5/10 stars, imo a pre spot - Page 5 - High Stakes Pot Limit Omaha

greywolf · 08-05-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CompEng

That's actually worse

, AA** has way more hands in it than just AA98r and AAK8r, so this will give AAxx way less hand combos.

The way it works is as follows. Say you type AA**, 45**. Each of these 2 ranges is parsed and all the hands in each range are enumerated. Then their union is found, apparently disregarding duplicates. This is when simulation starts randomly picking hands from this set. So putting AA** twice does not add more hand combos (duplicates are disregarded), whereas putting AA98r, AAK8r adds too few AAxx combos.

One way to weigh the overall range towards AA** is to put AA** and more restricted ranges for other hands (for example, less *'s).

hope that helps.

how would you go about if you want to calculate a given hand say KK87 vs top 15% exluding AA** ?

CompEng · 08-05-2009, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greywolf

how would you go about if you want to calculate a given hand say KK87 vs top 15% exluding AA** ?

I don't think you can do that directly.

You can try to do KK87 vs top15%, then KK87 vs AA**, but then you need to know what % of top15% is AA**. If you know that, you can easily deduce what you're looking for.

GoChoo · 08-05-2009, 04:37 PM

in a bit late to the discussion but i've been lurking it for sometime. for 100bb stack, i don't see how it could be +ev for calling the 3 bet preflop. however if it were deeper with multiple sidepots, i could see how an argument could be made for flatting.

i guess no one really made a mention of 2 betting this hand with bad position. i think it somewhat spewish unless one knew that a squeeze would be possible against a fish and then you can 4 bet/shove pre to reiso.

TomChan · 08-06-2009, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmenH

... or 4 bet getting in.

ah, finally someone mentioned it. I discussed this issue with two friends already and wasnt sure wheather i should kick off that point here or not.

the basic point here is that we are nearly as good against non-AK rundown hands as AA** and KK** are vs us. vs AK rundowns, we are a small fav. So, what parts of his range are what holding?!

a bare "top X% of hands" simulation in PPT helps very little here, because here there are always those bad AA** and KK** hands included which he would never 3bet.

an interesting question i wasnt able to solve yet is: how many % of all aces (which are approx. 2% of all hands imo) will he 3bet? More basic: How many % of a paired hand are ds? ss? How many % are connected?

Anyone knows advice on those numbers?

Also: does a "top X% simulation" at PPT automatically take out those hands that inferfere with my holding? Because obv some rundowns i do very good against are much less likely then.

Micturition Man · 08-06-2009, 09:23 AM

4-betting here is just wrong without the stipulation that the 3-bettor 3-bets very light.

The suggestion that our QQ versus rundown equity somehow makes a wash with our QQ versus AA/KK equity is just not true, (especially when you factor in how card removal makes villain less likely to be holding the rundowns that we dominate (e.g. QJT9, JT98)).

You're just going to be running into AA/KK a *lot* in this spot. And incidentally villain will be 3-betting all AA** hands here and I'm surprised you have to ask.

And I 3-bet/4-bet lighter than most winning players.