Lefthook's avatar


34 points

It's interesting you block a decent portion of his bigger combo draws w/ 9d but you also blocks sets too. If we assume villain isn't raising 55, which seems reasonable at this stack depth, then there are only two combos of value villain can raise given our blockers. I wold imagine people over bluff this spot and top two is too high in our range to fold.

So...do we call or jam? This is a tough one to answer. I would guess if we have any fold equity and villain is weighted towards draws that jamming has to be +ev. I don't know how to analyze this spot if we flat though... Can we assume villain barrels all non-board pair turns and determine ev of defending all non-diamond 2,3,K?

Also, it is interesting to consider how we should play board-pairing turns. Exploitatively, we would want to bet on a 5 to fold villain off his equity and check on 8,10 and let villain improve. Especially if we assume zero implied odds.

It seems nasty, and I could be dead wrong, but given you bet this flop I would 3b/jam if I assume he isn't good and his range is draw heavy. It is actually a good spot to have top2 on this board, but it sucks you have 9d and this stack depth is what probably makes you hesitant to continue.

Jan. 15, 2015 | 9:03 p.m.

Very good vid, Jeans. Thx for taking the time to illustrate the indifference concept with an example. You also did a good job with your explanations.

Jan. 1, 2015 | 12:06 a.m.

I don't even need to mention it, but I will anyway...Sauce your videos and insight are some of the most valuable content on the site. For me personally, I have learned a great deal from your content. I think it's great you turned a relatively uncommon spot into a series as a theory excercise. Plz keep the great content coming. There is a reason almost every video has 50+ likes and 20+ comments. Ignore the trolls plz.

Dec. 30, 2014 | 2:24 a.m.

RIO4Life!! (kinda serious)

Dec. 10, 2014 | 3:35 a.m.

Comment | Lefthook commented on folding AAxx pre?

What do you mean by folding AA here nets -1.75, or 3+ bb? I understand your implication that not folding AA has at least as much EV as folding, but not sure how you arrive at -1.75 for a fold.

Dec. 8, 2014 | 7:37 p.m.

Thx Ben. Looking forward to part 2!

Dec. 7, 2014 | 7:58 a.m.

Well done. Thx

Nov. 25, 2014 | 8:43 a.m.

Thx for vid, Zach. Interesting hands.

Have a couple questions:
First hand, you mention wanting to size bigger to rep polarized range. I have heard this mentioned in other videos. I was hoping someone could expand on this and possibly explain the theory behind this concept.
I understand it's theoretically correct to size bigger vs a capped range, does the same reasoning apply?

Also, @ 21:00, as played, if you didn't boat up on turn, I was wondering what your plan was with your hand. Are you betting all rivers except A,8?

Again, your videos are always appreciated.

Nov. 25, 2014 | 1:24 a.m.

I think your assumptions will be inherently biased, but not so much as to contradict your conclusion or the makeup of your model, which is most important. I think this is what Sauce is saying in his beastmode manner.

All in all, very valuable content.

Nov. 19, 2014 | 1:26 a.m.

Fantastic vid, Phil!
Very impressive work, man.

I have a few questions for anybody who wants to contribute:

  • Phil's analysis clearly shows, given his reasonable assumptions, that he is better off calling turn then jamming. But doesn't this also assume that he will play perfect on every river? Phil showed a breakdown of each river to show we have good visibility with our equity distribution, but even still, we will make mistakes that impact our EV. I understand the value from this video is in the method and not necessarily the result, but I feel like this is important for practical application.
    Is it possible to quantify with any accuracy the margin for error Phil is allowed to have that would still justify calling turn?

  • Also, is there merit to potting flop for an effective jam given legend's stack? A quick sim from OO using a 6% range (high-card equity), shows we have ~62% with our specfic hand so there is equity to push here. At 3.5 spr after villain cbet, villain call/jam range needs about 44% equity against our range. I approximate villain call range to be: 82+, (AA:97+), (AA:hh), (KK:97+), (KK:hh), (J9+:hh). If this is acceptable, villains calls half the time at 50.58% and Phil nets $6,171. Which seems decently close to ev call($6,806), especially if you account for margin for error.

Nov. 17, 2014 | 11:58 p.m.

Nov. 16, 2014 | 8:06 a.m.

I actually think this is a great spot to bluff for sb. Facing a bb lead with a wide prf range, and a capped co range given flop and turn action, sb has a perfect stack size to rip.

With your specfic hand, I would puke call/jam. I imagine you would lead turn with at least T5+, K: 68+, 468+, so KT is just too high up in your range to fold if you presume villain to be balanced with decently wide shoving range.

Nov. 14, 2014 | 5:09 p.m.

Comment | Lefthook commented on Passive 99 3bet Pot

was thinking a bluff-shove would be really sexy with this specific hand, but not sure villain has enough to fold any better. However, I would imagine that if we just get villain to fold random Tx and JJ, we probably have a profitable jam.

Nov. 14, 2014 | 4:56 p.m.

I understand those functions, but I was unsure how to account for the potential reduction in cc combinations given the effects of his preflop and flop actions on his range.

In other words, how do I account for his preflop range and flop range to deduce liklihood of having flush on turn in OO?

Wouldn't it not be as simple as putting in a flop continuing range bc villain arrives to flop with reduced combination of hands?

Nov. 13, 2014 | 11:35 p.m.

Impressive work, Midori.

When you get the chance, could you show how you got the prob. villain has flush on turn equals 77.5% in OO(under Q4).

after accounting for difference in syntax for PJ and OO, I still had trouble inputting villains entire range and accounting for preflop combos with combos he would shove over our xr.

Thanks a lot. This is great stuff.

Nov. 8, 2014 | 5:15 p.m.

Good Work Midori,

It was very helpful and intesting read. I was curious about your syntax for acheiving the avg stack off equity on turn, assuming HvPRE <0.33 on the flop.

Here was my attempt:
select avg(HvPerceivedEquity(v,turn,'AA'))
from game='omahahi', v='9%6h!AA', board='7d5d3c'
where HvPerceivedRangeEquity(v,flop,'AA')<0.33
and HvPerceivedRangeEquity(v,turn,'AA')>0.33

which produced avg equity ~72%

Nov. 8, 2014 | 1:54 a.m.

villain has KQ9 on J10x, so 8-A makes a straight.

Nov. 3, 2014 | 7:15 p.m.

Hand History | Lefthook posted in PLO: +EV to shove naked wrap w/o fold equity?
Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 (2 Players) SB: Hero: $29.62 (Hero)
BB: Dealer: $23.61
Preflop ($0.35) Hero is SB with 7 J K 6
Dealer raises to $0.90, Hero calls $0.50
B opens to .75
Flop ($1.65) 6 T J
Hero checks, Dealer bets $1.50, Hero raises to $7.50, Dealer raises to $25.50, Hero raises to $34.87, Dealer calls $3.36
aggressive dynamic up to this point. Even still, I realize my play is probably not most profitable.
Turn ($65.38) 6 T J 5
River ($65.38) 6 T J 5 2
Final Pot Hero wins and shows two pair, Fives and Fives.
Dealer lost and shows a pair of Fives.
Hero wins $46.72
Rake is $12.80
Villain had KQ95cc for naked wrap otf.

At first, I thought his 3b otf was atrocious, but using shove equity tool in OO, if he has just about any FE at all he nets more of pot than I do.

And even when he has zero FE he nets a postive share of the pot. If i'm interpreting this right, does he have a +EV 3b otf with naked wrap even presuming no FE?

assigning hero hand and call range: j6+,t6+:q98+,J+:q98+,t+:akq

shover nets: 3.48 bets
hero nets: 5.5

Again, if shover has any fold equity, then he nets bigger share of the pot. How is this a +ev shove for him? Is calling better?

Nov. 3, 2014 | 7:03 p.m.

Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 (6 Players) BN: Dealer: $19.65
SB: Small Blind: $6.90
BB: Big Blind: $25.00
UTG: UTG: $25.00
MP: Hero: $23.98 (Hero)
CO: UTGplus2: $23.14
Preflop ($0.35) Hero is MP with J 9 7 J
UTG folds, Hero raises to $1.00, UTGplus2 folds, Dealer calls $0.75, Small Blind folds, Big Blind raises to $3.85, Hero calls $2.35, Dealer folds
Opened 3x to .75 HH is wrong.
Flop ($8.05) Q 3 Q
Big Blind checks, Hero bets $3.50, Big Blind calls $3.50
Not sure what best play is here. Since I have 9s, blocking some of his continuing range, I decided to bet to fold out random AKxx. If this is goal, is 1/2 pot sufficient?
Turn ($15.05) Q 3 Q 2
Big Blind checks, Hero checks
River ($15.05) Q 3 Q 2 Q
Big Blind bets $7.02, Hero calls $7.02
Obv one of best cards in deck for my individual hand. But my range is not capped in the sense that I would take same line with Qxxx, but is capped in that I also never have AA, and KK are discounted.

His sizing is interesting too at a lil under 1/2 pot.

Nov. 3, 2014 | 1:05 a.m.

Hand History | Lefthook posted in PLO: 2pair in mw-pot facing donk lead
Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 (6 Players) MP: UTGplus1: $58.26
CO: UTGplus2: $25.69
BN: Dealer: $14.37
SB: Small Blind: $27.98
BB: Big Blind: $25.00
UTG: Hero: $34.04 (Hero)
game was playing loose-passive
Preflop ($0.35) Hero is UTG with T J 3 K
Hero raises to $1.00, UTGplus1 calls $0.75, UTGplus2 calls $0.75, Dealer folds, Small Blind calls $0.65, Big Blind folds
i opened 3x to .75. HH is wrong.

Each villain should have wide range prf less AA
Flop ($3.50) 3 4 K
Small Blind bets $3.25, Hero calls $3.25, UTGplus1 folds, UTGplus2 folds
Turn ($10.00) 3 4 K 9
Small Blind bets $9.75, Hero calls $9.75
Not sure how to evaluate this spot. According to OO, assumming no FE, if villain is bet-calling entire barrel range of:

villain nets .7 bets
Hero nets 18.8 bets

Seems like easy shove? Is this range reasonable?

Nov. 3, 2014 | 12:50 a.m.

I think it is fine to defend this pre with fish in pot. Your relative position is good pof, as you get to act last after fish decides.

However, when you lead flop, all this goes out the window. While it is true this is not a board that favors utg opening range, a fish will likely not consider this. So I would prefer a check in this spot otf. Given the action, I would prefer calling utg rr, as a 3bet implies youre representing greater than what you actually have and we dont want to be turning our hand into a bluff...

Nov. 2, 2014 | 5:47 p.m.

Comment | Lefthook commented on bvb in 4bet pot

Thanks Ph33rox. Good stuff

If l-c is preferred, what is our std l-r range look like against a wide bb open? Also, are we limping our whole range as default in sb? If not, this obv weakens our limp range as it takes away AA combinations.

Oct. 25, 2014 | 5:51 p.m.

Hand History | Lefthook posted in PLO: bvb in 4bet pot
Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 (4 Players) SB: Hero: $29.24 (Hero)
BB: Big Blind: $21.17
CO: UTG: $19.71
BN: Dealer: $17.31
the sizing is wrong in hh text, villain 4b to 3.75 over my 2.25 3b. The flop sizing is correct
Preflop ($0.35) Hero is SB with 2 9 T Q
2 folds, Hero calls $0.15, Big Blind raises to $0.75, Hero raises to $2.75, Big Blind raises to $5.75, Hero calls $1.50
not sure what is best line prf...bb is rasing wide and we have a ~top20% hand that plays well but usually won't flop amazing.

His 4b sizing is so small that this is a standard defend, right?

If villain pot 4b, and we assume AA, with a psb behind I don't think we would flop enough equity often enough to call, amirite? However, given smaller sizing I feel we can discount AA significantly.
Flop ($10.00) 5 A K
Hero checks, Big Blind bets $3.75, Hero calls $3.75
Bad flop for our range but okay-ish for our hand. Again, villain sizes small so standard peel(?). Facing psb, would this be a fold with only 1/2psb left on turn?

Oct. 24, 2014 | 7:05 p.m.

Hand History | Lefthook posted in PLO: KK w/ fd in multi-way 3b pot
Blinds: $0.10/$0.25 (6 Players) SB: Small Blind: $72.71
BB: Hero: $25.00 (Hero)
UTG: UTG: $25.00
MP: UTGplus1: $6.90
CO: UTGplus2: $22.74
BN: Dealer: $13.98

Preflop ($0.35) Hero is BB with Q K K 4
UTG checks, 2 folds, Dealer raises to $0.75, Small Blind calls $0.40, Hero raises to $2.75, UTG calls $2.00, Dealer calls $1.75, Small Blind calls $1.75
Standard 3b, right? In this game, no one is folding unless B 4b, so I have to be pushing equity. Is it fine to flat given hero position?

Utg posted, so I assume he is loose.
Prf range ~45%!AA
B ~25%!AA

Do these prf ranges seem reasonable?
Flop ($9.75) J 7 8
Small Blind checks, Hero bets $5.50, UTG calls $5.50, Dealer calls $5.50, Small Blind folds
Obv dynamic flop. We flop well and pot is big relative to stacks. Do we have enough to gii?

Oct. 24, 2014 | 6:43 p.m.

SB: : $11.35
BB: Hero: $51.55
We are in bb, as the hh reports.

I dont know why the hh has sb highlighted though. I think this is why the names were missing in the rest of the hh. I tried using position label but this switched hero to sb....

Sorry if action is a little hard to follow.
Preflop ($0.15) (2 Players)
was dealt J 3 A A
raises to $0.30, raises to $0.90, calls $0.60
3b AA pre
Flop ($1.95) 3 3 T (2 Players)
bets $0.50, calls $0.50
flop all of it. Yum Yum
This is clearly a board I want to be betting with a lot of my range. According to OO, I will have at least top pair and a flush draw ~20%. Plus a lot of backdoor equity for barreling opportunities.
Also, villain will flop nothing (/=top pair or trips or flush draw) almost 40%.

So, if this is a bet, then what should be flop sizing with my range, and with specfic hand? I think the sizing I picked was terrible. If I'm going to justify it, I was trying to exploitatively induce by sizing a bet to fold out his air and set up a barreling spot.

However, given stack sizes, I feel his continuing range here is somewhat inelastic. He is probably not folding a ten or fdraw for anything less than 3/4 pot.
Turn ($2.95) 3 3 T 7 (2 Players)
checks, bets $1.80
The turn is interesting.

After assigning 10% prf 3b range for hero and 5-50% calling range for villain and assuming given action no fdraw folds flop, the 7s is an average turn for our range according to OO.

Given our hand, we have the board crushed. Villain will have a flush about 15% and probably won't fold for one bet. We have the nut spade, so I'm not sure what he would bet turn with as bluff if checked to....and he probably isn't folding a 3 to a turn bet either, but we block one of those too.

Is there any merit to a check? If so, do we c-shove or c-c to induce on river?

Oct. 17, 2014 | 11:18 p.m.

I forgot to input names, but you should be able to follow action given that I am in bb.

Also, the prf range is less the 4b range (1-4%) and fold range (cutoff at 40%)

Oct. 14, 2014 | 12:01 a.m.

Hand History | Lefthook posted in PLO: tough spot in 3b pot w/ AA
SB: : $23.52
BB: Hero: $10.58
Villain folded to 1/6 3b pre.
Assigned a prf range btw 4-40%
Preflop ($0.15) (2 Players)
was dealt A 5 4 A
raises to $0.20, raises to $0.60, calls $0.40
Flop ($1.35) T 4 6 (2 Players)
bets $1.20, calls $1.20
According to ppt, I have 56% against his range otf. Is this enough reason to bet?
I would think that this board heavily favors his range, but since his range is so wide,
and I have Ad blocker, the part of his range that hits this flop is skewed. In fact, ppt has
villain hitting 2p+ only ~14% otf.

Also, he will completely whiff flop ~30% ( no fdraw sdraw, or top pair). 30% seems high, but not sure how to interpret this.

Accounting for ranges, this is a board that villain will hit more often. Consequently, if I am betting all AA** on this board then I am probably betting too much. But if I am checking, how do I balance(bet Ad?)
Also, turn playability is surprisingly decent. Even the worst turns still have my equity ~40%, allowing me to c-c any bet on flop and turn to realize equity on river. It would be a disaster to bet flop and get raised...
- using the shove tool in oo, if villain cr pot to 4.8, i shove, and villain calls with:
I net $3.65. Villain net $3.54 and calls 65% of the time. Does this sound reasonable?
Turn ($3.75) T 4 6 7 (2 Players)
checks, bets $2
This is clearly a turn I can call for this bet size, but can I bet?

Oct. 13, 2014 | 10:21 p.m.

Post | Lefthook posted in PLO: 4b or not to 4b

I want to calculate EV of 4b prf. I am confused on the calculation because there is still money behind if I 4b pot and the pot is multi-way.

PokerStars Hand #2906343532: Omaha Pot Limit ($0.05/$0.10) - 2014/08/13 1:01:49

Table '#8772444' 6-max Seat #6 is the button

Seat 1: Small Blind ($6.18 in chips)

Seat 2: Big Blind ($10.74 in chips)

Seat 3: Hero ($10.15 in chips)

Seat 4: UTGplus1 ($3.60 in chips)

Seat 5: UTGplus2 ($16.10 in chips)

Seat 6: Dealer ($2.85 in chips)

Small Blind: posts small blind $0.05

Big Blind: posts big blind $0.10

*** HOLE CARDS ***

Dealt to Hero [5d Ks Kh Ad]

Hero: raises $0.35 to $0.35

UTGplus1: folds

UTGplus2: raises $1.20 to $1.20

Dealer: folds

Small Blind: calls $1.15

Big Blind: folds

Hero: raises $4.55 to $4.90

I understand basic formula for EV as sum of all associated probabilties with relative outcomes minus cost (total?) but I am having trouble appling in this hand.

My basic assumptions: 

sb (fish) always folds if I 4b

villain 3b range is 8%(oo), never flats for 50% effective stacks (iffy?), and GII 4%

Any help would be much appreciated. Also, I realize this could get more complicated if villain can flat, but if someone could show, just generally, how that calculation would go that would be awesome. TyTy

Oct. 11, 2014 | 8:17 p.m.

Comment | Lefthook commented on PLO Hand Review

Hey Zach,

Great analysis. This type of video is what I am looking for in content:

In-depth hand analysis using current software.

For me personally, there is a bit of a learning curve using oo, as I'm relatively new.

Having a guide to help with my own hand review is awesome.

- quick question: @17:30 you discount ev gained when V has set, which he has 25%. You do same when V has flush. This makes sense. Why do you discount those relative ev's again by total % V continues when we have flush ( 25/62, 37/62)?

Then @20:30, why do you discount the total ev when villain continues (3828) again by  the total 62%?

I am probably missing something from the basic definition of ev, but having an explanation would be helpful.

Thank you for your time.

Oct. 1, 2014 | 8:19 p.m.

Comment | Lefthook commented on Toy Gaming (part 4)

Thx for the response, Sauce. 

I wasn't really arguing for/against anything, just a little confused about how you applied the concept of indifference.

My main point was that in MOP, ex-showdown equity was considered which implies a check is worth 0 EV. This was the baseline for decision making in terms of optimal play. Therefore, when facing a bet, if u call with (1-a) of hands that beat bluff (in one street game) then the game converges to its equilibrium value. 

Later, this point is expanded on when distributions are considered. Calling with (1-a) isn't optimal if villain has range weighted towards value, as he b/e on bluffs but increases expectation with value and bets it with higher frequency.

In your video, you make this same point but use a different method and reasoning. 

In summary, as I understand it, calling with (1-a) of hands that beat bluff is insufficient once the composition of villains distribution is considered (ex-showdown equity). You make this same point without considering ex-showdown equity and, as a result, have IP hands have +EV as a check.

Both ideas reach the same conclusion, but in practice, I was unsure which is better or more correct.

Sorry if this is all jumbled, and again, great video. Really appreciate it. 

Aug. 9, 2014 | 6:05 p.m.

Load more
Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy