see the effects of the low straights.
Combining these results should bring you pretty close. Or just program a calculator yourself.
Aug. 26, 2017 | 10:44 a.m.
1) Fold pre
2) open, call
Why do you prefer KdQhJh9h over Ah9hJd8c?
Propokertools rates the former as a top 20% hand and the latter as a top 10% hand:
AJ98 has more equity than KQJ9, against tight ranges and against wider ranges:
Also KQJ9 with 3 hearts and a Q high suit will hit a flush less often because it has 3 hearts and its flushes will be dominated more often since it's the third highest flush.
KQJ9 blocks 23% of top 3% combos whereas AJ98 blocks 51% of all top 3% combos. So you will almost certainly face less 3-bets when you open AJ98 from UTG than you would with KQJ9 from UTG. In fact all 4 hands are from JNandez at 500 zoom - he folded the AJ98 - and he got 3-bet by the HJ when he raised the KQJ9 from UTG.
I fail to find just one measure by which the KQJ9 performs better than the AJ98, and yet both you and JNandez play the KQJ9 and not the AJ98.
Aug. 26, 2017 | 1:22 a.m.
The EV for bluffing will be different than the EV of calling.
If you have any chance of winning the pot you want to include the new size of the pot into your calculations
The last formula seems incorrect, using your vague terms this seems correct.
Aug. 24, 2017 | 5:52 a.m.
In the beginning you discuss that you want to openfold 9753ds from the HJ if the table is tough. Would you openfold the following hands and/or fold them to 3-bets when the table is tough (if ever)?
Ah9hJd8c from UTG
KdQhJh9h from UTG
AsJdJh7d from the HJ
Ad4d8h7h from the HJ
Aug. 24, 2017 | 5:34 a.m.
Top 5 Users This Month
Top 5 Users All Time
Aug. 2, 2017 | 9:04 p.m.
You can't have one function f for all river situations.
For instance when you have
(X)KsKhKdKc vs my
then you can't bet for value obviously. And when I bet I only rep one hole card the Ts. So when I bluff you will have a 1 in 43 chance of blocking me with the Ts yourself. Also when you have an A you block my bluffs as I would be more likely to play AAsKs than 6hAsKs. Betting very large for me here will be optimal.
But when you have
(X)AsAc5c6h vs my
I must bet much smaller, because a Q or 7 gives me two pair that will have 70-80% equity and a K will give me around 95%, but you can always have an ace and be sure to beat me. So bluffing with an ace becomes interesting for me. Potentially you would be looking at multiple betsizes here.
And those are just two simple spots.