would you mind sharing your conclusions and showing the work for how you arrived at the answers? im not certain on what is the correct way to do the calculations
Sept. 6, 2016 | 5:50 p.m.
are you considering taking this strategy in only HU pots, vs presumably someone with balanced cbetting strategy on this texture? if hes overcbetting, clearly ur friend is correct and you should just cr (this combo specifically would be an excellent candidate for obv reasons). i'm assuming you are discussing developing this strategy because smarter ppl know bb has RA and will ck back a lot to either not get blown off/inflate or realize bd equity. since most ppl are not used to facing such a strategy, i would expect to get a lot of immediate folds or a lot of peel once/fold turn types (agree a large sizing is best as to maximize FE/pressure). I am, however unsure of how to compose the exact type of hands to do this with. I would guess you defend roughly 75-85% of ur hands here so some combos that both block overpairs and don't block wraps/SD's seem to make sense, but i wouldn't be able to expand further specifically. Also, i do think its very tough to barrel off from a standpoint of visibility. I think its pretty unlikely most ppl will raise you very often with a 3 in this spot, so im hesitant to use the phrase "mindlessly betting" since the numbers you ran dictate how infrequently btn will have 3x+, but in doing a little bit of this myself in game, i find it difficult to decipher whether im bluffing ppl off overpairs, wraps, or 3x and therefore either fall into the category of under-bluffing or over-bluffing. Very curious to hear your thoughts on this and how the discussion develops.
April 27, 2016 | 6:43 a.m.
First let me say that i dont really want to discuss the initial peel preflop. i know many ppl will say you play this hand and get in this spot blah blah i get it. This call pre is unorthodox for me (i would often 3b or fold, leaning towards fold) but im toying around with a few new strategies so yea. i know this topic has been covered before, but if i understand the spot correctly (possibly i dont) this is a very standard call given action correct? I think utg has AA nearly every time, or some very good KK combos/Akkx. Obv the squeezer is calling off everytime here given stack depth, so essentially im calling 560 to win 1065 with extremely clear visibility and (i think?) a hand that flops well enough. In previous examples of this spot, ive seen the argument that calling with any 4 card combo (presumably one with an ace would be the only exception) is fine because youll always have enough equity vs the assigned range of UTG. My hand has 40% equity vs AA only range and given pot odds here, i need 34.5% to call. Based on that, im assuming this is +EV but i just wanted a more thorough understanding to be sure, because even if im correct that its +EV, im not sure how to calculate exactly by how much, or if it is at all considering there is still money behind. Thanks so much in advance for any responses!
1) Are all of the above assumptions correct?
2) Is the play +EV pf? If so, is it quantifiable in terms of BB, and if so, by how much?
April 27, 2016 | 5:57 a.m.
can you pls explain what stats you are using at 22 minutes in the 3bet/cold call popup under the "total" column? if im reading it correctly, it should be total 3b vs utg, total 3b vs mp, etc etc.....however, i do not see those stats in HEM. for my popup i have something similar, only for totals i use mp3bet, CO3bet, btn3bet, etc as a way to see how often player 3bets in total from each position, not VS each position. If i am reading your popup incorrectly, i apologize. If you wouldnt mind taking a moment to clarify i would appreciate it. thanks!
April 25, 2016 | 5:05 a.m.
Link to hand
5/5 live game with a $10 rock. Hero is viewed as very lag and someone who hates folding. There are a few minor details that you cant make out from the hand history in the link below. The game was currently 8 handed and i had the rock in the HJ. Action started on the fish in this 4way pot, who was the CO. The btn and SB are both regs, btn is pretty straight forward, SB is close to the same but with some tricky tendencies. In general both are very ABC. When the CO limp raises 3x and not pot, i think he never has AA combos and i think the SB knows this, which obv factors into my decision greatly. I think both my initial peel for $15 more and additional $50 are not worth mentioning specifically given I have best relative position. I think SB cr range should always be AT+ here, although its possible some A6 with gutters do the same. Im unsure of if he takes this sizing with whole value range, potentially to fold some of his A6 or AT combos if big action develops behind him or not. Its possible he raises small to induce with TT+ and pots all of his A6 and AT. To me, it makes little sense to do this though because its very plausible btn has some form of a wrap that hes giving great price to call with. Given action, what is best action?. My initial thought was jam...but the more i thought about it, i ended up with Call>Jam>Fold. Curious to hear everyone's opinion on that hierarchy. If you decide on jam, is there a stack size of the villain where it becomes a bad jam? (ex: always gii to 2000 or less but not above 2500? or something similar).....hopefully i worded that correctly. I also dont think its impossible for villain to have AA here at all, but as i said when he knows CO almost never has it and he knows btn almost never has A6+, it becomes a little dicey for me to decide range for gii. If i went solely on combinatorics, its very straight forward get in given assigned range, but perhaps some of these other factors will lead to you all disagreeing. Please lmk your thoughts on the hand below. Thanks!
April 3, 2016 | 12:19 a.m.
in reference to phil's counter argument about not wanting to include rly bad AA combos in your squeezing range....jnandez im wondering if your strategy here would be most effective at shorter stack depth (perhaps 40-60bb)? In one sense, the shorter depth addresses PSR concerns with playing bad multiway combos such as AAxx, but then again, i believe the shorter you are the less likely CO is to fold pre or on the flop, so any amount of assumed FE from him being sandwiched is at the very least dramtically decreased if not lost. Do you agree with any of the above and if so why or why not? Phil, would also love to hear your thoughts as well.
PSA: im not advocating shortstacking :)
April 2, 2016 | 11:24 p.m.
i did a quick sim in PPT of all AA combos vs a range for you of all sets, top 2 ( which you have very few combos of i think?), T98x (w and w/out clubs) and K hi fd+, and AA has 36% equity vs that range. So it seems to me he should have between 36 and 40% and therefore not folding nearly as often. Was your read that he would not call correctly in this spot?
Nov. 18, 2015 | 11:37 p.m.
Really love the way you have formatted this video and used various tools to calculate the answers you're striving for. I hope to see much more content following this style, so thanks for that. With that said, when you make a few of these calculations, do you think you are overestimating how often you will get folds (specifically vs the pf squeezer for ex? Like on J73cch, is rly going to fold like AA9Thhxx or AAKThh etc? even AA98ddss? I realize im only referencing a handful of combos, which would be no means make the play dramatically less EV (i dont think) and perhaps thats why you didnt bother to include what im talking about in ur calcs. Just curious to hear your thoughts on this point and if its worth elaborating on. You have very few JJ and 77 combos expect for like QQJJ (dbl pairs etc) so it would seem to me that if he folds like AA with any kind of immediate (non flush draw) back up or back door back up, given pot odds he should be calling. Sorry if im rambling, hopefully that makes sense. Cheers
Nov. 18, 2015 | 11:26 p.m.
In the 2nd line of the last slide in this video titled "conclusions", you mention that players with a high cbet and a high flop c/fold tend to be merged. how can someone have a high cbet and a high c/fold at the same time? or am i not understanding this correctly? you make the point that these ppl with high cbet tend to bet their strongest, middle, and some of their weakest part of their range (hence the high cbet%) and i understand that.....but i dont follow where the high c/fold part of that sentence comes into play. thanks for the video!