Grunch. Not folding. He can be overplaying worse hands so our hand is not a pure bluff catcher.

In a tournament stack size really matters and is changeable and we are always looking to set up pots based on ours and villans stack size....in cash stack size just doesn't matter that much to me, (I am invariably playing at a table were the majority of players have 200bb+) and it's tough to get all the monies in regardless of how we set up stacks pre-flop.....
There is a huge disconnect I find on here were people talk about a bet being 40% pot on the river or whatever and assuming the $ value doesn't matter....
Playing 2-4 a 40% bet into a $100 pot is hugely different to 40% into a $700 pot...... You can set the spr how yiu want $ is still $....
Feel like an old curmudgeon here refusing to embrace the new ways....but I really don't see the benefit.

In tournaments we are much more concerned with M-value, bubble strategy, ICM, and shortstacking strategies. SPR is more useful in the early stages when we are deep. Typically in the late (and most important) stages effective stacks are fairly short.

Effective stacks are one of the most important considerations in cash games with wide variable buy-ins (for instance, 30BB - 150BB). The effective stacks are still important even if everyone has the same stack size, but we need not keep as careful track of this information in this scenario. But at a table with stacks ranging from 30BB to 500BB, whether I enter a pot with 75 is hugely affected by the effective stacks as these, along with number of callers, are the determinants of our SPR.

Absolute $ size of bets is somewhat important in live games, yes, but SPR is measured at the flop where absolute pot sizes tend to be small, except in multiway 3-bet or 4-bet pots where we aren't guided much by SPR considerations anyway. Also, it was necessary to limit the variables in order to be able to solve the equations relating x-values (fraction of pot bet) and r-values (SPR) for 2, 3, or 4 streets of action.

I don't rely on SPR as much as my past few posts may indicate, but it's something I always try to calculate, and sometimes manipulate, when I contemplate entering a hand. It's one useful piece of information among many.

But again what you are saying there seems obvious to me, don't pkay 56s vs the 30bb stack, there just isn't enough value/implied odds/correct spr...to play that hand vs that opponent.....if we are 300bb deep we can easily get the correct implied odds/value/correct spr....

My point that I am really getting at is where would an spr calculation change the decision I would normally make based on old fashioned circumstances/implied odds/value and why is it appreciably better.....

I also want to pick up on where it was commented about varying bet sizes based on our hand strength pre flop to change the spr.... Isn't this just a huge bet sizing tell to any opponent who can be bothered to look for it?

In tournament play I was thinking spr would be relevant in the awkward 70-40bb stack size times

It's just a way to quantify reverse implied odds. It's also useful for determining bet sizing when we want to get the money in, or how likely we are to end up all-in given certain bet sizing, though that requires some additional work (see my previous post with the x-values and r-values).

Not necessarily better than anything you have learned through experience or know intuitively.

Yes. Manipulating the SPR becomes less useful the more your opponents tend to notice these things. The book was written for live low stakes play where most would not know what you're doing, though. Still, even at 1/2 I will often pass up a chance to manipulate the SPR if I think it leaks information about my hand. Or sometimes to get the SPR you want you might need to raise to 2-3x the normal raise amount, which I'm just not going to do as too many people will fold (assuming I want callers). I usually use SPR more passively, in deciding whether to play marginal or speculative hands, for instance, or determining how many bets I'll need to get all-in if I hit my hand.

A little, particularly at the upper end of that range. Around 50BB or less you just almost always end up with low SPRs so there's no reverse implied odds to worry about. EX: It's 10-handed, there's three limps, you raise to 6BB and get two calls from the limpers. SPR is 44/23 = 1.91. In these situations you're typically getting it in by the turn, whether you're aggressively playing a draw, or a hand like TPGK.

Below 40BB we often encounter SPRs of 1 or less, where we're either minbet/folding the flop or shove/folding.

Again, I think we're somewhat on the same page, but have just come to different conclusions. In general, I'm not fine at all facing 3 postflop streets worth of check/calling (even 1/2 PSBs) for stacks, and yet if I do find myself on the river facing a 1/2 PSB for stacks I also don't feel comfortable folding either (given that I don't have to be right all that often at that point to be profitable) but that also suggests I've made a mistake earlier in the hand. If you're comfortable with both of these things (check/calling 3 streets of 1/2 PSBs for stacks, or eventually folding to the third small bet on the river), then you're fine getting yourself in these spots; if you're not (like me), then you should attempt to avoid them.

GcluelessNLnoobG

^but gg you are making what can be relatively simple decisions into potential complex problems based on the spr....
You say your not comfortable with three 1/2 pot bets gii, but your not thinking in the terms of any other information. Vs an (almost) Gto bot this is a very difficult spot, but with any sort of information on our villans this line becomes Easy(er) to work out.....
I refer to the extremes again, vs the omc when he fires 3 1/2 pot bets, you better have top2 minimum, and why the hell did you get to the river without atleast top2?
Vs a maniac facing 3 1/2 pot bets tpgk is easy good enough to call.....
Every other player in the world fits in-between these two extremes and the closer to the (Gto) middle you get the harder to play against it is, but honestly how many llsnl player are any where near the middle?

In the simplest of terms, if we are ahead we should try and get more money in the middle, if we are behind we should try and get less in the middle.....we beat this game by getting more in the middle when win than we get in the middle when we lose.....
Of course the game becomes much more complex than this,but thus should always be the underlying principle we are thinking about.....bringing it back to the op.....he has kk pre-flop, smashing ranges his main concern pre-flop should be, how can I get the maximum amount of money in the middle....2nd and 3Rd would be about the number of callers he wants and how to play the flop....but primarily we haz kk..... Get the money in the middle.

I played a hand earlier today that I think is maybe relevant here to illustrate why I don't concern my self with spr, but all the other things to reach a simple conclusion, I'll keep it short:
9handed utg+1 hero has kk and a stack of 170bb 1-2 main villans cover hero.....hero makes it 12 (standard raise size at the table) Co calls, two blinds call.
Flop comes 10 6 2 rainbow...check check, hero makes it 34..into 48.. Two callers.
Turn is a k,hero has the nutz and about 150 left, pot is now just short of 150.....
Now from an spr point here I should just ship it would assume, but with no draws here hero makes it 42..... Leaving behind what will be if I get 1 caller a 1/3 pot bet on the river.....
This Imo is the easiest way of gii from this spot..... I did get 1 caller, I shoved river and he folded for what was as suggested a less than 1/3 pot river bet....

I didn't consider spr in any of this, but at all stages new how to bet this hand to gii if I required.... I don't need (and don't see the benefit of) an arbitrary ratio to help make this decision.....

My thoughts were that spr was a quite advanced new concept, but am I correct in ascertaining it's alot like pre-flop charts....great for beginners to reach a certain level but largely irrelevant to more 'seasoned' players.....

Fwiw I really don't think that some of the ways I come to seemingly the Same decisions you get from spr are particulaly advanced ideas, I kind of assumed most experienced players know stuff like don't play sc's when your 40bb effective,

This is SPR reasoning, you just described it more vaguely. You basically said SPR on turn is 1 which means you gotta bet 1/3rd pot on turn and river to GII.

^forgive my frustration...... Bur that's fu****g obvious, I don't need to worry about 'SPR' to conclude which route will best get the money in....... There is barely a villan out there that couldn't work that out.....
What I don't see the point of is trying to work out routes to gii pre-flop, and setting up 3 1/2 pot bets to gii.....it just doesn't matter, im playing with real $$$$ if I win $200 it doesn't matter weather it came from an all in vs a shorter stack on the flop, or weather I got ot on the river vs a monster stack, the value is the same.....

That's not really what it's for. As I've said, SPR is primarily a way to quantify reverse implied odds. As for solving for paths to get the money in, that's just something I worked out myself (and which others could work out algebraically), but which is beyond the scope of PNLHE. The book is actually about 10 years old, so SPR is not a new concept or anything, and in fact much of the book I think is dated (particularly the commitment threshold), but knowing the SPR for your hand is just useful data IMO.

It's like knowing Harrington's M-value while playing a tournament. You could just intuitively figure out how healthy your stack is and how aggressively you should be playing--the M-value just offers a quantitative measure of this concept, and you correlate different M-values to "green zone" or "yellow zone" or "red zone" or whatever to determine your strategy. Similarly one can correlate different target SPRs with certain types of hands: those that make overpairs, those that make TPTK, those that make weaker TP, strong drawing hands, weak drawing hands, etc.

Just as Harrington's M-value and zone concepts quantitatively address how to play tournaments in different stages, SPR theory addresses how to set up pots for desirable reverse implied odds or implied odds for your given hand, and how to know when you're in a potentially dangerous situation. Neither gauge/theory is necessary if you have enough experience, but they're data I'd prefer to have when making my decisions.

Of course it's obvious in this case on the turn having only a PSB left.

But most people have no clue what they'll have to size their bets for on the flop (or even preflop) if they want to get it in by the river. SPR is a very helpful technique here for deciding on betsizing; basically, it's just a tool, and you're welcome to use it, and welcome to ignore it. T&P ignores it, and instead tries to figure out bet sizing by breaking down chunks of bets; whatever floats your boat (but I find memorizing an SPR table for this is *far* simpler than the technique T&P uses). I've memorized a pot odds table so that I know what odds I need for the amount of outs I think I have; but if you'd rather do the math (i.e. 47 cards, 7 of them are good, etc.) in your head every single time, that's fine too (although the odds table shortcut technique seems *far* simpler to me).

What's far more interesting about your hand example (at least regarding SPR) is that you've left yourself with just a PSB left on the turn against two opponents having gotten in just 3.5% of your stack preflop. If we didn't spike the K for the nuts, any of these opponents could easily make us play for stacks with a lol ~1/3 PSB on the turn (I mean, we're not folding an overpair to a 1/3 PSB on the turn are we?), and then another lol ~1/3 PSB on the river (folding again?). Again, you can look at it from whatever standpoint you want, but SPR is simply dealing with IO and commitment; remove the SPR, and you're still left with the exact same IO / commitment issues, and all of that can be traced back to preflop (where a small raise followed by multiple callers put our stack trivially at risk).

GcluelessNLnoobG

Couple of points.....
I'm happy with putting my stack at risk pre flop with kk....I want to be gii at that time because I am crushing ranges....
Post flop if it all goes pear shaped I like to think I'm good enough to fold...

I gave no info about villans in these hands,but I will give you two scenarios for the two villans....the one that called turn folded river, if he raises me at any point it's a trivial fold..
The other guy I will stack kk against all day everyday because I know he massively overvalued tp.....
Regardless of the k on the turn,any none ace I'm making the 1/3 bet, setting up any easy shove on a none ace river.....

Again you equate 1/3 pot to being a small bet, completely ignoring the $$ value....now this may be correct (it is correct) for a pure theory stand point,in practice a full pot bet of $50 into $50 is much more likely to be called than a $200 bet into $600

Roi in my opinion is another concept that is often over used especially in 2P2 to tow the 'fold-pre' party line, I dont think we need to actually calculate roi, but can qualitatively just say kt is probably dominated vs a utg open....best to fold...

And if that's the case, fine, you're comfortable in that spot and will thrive in it.

In your example, I wouldn't be good enough to fold to a lol $55 bet into $150 on the turn, nor a lol $95 shove into a $260 pot on the river, so I avoid these situations.

Gplaytoyourstrengths,andplayawayfromyourweaknesses G

^but why? If an omc starts firing at the pot......he has the goods,
The obvious extreme example again is you get to the river with 23hh on a board that came 4h5h9c10ckd the pot is now 50 and a guy bets $2...... The bet is lol size but you obviously can't call......your good enough to fold here......
As it gets more complex, and more difficult this becomes more challenging to work out,but if you look at the hh that more experienced posters look for help on its usually really marginal decisions like this.... And that's fine because it can be tough but honestly most if the villans we play against are rubbish, especially on the turn and river and in my opinion you are losing a tonne of value in your game by not exploiting the bad play of villans on the later streets.......when the $$ to be made are increasing exponentially.

You are worrying about SPR, you are just failing to express it to yourself in those terms. Being able to quantify why you are doing what you are doing is imperative to improving your game because not all decisions are easy.

The fact that some decisions are obvious doesnt change whether they are quantifiable, or the value of quantifying, This is like if you needed 100 apples, and you got one from a first tree and one from a second one, and when I respond with "1+1 = 2 which is less than 100" you say "addition is useless because that was obvious!"

If we go back to the beginning at why I suggested an alternative preflop line, it's mostly because (a) we're OOP and (b) we have zero clue who are opponents are (are they OMCs or ultimate maniacs, we have zero clue) and yet they'll likely be able to force us to play for stacks postflop with minimum difficulty.

If you're really good at making the correct fold (vs call) after weakly checking OOP on multiple streets to an unknown for lol 1/2 PSBs for stacks, then you'll do really well, and nothing more for you to consider preflop. I don't do well in that situation (I feel I'm blindly grasping at straws), and so I lean to doing something different.

Gkindagoingaroundincirclesonthis;goodluckG

Now you're getting back in to crazy talk.

OOP against 8 players is not a good enough reason to limp or fold KK. We do not have zero clue. Hint: OMCs are old men, typically white. We should have at least some vague notion of the type of player based merely on stereotypes. Even if I have no clue in hell, not folding KK. Say I bet a favorable flop and get raised by someone who looks like he could be a nit or a maniac, I use Bayesian inference--there are far more nits than maniacs. We can also sometimes tell by looking at the person's stack. If it is nice and neat, he's more likely a nit. If he's got a dirty stack or chips not stacked messily, he's more likely a LAG or maniac. We call one bet and if the pressure continues maybe consider folding. We can also fall back on stereotypes for how unknowns play in this particular room. Do they tend to be passive? Do they tend to be wild? If OP has played there before he probably knows this. Lack of specific reads on players does not mean we have literally no information.

And I think even many LAGs and maniacs will be relatively careful against an UTG raise from a complete unknown. They'll be more careful than normal when deciding whether to raise on the flop or turn, so we should probably give such a raise some credit.

Or we could raise pre-flop then just x/c to the river to induce bets from top pair. Both options are better than folding or limping KK. If it gets checked around on the flop, we bet the turn and river.

A bad SPR is not even likely if we pick a decent raise amount like $18-$24. Based on 1 to 4 callers, raising to $24 gives us an SPR from 2.3 to 5.6. Raising to $21 gives us as SPR from 2.7 to 6.4. Raising to $18 gives us an SPR from 3.1 to 7.5. The only particularly bad result here is if we raise to $18 and get exactly one caller. I pick the highest raise I think I can get away with and use that.

I'd rather make it $21 and risk no callers than limping. If it gets limped around, it's a terrible waste of a premium hand. Hell I like minraising or 3xing better than limping. It will still keep the SPR high and we can pot control, and we can maintain aggression post-flop, as well as get fewer callers than limping.

We're 100BB deep and you don't want to raise KK for value. You're a madman. A MADMAN!

OK, KK pre-flop, let's forget spr for a minute and think about good old fashioned ranges.....
If we limp, and it goes around to the flop vs 8 players and the flop comes 8-2-j.....that looks pretty innocuous, but smashes the limping range of players, who limped j-8, 22, 88, maybe the bb had 8-2 and the sb had j-2.... We are just in a horrible spot with kk no clue at all what people have, so c/f overpairs????
Let's take another flop j-q-8... This could be a problem, Players could have almost any two pair combo, a made straight...but this is a limped pot they could be betting qt just as easily.... Or q9. Or j9, jt..... We have no clue where villans are...
Unless you find a k on the flop your going to be check folding kk alot if you limp this up top.....can you not see that as just a chronic waste of value, probably 20% of your lifetime profit should come from kk.... Your just throwing that chunk of change away.....
Even if you hit kk your by no means guaranteed to make any money, as the pot is small and youve now got to shove money in and hope people call with what was probably a load of trash hands to begin with.

Look at all those scenarios in a raised pot where you have 4 callers, regardless of the spr they play so much easier, the first board is trivial to play, the second board more caution is needed....

Of course with kk we have a high boards also which again play pretty simply vs most villans.....

Your trying to make your decisions easier but I can't see how this does anything but put you in a dumb spot were you invariably have to fold an overpair...