As played on riv I guess we fold. Vs the lot size riv lead, id prob jam or call and not small raise. Depends if I think he can have bare Ax that I think can call.
Prob fold preflop. Flop is prob a fold with all the players behind, exactly for what happened. I think after the flop raise especially we can let it go
Aug. 10, 2020 | 5:58 p.m.
I was just saying that 5 way people will be handcuffed a bit from bluffing(not saying they won’t do it), but this may lead us to being able to show our hand down(very rare, but does happen). This gives us a bit more equity, but not much, that’s all. Wouldn’t really be looking to bluff much postflop unless an insane opportunity presented itself
Aug. 9, 2020 | 2:25 p.m.
I do think the Donk/rejam is super strong here, but I’m going with AA here. He could for sure overplay some AK or combo draws which will give ya enough equity to play. Maybe could fold vs very specific players or with a weaker hand. Like KQ id fold here, AK gets interesting. AA with a spade is interesting too
Aug. 9, 2020 | 2:17 p.m.
But they don’t fold always for sure. Def will show up with some slowplay a from time to time, or get sticky with things like AQ, AK. Think things like TT+ do get limped at a non zero frequency from a weak player especially
Aug. 9, 2020 | 2:13 p.m.
That's actually a good point. It definitely crossed my mind that by checking, I can still get stacks in post flop, which is a pretty good benefit. $6 on flop, we can bet like $6 flop, puts 18 on turn, with 52 stack, bet 15 on turn, and viola.
Thanks for commenting. Very good reminder
July 29, 2020 | 3:02 p.m.
55bb, so your $265 eff.
With the straddle on, I immediately interpret my stack as having 26.5bb, given the straddle makes it as if you're playing 5/5/10 effectively.
So with that being said, I don't mind the limp, and prefer it to making some type of raise. However, I think we might be able to shove preflop given there is $40 in the middle already, which is 15% of our stack.(40/265)
I am not 100% sure if shoving is the play given I'm not familiar with playing short stacked, but at first glance it seems viable, but I am interested to see what other people think about this option. A big issue here might be that we have quite a few players behind left to act, and sometimes the limpers will have traps as well. So I'm a bit wary of this option
I would likely limp behind as well. As it has played out, it appears to me that the BB basically has a defined range that is likely overpair heavy and some strong broadways. Against this range I don't think we want to be jamming 88, and I would guess we have very little fold equity.
As played, there is 220 in middle, and we risk 45 additional, so we are getting 1:4.8. Say we estimate we need to win (times we hit set)9-5.8 = 3.1x45 = 144. So can we win at least 144 when we bink to break even? Probably so, plus we have position, sometimes with the low SPR we win mult stacks etc. Rarely will win a showdown given the players OOP are a bit handcuffed with AK type stuff in a 5 way pot. So yeah, I suppose we go ahead with a call pre.
July 29, 2020 | 2:56 p.m.
Really? I didn’t consider that at all. There is 20% of their stacks in the middle, and probably a lot of weak hands in range. Guess this could be pretty good. What about things like QJo or KJo? Are you ripping these short as well?
July 28, 2020 | 12:22 p.m.
unknown player in a low stakes game limps UTG w 30bb. We can assume his range is wide, but our fold equity is quite low even against his wide range.
SB limps w 30bb
BB Hero has JThh
Basically, at deeper stacks I am auto raising this. But given the shallow SPR, is it good to check a hand like this, or ATo, KJo, QJo type stuff?
In the environment I am playing in, I probably want to use a pretty large sizing preflop, as making it $12, I would expect to get a lot of action from the UTG and the SB to call way too much. I guess really tho, maybe that isn't as bad as I first thought. Initially I was thinking I would want to make it like $15 preflop, to get it HU more often or win it preflop, but with the shallower stacks, I was more hesitant to use the big sizing, and then leave a 1-1.5 SPR behind depending on how many players called.
I suppose I could just make it $12 here however now that I think about it, because even if the SB does call loose, our hand is pretty playable, and the SB will probably still have alot of weak hands that still fold like Kxo and Qxo etc etc. Going $12 or $15 might achieve similar things at this stack depth, so maybe the smaller sizing actually is more appropriate. What do you think? (this is a live game too, so expect loads of action preflop)
July 27, 2020 | 11:34 p.m.
Going to guess it is profitable. If you are doing it for recreation(to win of course), just do whatever you want. 6-max might be a good place to start to get meta feel, but there is also nuno who does HU content. So if you don't need the money and are okay with a learning curve, then do whatever
July 27, 2020 | 11:27 p.m.
I'd just like to add that building a database with HEM2 is pretty helpful. I have a tendency to lose confidence, but having a multiple year database that shows a 10bb+/100wr def helps. Plus, it also let's you run filters to see where you are under-performing/what is working well. So if anything, especially when learning, I'd recommend playing on a site that allows you to export your hands into a database so you can get visuals and direct feedback.
July 27, 2020 | 12:09 p.m.
So basically we are losing money 50% of the time, and not winning that full amount back 50% of the time due to equity being realized. So while we may in isolation get called by as many worst hands that call that we beat as beat us, they can still bink their equity. If they fold we win the pot, but don't win the full money invested due to their equity realization
July 16, 2020 | 3:25 p.m.
I think CO I guess we are handcuffed to just being value oriented, because people do cold call rather light in a lot of live situations
I guess specifically from the Bttn or Bb tho, it just seems like we could probably use a large preflop sizing if they truly have a capped range. I mean there is likely a point where we get close to 100% folds. Maybe that means making it $42, or $50 preflop. If they are capped, it’s hard for me to see this not being good(assuming they actually have a threshold where they stop calling). I do think there is a point where a capped range folds
I would still be 3betting my strong linear range for value, and likely to a smaller sizing, trying to play pots ip against a weak range
Obv this is something we don’t have to do, but Taking a semi playable hand, with the knowledge of a capped range(that probably folds to a 5-7x 3b), against a weak player who if does call, we can play postflop/have position. Just seems reasonable to me.
I get that even against a weak range that calls too much we want to have a strong range, but I’m talking about deviating and using a completely different raise size with the weakest part of my range. I think this likely works until it doesn’t. (Once we have a showdown for whatever reason, we stop doing it)
It seems like this could be a way to exploit an information gap and increase our hourly
July 10, 2020 | 1:20 p.m.
Such a strange hand. It just makes no sense lol
At first glance I’m thinking what hands Donk/repop, as this is typically super strong. But then to check call the turn?
He for sure can have 6 (55/99), and maybe 1(JJ). JJ seems quite consistent if he is flatting this preflop
He needs 3.5 worst hands to hit a breakeven threshold.
It’s hard to find them, but it also sounds like the guy might be doing nonsensical things. Against most passive recs who won’t have a bluffing range we can probably fold.
I’m not sure this guy is that tho.
Maybe he can have some 45o in hand(3), maybe he can have K9(1), maybe he can have J9(1), maybe he can have 76o(up to 16 combos), maybe can have AA that was “getting tricky”....
I guess I’d just call mainly because his line is so strange that he probably is doing things that I wouldn’t consider to make sense.
July 10, 2020 | 12:46 p.m.
So, had this spot come up yesterday, and wanted to get a better understanding of what is actually happening under the hood mathematically.
I tried doing my own calculation, which often ends up being corrected by bigfische lol or just completely wrong. So please feel free to correct me
Situation goes as follows
Rec opens LJ to $8 covering
Hero raise AKhh to $25 HJ w $300 eff
Rec leads $15
Hero raise to $58, call
Pot = 167
Hero has $217 behind
Basically, I am curious of EV of check vs jam against a very well defined range as shown below
This is assuming Rec folds all Jx to a jam aside from Jx with hearts and two pair combos.
31 combos in range
11 combos that auto call a jam for $217
11/31 = .35 call, .65 fold
against the 11 combo call range, our hand has 24%, against his entire range it has 30%.
EV(shove) = (.76 x -217)+(.24 x 167) + (.24 x 217) + (.76 x -217) x .35
-164.92 + 40.08 + 52.08 + -164.92 (.35) = -83.18
167 x .65 = 108.55
Ev of shove = +25.37
Ev (check) = (.30x167) = +50.1
Aside from wanting to have some bluffs here, I was wondering if this is the Rec's range, could we derive more EV with a turn check back?
At first glance, it appears this may actually be the case. My math however might be wrong.
If it is correct however, then even if we add a few folding combos into their range, checking still is going to be hard to surpass EV wise
In general, I think that having a jam here is probably a good idea if anything because it benefits our overall strategy and increasing EV that way. But I just wanted to understand the math behind it better, because I definitely think there are cases(and this may be one of them), where the best way to exploit would be to just not bet the turn as a bluff, because outrageous it may be, I don't think the range I assigned is too far off. And if this is the case, I can see checking back as a viable option for exploitative purposes.
EDIT: realization I just had, IF my math is correct, AND IF the opponent would actually fold all Jx, then I could see this being a good spot to polarize, and jamming weaker hands that would not have as much EV as a check. That's kind of an interesting breakthrough for me. That would allow us to make more money with things like AKss, or ATss(if we even have them, which we probably don't in this specific scenario). Food for thought
July 9, 2020 | 3:38 p.m.
I think getting a better understanding of the game will help, and then being cognizant of the fact you got your money in good, and remind yourself that is all that matters in this context.
Yesterday I get my top set in on the flop in a live game and recreational player runner runners a flush. I say "nice hand", mentally remind myself that I got my money in as a favorite, and I can have confidence that I have an edge. That's all that really matters, and being mindful of this helps tremendously.
Aside from just understanding the game better, and mentally refocusing your attention to what actually matters "am I getting my money in as a favorite on a consistent basis", I think a few things matter
Have at least one other player who has a good mindset and is as good or better than you in the game who is willing to discuss things through with you. It can be easy to focus on the wrong things and this will destroy you.
Have a system. Block time that is dedicated each day to getting better.
If you tilt easy, maybe even playing smaller and working with someone to help you work through things can be a good idea.
Have things going on outside of poker. It helps you keep perspective when you have stuff going for you other than this game. It gets your mind off things, relieves stress, and can respark a healthier perspective.
Don't put things off. I think a major learning curve I had to embrace was that by not addressing things relatively quickly, they can eat away at your energy, and then you forget about them, and then you lose the chance to learn. A simple example may be " I got in this spot I was unsure about, I thought about it for a few days unfruitfully, not giving it my attention fully to solve it, not asking for help from other people... a few days pass, I forget about it, I feel better, but I learned nothing, and I created a bad habit"
Have a system that you address any uncertainty you have on a daily basis. From my experience it helps to have someone to talk to. For whatever reason, it's easy to fixate on a singular viewpoint, and not see things from different angles, another person can solve this.
Exercise, sleep, proper nutrition, etc will also help in seeing things clearly and objectively. It's hard to think straight when you're stressed out constantly.
There's probably more, but this is a good starting point. If you have further questions, fire away
July 9, 2020 | 2:51 p.m.
July 9, 2020 | 2:35 p.m.
def more clear that in the case where the ratio is 30/46 that betting would be a disaster.
I see that the equity is not in our favor, but I still do not really understand just exactly how it would be bad to bet small and get called by a weak Ahigh on the flop and turn
HOWEVER, practically, I can see that checking would be even better because we can fold to turn bets, and then thin value clean turns against a range of almost purely A high
July 9, 2020 | 2:31 p.m.
Playing in my local live game yesterday and this scenario came up
This lady who I have seen min raise KTo UTG, and is also using other raise sizes like $8, $13 etc. I assume this means her min raise makes her incredibly capped. She also is very bad at poker, where she will pay off too light, not get value from her hands well, limp call way too wide, etc etc
So, when this lady min opens, how crazy would it be to attack her opens from the CO w a hand like Q6s?
I think we need to use a very large sizing, because we are trying to accomplish a fold, as we don't really want to take a hand like Q6s to the flop a ton. I'm just not sure if attacking from the CO is overdoing it.
I think the button makes sense because we at the very least have absolute position, however, if we make it like $32, I think the players behind probably will fold everything but the top 7-10% of hands(assuming we have all recreational players behind)
I suppose doing it from the button is likely going to be okay in a live setting, especially if the blinds are straight forward players, because they will not cold 4 bluff us ever, and the most likely thing they will do is maybe call a bit too light with things like QJs, KQo, AJo region of hands, but maybe still fold a good amount of this stuff too. So what this leaves is alot of folding from the "guessing" capped min raising range.
It makes me wonder however, if we can do this from the button with 2 players to act, why not do it from the SB? I suppose maybe we could if we had solid information that it is truly a capped range. Maybe it's wise to have more solid evidence before taking that next step however, because maybe when she has position she will call more. I think another good spot to attack would be from the BB, because it is truly heads up and nothing out of the ordinary can happen, like a player waking up with a good hand behind. I suppose we should still exercise some caution and maybe not get too out of line from seeing one hand shown down. But it definitely got me thinking. It's something I think must be good, but something I do not take advantage of as much because I haven't thought on it too much, and it can add some uncertainty to a situation that ABC prints in.
July 9, 2020 | 1:49 p.m.
I'm very glad that you are around to school me xD
In the EV(check) equation, what is the .9 and .1 representing?
Also, If we were to bet $20, and get called, would this not be a win? I understand that AK has enough equity if it always saw a river, but even if we were to bet $20 on flop(above the $13.5 threshold), and get called, and then check turn, and river, and never be bluffed, wouldn't have been called as a 75% favorite against that portion of his range be worth something?
If you take it a step further, if we have impunity from being bluffed, we could even bet the turn for another small bet, making another thin value bet(which is likely even more effective given overpairs would have likely raised us on the flop very often, especially the TT-QQ region(not wanting to be sucked out on)
So, it still appears to me the best exploitative line would be to double bet incredibly small targeting Ah(and maybe sometimes getting a fold)
July 9, 2020 | 1:19 p.m.
Had a VERY specific spot arise in a game a couple days ago
player in a 1-2 game raises to $13, hero is on button/CO w 99 and 3-bets to $40(specific player has a sizing tell; he raises JJ+ $25 preflop, and then raises a wide range for less lol)
Then unexpectedly, the most old man coffee of old man coffee cold calls the $40 3b, and the PFR folds. The old man coffee in the BB has $100 remaining, and I think is going to be incredibly faceup with all actions, and I think his range is literally something like TT-QQ, KK/AA at like 50% each. And then maybe AK just gets flatted, as alot of live low stakes players will not just jam AK.
It got me thinking, hypothetically, if we had a way of knowing someone always had 16 hands that beat us, and 16 hands that we beat(but that have equity, in the case of AK), is there merit in betting the flop to capitalize on the times he misses(say on a 556 board), assuming he always folded unless he had a pair?
In this instance I don't think there is merit in betting on a low board, mainly because I think someone like this guy might have 18-24 overpair combos, meaning more than half of his range is just ahead of us, and I don't think equity denial is as important when the ranges are so narrow(I might be wrong on this)... From a risk/reward, say a $30 bet into a $90 pot makes him fold AK, technically it's a profitable bet, as our risk/reward is in check, but we also aren't really accomplishing getting called by worst.
In the case his range was perfectly symmetrical, we would lose $-30x16 = $-480 when he is ahead, and when we are ahead, we would win $90x16 = $1440, and if we check down, he realizes 25% of $90, which is 22.5, which we can multiply by 16x-22.5 = -360, while we realize 75%, or $67.5x16 = $1080
So, I guess it is a comparison for the answer...
-$480+1440 = $960
-$360+1080 = $720
Hmm. So, actually, in that case, if my calculations are correct, it seems like betting for the collection of dead money would still be the more profitable option.
I suppose a third option, that would be even more profitable, if we didn't think he was capable of turning hands into bluffs, would be to bet really small and try to get called by A high. Like if we bet $20, I could see this guy calling with AK. Then could even bet $20 on turn and continue to get cry called by A high, with confidence that he will not turn hands into bluffs.
Feel free to tell me I'm wrong, but this seems to make sense. Cool stuff
I was curious to know at what point could we continue to just bet small, and even with a 22 value/16 A high ratio, betting still outperforms checking. We can take this a step further, and say if he had all TT-AA, betting and checking would perform similarly. But, I think a major take away, is that this guy might have more unpaired hands than AK. He might cold call AQs, and possibly stuff I wouldnt expect like KQs, AJs, or AQo. What this tells me, is that betting small on the flop is alot higher utility than I previously realized.
22 over pairs
July 8, 2020 | 1:34 p.m.
Don’t see a reason to check raise this hand on this board vs these positions .
It’s kinda tough to put villain on many worst hands honestly. Even a hand like QAhh and AJhh are 3b often preflop.
I think we can find a fold
Hands that make the most sense for him are low freq 22, 99, TT, ATs, and T9s. Maybe small A2s, but he flatted co, bet flop, and called a raise, so I dunno bout dat.
I’d prob fold turn.
I don’t think he has many bluffs here, and if he does, they are very high equity, so the threshold we need is higher. I think he needs something like 3+ combos that we beat to Gii here. Maybe 1 T9s fits this, and then maybe 1 AQhh, and 1 QJhh, 1 KJhh? Pretty rough shape. Think it’s close being this high in range, especially if villain can overplay hands we don’t expect, but I’d prob fold. If we think he can have a bare AQ or something then we can’t fold, but think this is unlikely. AQ prob doesn’t bet flop, and when it does probably folds to a raise, and if does call, probably doesnt jam
July 7, 2020 | 6:01 p.m.
I'm also a bit surprised to see ATo in a SB flatting range. It seems to me that being OOP really hurts our equity here. Even if the BB folds, our ATo realizable equity is low. We are risking like 2.5 to win 6.5. So we need like 38-39% equity here. Stone cold we have around 56%, but when we consider our position, it seems like our realizable equity will be quite low. say 60% or so, which makes it quite unattractive..
However, as I'm writing this out, I just realized that maybe our EQR is a bit higher than I am giving credit for because it is a button range, and if the guy isn't barreling enough, we probably are able to float some flops HU. Interesting spot. I typically don't flat at all in the SB, which I think is fine, but this seems to make sense. Basically against someone who isn't good aggressive, and with a BB who isn't aggressive preflop, and probably not good aggressive postflop, I suppose we do probably realize more equity than I first thought.
July 7, 2020 | 4:16 p.m.
If I'm reading this right, folding 88 while on the button vs a recreational player opening is a mistake, no doubt.
July 7, 2020 | 4:06 p.m.
Not sure how you got 55% w AJo vs an UTG opening range. In my Flopzilla I get 49ish% equity. But, very interesting. If this is true, then I can see why flatting opens can be quite troublesome(if we are only realizing 75% IP(!)). I will say, during my quarantine, and getting back into online, I was implementing a R/F strat, and thought it was really good, and definitely simplifies things quite a lot. Going back into live games, I guess I've wanted to be able to play more hands IP, but it's also caused quite alot of confusion.
a friend of mine that plays 5/10 online said once that "flatting to keep the fish in" is kinda an overrated idea. And I can def see that in online settings when the fun players aren't quite as bad, but in live settings, alot of the fun players just stack off so light post flop, that it seems like keeping them involved in pots is a good idea. Maybe if anything, the thing to take away is we can't just start flatting weakish hands, but some of the more medium type of things in a linear 3betting range could be flatted(think QTs, KTs, QJs, KJs, T9s, AJs, AQo), and then we can pull 3bets from things not quite good enough to reraise. This does create problems for us, namely having a capped range. But, this could be overided in some cases I think if the blinds are particularly weak. Also, typing this out, even a hand like QTs doesn't really seem THAT appealing to me to flat, because it's not like we flop top pair and then just get to go ham on a weaker T or Q post flop. Yet, a hand like AQ seems really good to flat, especially when alot of live players will overcall any Axo combo, meaning we can potentially just flop top pair and get 3 streets.
That last point, is something to consider as well. If a hand like AJo is borderline, it could become profitable if we have a particularly weak player in the blinds who we can flop a pair against and get multiple streets from. Suppose that would be something that would increase our EQR, and an adjustment that could be made, but as a default, just folding our hands that don't immediately hit that threshold
July 7, 2020 | 1:27 p.m.
What two pair combos are you counting? I'm doubtful he has things like 98o in range. I only come up with 98s(2), 87s(1), Q8s(2), so like 5 combos. Value combos in his shoes tho, 65s(1), 88(1), JTss(1), JT(hard to be precise on these combos, but potentially alot, let's say (2.5)), so like 5 or greater nutted combos.
While I think he can call off vs a jam with two pair, I think his full pot sizing is quite polarized and reason for at least a little caution. I think a hand like JTo is more likely in his range than 98o preflop, and even though it doesn't make sense for JTo to call a pot size turn bet, the pot is small relatively, and I could see people on occasion making lighter calls, thinking a J or T out can be good sometimes, or overestimating implied odds.
I think all things considered, calling is a pretty good option, better than jamming. But, the moment villain has offsuit 98 in range, I really prefer to jam for obvious reasons
Edit: I suppose things like Q8o or 98o are possible. But then again, so are JTo combos if this is the case. I think they are all a bit discounted in intangible ways. But the one reliable piece of info is that villain chose to full pot donk... Seems pretty polar and strong from a fun player IMO. I can def be convinced of raising however. really depends on the guys range.
July 6, 2020 | 1:17 p.m.
Yeah, I agree with this in alot of online setting for sure
I suppose the reason this really came to mind was in reference more to live environments where there is often recreational players involved ALOT, and we get squeezed significantly less often.
Many times, the fun players in live games will not even squeeze w AK, so often they are only reraising QQ+, and only sometimes 99/TT or even JJ.
This just makes me think I can be expanding my ranges a bit, but not sure how to build a framework to apply this. I don't want to just start flatting a bunch of stuff without understanding why I am doing it and be able to back up my reasons with rational framework.
That's a good point on the 3b/fold stuff. I def like it in online environments where the edges are a bit smaller, and to really focus on being the one to isolate. But in live games, there's just so often 2 fun players in the blinds, that 3betting to force them out must not be as good as flatting to keep them in, in some circumstances. Suppose this leads to more polarized 3betting strategies, at least when IP.
I suppose Easy Game (AndrewSeidman) has alot of merit in these situations, and falling back to some of the more traditional concepts is pretty applicable in live games. Flatting some more things like 89s, T9s, A8s etc when on the button and have weak players behind could be a good idea.
July 6, 2020 | 1:07 p.m.
Why would we ignore EQR? I see in the original post I did say "range v range", but a more accurate description of what I meant would've been AJo vs an expected UTG range.
Also, do you have a definitive explanation of EQR? What exactly is the percentage based off of? The percentage we see the river? The flop? I'm curious, because I typically just default to estimating having 75% EQR oop and 115% IP. How would you adjust this metric based on the varying circumstance?
July 6, 2020 | 12:58 p.m.
Something else relevant here, is there may be a tendency to bet more Ahigh combos on flop for 1/3, and overpairs a larger size on flop. This may not necessarily be true, but think it is very plausible, especially against someone who may not be super balanced. It’s easy to justify betting 1/3 with range when not comfortable with hand, and then bet bigger with overpairs targeting the stronger portions of your range.