He needs 29% to call so if he has a gutter and a FD or 2pair and a gutter I dont think he is folding. Also in a pot this big you probably dont mind him folding 18-20% of equity.
X/C is very reasonable at higher stakes or with certain reads, but against unknown who is potting 2 streets I would just go for direct value.
June 17, 2016 | 10:25 a.m.
you can use Q!RR so hands like KKQ* or Q997 are not included either. Here I would also include Q!A since those hands usually don't meet the stackoff requirement against AA unless they are in some other category that we listed.
However I think OP's assumtion of a 15% 3bettingrange COvsMP seems waaaay too wide, given stats and population tendencies I'd say it's between 4 and 8%.
June 16, 2016 | 1:27 a.m.
actually Q+ is wrong because it includes all KK and we are missing the bare wraps
June 15, 2016 | 10:57 a.m.
does T:J8+ include T98x? Other than that it seems what I'd be going for.
June 15, 2016 | 1:42 a.m.
Would you want to 3bet 98s or 87s against an unknown UTG player in holdem? Probably not. Can it be profitable? I'd say it certainly can, but without many reads on our opponent it's close to impossible to say whether flatting or 3betting will show a higher profit.
June 14, 2016 | 10:19 a.m.
You should be pretty happy pot/calling it here, should have above 50% when money goes in, and even if I try very hard I don't really see another option with a similar or higher EV for us.
June 14, 2016 | 10:15 a.m.
SB: $27.37 (Hero)
June 14, 2016 | 10:06 a.m.
4bet ranges are usually such that our wraps are very rarely dominated (potentially only on the 98x boards, but there SPR is still high enough to where we can flat a cbet and don't have to GII), so that shouldn't be a real issue.
June 3, 2016 | 2:20 p.m.
It's not really about being trapped by AA, but rather about being oop to the bigstack and IP to the shorter stack, lowering SPR will put us in a lot of super tough spots where we want to stackoff against the shortstack but dont want to stackoff for 400bb, and don't wanna call either. Might potentially be more likely to squeeze if shortstack opened and bigstack called because of that fact.
May 30, 2016 | 7:47 p.m.
Agree with Stlplo. Tough to make the line -EV, checking flop is also a great option against more agressive opponents who will try to get you off aces, however here there is a short player in the middle so he might be less inclined to purebluff and semi bluff.
Preflop is pretty debatable though.
May 30, 2016 | 7:53 a.m.
The top gap doesnt matter in the K high rundown because there is no superior straight draw to K-high openender. KQT8 basically needs a J on the board to have a good straight draw and doesnt have a wrap on a 97x board, while KJT8 flops a number of nutwraps and nut openenders and even 96x boards we have pretty good equity on against 2pairs (the ladder is true for both obv)
May 29, 2016 | 9:26 p.m.
I guess I can also get a bit more behind the squeeze knowing the linup, I believe o4rollz is wider than average UTG, therefore Cobus will be 3betting a bit wider with nutty hands, so your hand is actually stronger in that spot than in other lineups. Still believe it's slightly too weak, would have gone with KJT8 and KQT9.
May 29, 2016 | 6:44 p.m.
Cobus would have been my third guess :) I dont know how big of a fan I am of UTG's shove, but since it's omaha4rollz he usually doesnt care too much, so against him we might have less foldequity in that spot. Also he might have the read that Raven wouldnt shove KK+:Kdd+, which I dont have.
Generally speaking I think after squeezing preflop it's tough to find a more profitable line than pot/calling here, we will just get folds from both players too frequently I believe. Having the BDFD is also helpfull and gives him 3-4% more equity for cases where he is clinically dead (kinda like here). W/o BDFD I think c/f is reasonable, but pot/calling is probably still +EV.
Things probably change significantly on 863 and especially on 873.
May 29, 2016 | 6:33 p.m.
Yep, definitely agree on that :) Thanks for the numbers below, was gonna run them myself otherwise, as I strongly disagree that this is a favourable flop for our range, even despite having more sets than our opponents.
May 29, 2016 | 6:27 p.m.
Simple explaination: It's a flop that is very unlikely to hit either range (most likely to hit the HJ/CO callingrange), he blocks topset and 876 types of hands and because of the slightly high SPR some flushdraws have to fold (espeically by the player in the sandwich). Checking puts him in a fairly awkward spot and he probably can't fold against 1 player anyway, so jam should be the highest Ev option for BB. I think both the squeeze and HJ's preflop call are debatable and potentially questionable depending on the table lineup, would be curious who HJ actually is (my guess would be omaha4rollz or Ilari)
May 29, 2016 | 3:05 p.m.
@MajinVeta: I assume the only reason Hero calls the turn and doesnt get it in is to potentially bluff the river on good cards to get opponent off of splits and sets.
Getting to the river card removal kinda loses its power since our range is split into 3 categories on that card: flushes, straights without flushes and 2pairs. We probably can agree that whenever we have the first two categories (which should make up the biggest part of our range but quite a bit) we are always shoving, as well as we are shoving straights no matter if we have a spade or not (we usually do, but some JT8 combos don't). Now, the third part of our range which is some 97 combos that usually improve to a better 2pair on the river like KJ97, T976 and (apparently) hands such as ours, however some of these we might be getting in on previous streets due to playability, or rather the lack of it. Now of course not blocking any straight or flush cards isnt exactly the best situation to be bluffing, but if we look at our range there will be close to no combos that have any significant blockers for that situation from hands that actually are looking to bluff because they never win at showdown. We also need to look at the price we are laying ourselves on the bluff, and at this point we are ok with him having to fold 20-25% of his range that are hands worse than straights and making a profit rather than always losing the pot by checking.
P.S.: given that our opponent pots the turn (even at somewhat low SPR) makes it a bit more likely that he doesnt have a bare wrap without a FD, so the Js actually removes a good number of the wrap+FD combinations, probably removing more calling hands from our opponents range than any blocker in our hand could do.
May 29, 2016 | 2:40 p.m.
@oblioo : It does, however it also does include a big bunch of disconnected stuff and stuff that doesnt want to lead. Also, I dont think that it's a spot where we necessarily want to lead our sets or 2pairs, but it might depend on CO's tendencies.
I think it's a pretty clear fold against a raise by the CO, he has also the SB to worry about and your lead is pretty much never air nor a hand that is folding very often, I might run some quick numbers later but I don't think we can continue with this combo.
PS: Gave him a solid 30% RFI range and have him raising 22+,97+,9865,T86,JT8 which is actually a lot of bare wraps, we still only have 38%, and have slightly not enough equity on a Qs. Peeling to stack off on good turns seems to be about -7 to -9bb, and that's probably with the loosest assumption for villain, since a number of wraps are not gonna get raised by the majority of players, while the valuerange pretty much always will.
May 29, 2016 | 2:26 p.m.
Pretty sure this flop hits your range worst to potentially second worst rangewise (assuming reasonable ranges for all 3 players), you are pretty far behind against a raising range and once you play the hand this way and this river comes down and you decide not to bluff I fail to understand what exactly you are doing at 600pl.
May 28, 2016 | 9:01 p.m.
I mentioned the fact that c/f is also a resonable line since apparently checking was kinda out of the question. Second of all, saying that he will be folding Jx to a potbet is probably quite ambitious since most players below 200 don't have a defined strategy for these situation and I wouldnt assume that they are going to fold a non-paired Jx (e.g. a non QQJT hand) for any sizing that can be used in PLO, and because of the SPR still will realize their equity (eventhough potentially making mistakes against our range and potentially our hand).
What you are missing in your equation is that there is a number of cards where even if flop goes x/x our equity will be dropping a lot, so eventhough our opponent might be betting turn on those cards our hand doesnt lose a ton of EV since we will have 0-20% equity in those situations anyway. Also the fact that we dont really have big reversed implieds and pretty good implieds on the backdoor flush and on the A (since we can assume that they would expect us to cbet most AA combos), I probably still prefer checking to betting against the more passive kind of opponent.
Also, we are actually kinda more likely to get him off of some equity by potting turn on blanks and good cards after flop goes checked through rather than by potting flop, since I wouldnt expect a hand with more than 30% to be folding to a flop bet for the most part.
May 28, 2016 | 2:56 p.m.
Good luck with the challenge, and I dont recall what stakes you usually play but I'd rather spend the 6h/day working on my game than proving to the internet that the micros are beatable when there are people with 2-digit winrates at lowstakes with only slightly lower rake and much much tougher games.
But then again, what do I know.
May 21, 2016 | 5:07 a.m.
Check out Phil's "Death of EV" Video to understand why c/f is potentially better than the other options, especially with villains tendencies. What you are doing is comparing bet/calling to openfolding before making the bet (which has 0EV), whereas if we look at the flopspot itself we are probably around 55-58% against his full range, so if we were to check down from this point and never get value on our backdoor flush our EV would still be higher than the 8,26 we gain from bet/calling.
And as I mentioned, our EV for calling after making the bet is usually better against tighter ranges than wider ones for the reasons above.
May 20, 2016 | 6:40 a.m.
PPT 32% raw ≠ BU RFI 32% range
Also he is isolating a CO limp, so if the 32% are true it's probably more around 20-25%.
Dont think this is ever a fold once you bet especially against tighter ranges, they have much less J2/72/22 and such. Strongly dislike your sizing choise though. Check/folding also seems surprisingly reasonable.
May 19, 2016 | 6:48 p.m.
I just checked in my own DB for Hero, within different periods of the data (during each we had at least 7-8bb/100*) the positional winrates are all over the place. There is really funny stuff, such as being in the red on the button at one stake for this year while winning for almost 15bb/100 at the very same limit over that period, then breaking even in the BB at one stake and losing 60bb/100 at another while having a similar winrate, and so on.
Because of that and because such a large group of people as 40 will have different strategies and different leaks and might as well play in totally different games ( I expect huge differences between early morning games and afternoon/evening games (CET)), as well as it might just contain a number of weaker regs running hot over 10-25k hands, thus not giving you the result you are probably looking for.
- All winrates are refering to EVbb/100.