Bilbo-san why are you condescending all the time when you are wrong most of the time?

oh snap

oh nahhh ITT

using other account to stand up to bilbo ITT

If I used HM/PT or w/e I'd probably be able to give you a super worthless number about how well I ran when I flatted AK the 500 times I've done it or something like that.

Poker's like any game, if you make an argument that makes sense, it's probably right.

When your opponents 4-bet bluff into big hands, they're making a mistake. When they fold to our 5-bet jam with 30% equity, they're playing correctly.
When they stack off with like 5% equity on the flop, they're making a big mistake (we both hit)
When they stack off with like 35% equity on the flop, they're playing correctly on that street (but are still getting all the money in as a dog).
When they bluff postflop and we don't fold, they're making very large mistakes.
etc etc etc

Lots of ways for our opponents to screw up if they end up in a 4-bet pot with a bad hand. Obv there are lots of ways they can beat us, but that'll happen no matter anytime you see a flop. just saying.

Andrew

obv its about whether flatting is higher EV than shoving

In fact, we can break it down one more level-- is flatting higher EV against his bluff range than shoving.

If we accept that his bluff range has some equity that is NEVER realized when we shove, that's pretty good.

Now, we need the money we make postflop to be worth MORE than his equity in the pot (the times we lose).

So, obviously if our opponent bluffs it off with any regularity, this starts looking better and better. And, guys who 4-bet light will often bluff it off.

Against guys who don't, i'd ship, if that makes sense.

Andrew

I thought we were talking about calling 4bets outside of TT+/AK? Obviously calling with that range can be profitable, sometimes more so than shoving. Do you never flat 4bets outside of that range?

Second part seems especially untrue. Empirical evidence > words

I mean, if you've flatted 500 4bets with AK, I think a logical place to start this analysis is to see if you're losing 3000bb/100 while flatting and losing 500bb/100 by shoving. If the results are indeterminate or if the sample size is small then sure, logic away, but ignoring those results seems foolish.

meh, words sometimes do a bad job of explaining stuff, but if you get far enough into it, you can predict stuff that will eventually be backed up by data. (good example, ages ago there was a long argument about whether or not overbet shoving vs fish was better than betting 1/2 pot "value size". Some predicted that shoving was better and made a persuasive case, others predicted smaller was better and made a (somewhat less) persuasive case. Then, someone (i think it was Isura) collected a ****ton of hands and basically proved shove camp right. That's basically what I'm saying.)

How wide I flat 4-bets depends how wide my opponents bluff range is. Against a bad-aggressive guy I might go pretty far. One time I flatted a 5-bet with AJ in a live cash game, that was pretty nuts. But it was right.

Andrew

First example doesn't seem too relevant. I don't really remember us being that ignorant but I guess we might've been. I mean, the answer to the question about whether or not we should overshove vs. a fish could be explained in about two sentences. We guess fish calls $1000 bet 50% of the time, and calls a $250 bet 75% of the time = bet $1000. Those guesses could both be estimated fairly accurately.

Using logic/maths to decide whether we can flat a 4bet with AK requires us to break down about an infinite number of possible permutations of villain's range, boards, % we get to SD, % mistakes villain makes, etc.

I'll take a HEM filter over 500 instances for proof before I assume our logic/maths in this spot works in practice.

Also I'd be remiss to fail to mention that one time you tried to logic your way out of flatting a 4bet with AK oop with 100bbs, lol.

lol we were totally that ignorant haha. I'm talking 2007, maybe even 2006. Back in the micro days or rather, the SSNL days (before 2p2 had a micro stakes forum even!)

If I had HM I'd run the filter. But I don't use it. Srry!

Andrew

I don't have access to my old 2p2 account but I'm sure everyone can work out who I am

Logic is math (or I guess philosophy).

i thought the question was flating a 4bet with other hands u 3bet? like QJs J7s 75s ect the non AQ+,TT+ part. obv u cant go wrong flating or shoving AK pre under most circumstances(unless he never has a 4bet bluff range or AQ) as bothwill be +ev lines.which has the higher ev is up for debate and deep analysis

I think you are mistaken about the frequency with which I am right or wrong. This is probably because you put a lot less effort into considering the merits of my arguments than you do into whether or not you like me or my tone.

Now you are just bitching about semantics.

Your original post made a very strong implication that people can't do an EV calc.

My point is that doing an EV calc is easy, but it's the assumptions about peoples' ranges and betting/folding frequencies that matter. Those assumptions are not "math" the way most people use that term.

And I'm sorry but Logic is definitely not just Math lol.