"You are correct that KJs makes more money 3betting versus a wider open range but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the best play to 3bet it."
Care to ellaborate this? Im not an expert, but the way I see it, if a play makes more money than other, is better.
Aug. 27, 2015 | 12:23 a.m.
@ Case 3, ph33roX hand, you wrote:
Q+ and 42-or-better straight draw, with double flush draw = (Q+,42+):(hh,cc)
Doesnt that expression mean Q+ or 42+ with hearts OR clubs draw? I mean you are defining hands which have 2 hearts or 2 clubs, instead having both, no? If you want to select the ones that have a double flush draw shouldnt it be like this: (Q+,42+):(hhcc) ?
I might be wrong but i wanna be sure :)
March 27, 2014 | 9:37 p.m.
Thanks for the very fast answer!
Sounds great that they are planning to add that :) It would be def an interesting addon, would be great if we get that + the possibility of assigning a villains c/f % or fold % of each part (top mid and bottom) of his range if we combine it with HUD data and personal reads, to get a better idea of the EV of some of our bets, if that makes sense.
Regarding the syntax, You wrote:
"Any boardpair/overpair + 2 backdoor FDs
That is, any hand, bottom pair or better, that also has two clubs, or hearts, or diamonds. "
This is not what i was looking for :P I think I explained it poorly (im spanish so sorry for the poor explanations). What i want is adding to the strong range the single non top board pairs which also have necesarily two backdoor flushdraws (only one BDFD is too weak imo), like:
I guess it should be expressed with something like:
"Top pair + any nut BDFD
Here I meant all the top pairs and OVP with a nut backdoor fd, so i guess it should be something like
March 27, 2014 | 9:56 a.m.
Hi! Very good job, thanks for the hard work :)
I wanted to comment that, in the last hand (the Phil galfond vs analtmezer one) isnt the Top Range for Phil's preflop $3b15o on that board a bit too pesimistic?
Flop is 4c2h6d, and you estimate that a top range for Phil there would be 53,22+,875+:2+
However, imo theres some more good holdings we could have on that board, like any boardpair/overpair + 2 backdoor FDs, top pair + nut BDFD, some two pairs... or you think we shouldnt consider this top range?
So I wanted to check how adding that stuff would affect to our top range % (probably not much) etc, but then i realized that I dont know how to express this:
any boardpair/overpair + 2 backdoor FDs
top pair + any nut BDFD
I have checked the vid @ pokerjuice website regarding the intelligent postflop syntax, but i still dont know how to express it.
Sorry for the noob question =P
March 27, 2014 | 8:15 a.m.
This guy is clearly unable to beat the games hes playing in the video, maybe he can beat them in a couple of specific sites. On Stars he should move down to 2/4 if he wants to really help people, this is just insulting.
Jan. 8, 2014 | 4:38 a.m.
I see a problem with your solution, GT.
When you bet [0, 0.17] of your range and get called by [0, 0.50], you are assuming OOP is valuebetting and winning always the pot. So, if you have 2/3 valuebets, 1/3 bluffs, EV equation for IP player when calling, assuming PSB, is:
EV=%OOPvaluebets * (Eq*Pot-Pot)+%OOPbluffs * (Pot)
So you are doing
But the thing is, when [0, 0.17] bets against a calling range of [0, 0.50], hes gonna win around 2.5/3 of the times (so it has 83.33% equity). Thats because 2/3 of the times the calling range has hands between [0, 0.50], and 1/3 of the time they are going to show up with the same range. So, the EV equation for IP player should be in this example:
This number obv should be 0.