The underlying idea is to avoid reverse implied odds (RIO). That is, you want to avoid spots where you will either win a small amount or lose a lot.

When you call a raise you do not have preflop fold equity or initiative (and maybe not position) so you have to rely more on making a hand postflop. Thus it is important to select hands that will make the best hand when they do hit. For example, if your opponent is opening J8-AJ, you might want to call with QJ-AJ because when you both flop a J you want to dominate him more often than he dominates you. If you call with J9 and flop a J, most likely you'll either win a small pot (when he has nothing) or lose a bigger one (when he has a better J or overpair). This is basically what the gap concept is about - avoiding RIO with hands that mainly flop pairs.

With small pairs, when you hit a set you're good most of the time. In this case it's actually good to be facing a stronger hand preflop since you're more likely to get paid off when you hit.

Suited connectors and suited aces are similar in that you're trying to make a monster or big draw so you don't necessarily have to dominate the range you're facing. In this case though, you don't necessarily want to be facing a super strong range because a lot of the time you "hit" it will be a good draw and you want some fold equity and also you want to be good some of the time when you flop a pair.


As an example, suppose you're sitting in the CO and get dealt A8o. If the action folds around to you, you can open this hand. Some % of the time you'll take it down preflop and when you don't, a lot of the time you'll be in position with the initiative going to the flop. You can probably take down enough pots on the flop with c-bets and pot control / bluffcatch with your weak made hands enough to make up for the fact that when your opponent has an A it probably dominates yours. OTOH, suppose you're sitting in the CO with A8o and MP open raises 3x. Suppose he opens with a 20% range. Calling here is clearly a mistake because you don't have the initiative and when you do make a hand it's unlikely that he will put a lot of money in with the 2nd best hand. Of course you have miracles like A8x or 88x but these don't happen nearly often enough.

yes thats all great...please read the thread before responding though (you're not on topic).

To answer your OP: First off, the gap concept doesn't apply to set mining. It mainly applies to hands that make pairs. Secondly, of the statements in the OP, the following is the correct one:

The reason is pretty simple. You can have a stronger range that the opener and still be playing some unprofitable hands. If he's opening J8-AJ and you're calling J9-AJ you have a stronger range but the hand J9 is not going to be profitable against his range. If you threw that hand away you'd make more money. The maximally profitable range for you to play is the set of all hands that will be profitable against his range. Add any more and you will make less, remove any and you make less. So the appropriate criterion is how a hand stacks up vs. his range.


Regarding the statement

Your calling (of a raise) range is not directly related to your opening range. They are two different scenarios. As an extreme example, compare your button opening range at a 10 handed table vs. your button cold calling range vs. a nit's UTG open at the same table. In general it is true that you cold call a range (or hand) stronger than you would have opened, but it's not really what the gap concept is about. I made this mistake in including the A8o example above. I should have used A9o or ATo and said that MP could have opened those but you can't call with them.

Thx.

Ok so this one is correct.


But you still didn't address the main question of this thread.
Sklansky said how a hand stacks up vs. his (villain's) hand. Which I am suggesting it should be 'range'. Just like you wrote and just like the other poster wrote.


Thats what Im asking about thx!

I haven't read the book you're talking about but my guess is he implicitly means range. If we knew the villain's exact hand, it would be pretty straightforward to play against him and none of this would be of any interest. The only thing you have a decent knowledge of in practice is his range, and in conversation it's not unusual to mean range when saying "hand." "I had a good hand" on a dry board is basically saying TPTK+ or 2 pair+ for example.

thx for the help but I'm certainly looking for someone who at least read Sklansky. Gap theory is commonly sited in many texts. I realize that he means range. I'm suggesting the rule needs to be re written to say range.

Yes people used to think about hands not range, people also thought the world is flat, but we don't keep all the flat history in our text books, our understanding evolved and we re wrote it.

I am not sure what you want here. Everyone and his dog understands that "range" is meant here. What is it you want to happen, for a new edition of ToP to be released that has this change and a footnote thanking you for your input?

+1

edit: not to re write the book just the theorem

How exactly would this happen?

Ok. The theorem is rewritten. Poof! Happy now?

dunno! nonetheless thx all because now I have a better understanding of the theory, everybody and there dog might have got it but the wording threw me off! glgl!