you're thinking is good here, because of rake I think that good default should be 3x @nl50, until you have good reasons to raise smaller. Unless you're playing zoom, where most people are overfolding bb, so you can get away with 2-2,5x.

Also, if you see that your opponent is calling too much from bb vs 3x, you may wanna start raising 4x, playing bigger pots IP is always a good thing.

I never considered 4x, but may be a good option since a fairly decent amount of villains at my stake seem to pretty much never fold their BB to a raise. TY

Anybody find it significantly more difficult to get hands in HU?

I was putting in ~5-6k hand a days at 6 max. I can't seem to play many tables at all HU for reason. Also, someone will play me for like 80 hands. Another for 12 hand. Another for 110 hands. Then I just get bored and quit.

well, in HU you should play with at least 75% total vpip, in 6max most players play below 25%. Also, you usually see many flops. So you actually "play" waay more hands hu, it just in 6max most hands are either open fold or raise-and-take-it, which takes much less time.

Play zoom if you want to get a decent volume, still, HU hands count as at least 3x as much as 6max hands.

Unfortunately, I'm not on Stars. Though, not sure I really understand the point in HU zoom tbh. 6 max zoom makes sense. You fold, but the other people in the hand would have taken a while to finish, so you get to move on to the next hand quicker. HU you move onto the next hand as soon as you fold anyways, so what's the point? Seems like not much upside, but there's downside in that people that are better at reads, judging gameflow, etc.. don't get to utilize that skill as much.

On a side note. Kind of surprised how much ego seems to be in HU compared to 6 max. I'm pretty new to HU, and already been challenged to HU4rolls (I think), lol.

^^ya, that's how it is in HU. MANO per MANO. You either fight or chicken out and lose. It's a very c@wky game. Have no balls - you'll get run over and lose in long-term. It's not a game for nutpeddling nits. Also, skills alone won't make you a champ in this game. And last, most players don't realise how huge an impact of a variance in this pure form of poker and it shakes their confidence back and forth a lot, making them playing suboptimal and slowdown in progress.

I guess I can see that, kinda. Though it doesn't really seem like the ego thing is necessary to be good. Maybe just a byproduct of winning for some? Also, is it really a game of balls? It's just like any other poker isn't it? +EV plays, and -EV plays. Figuring out frequencies, and ranges. Exploiting, GTO, etc... Just the ranges and frequencies are different.

I can see variance being a mind **** though. Like, I'm running prob about 50bb/100 so far over a tiny sample, since moving nl5-nl50, and while I feel like I'm better than the guys I've played right now, I'm not so disillusioned that I think this W/R is sustainable, and I'll prob have times where I run so bad against people (I currently think I'm better than), and question if they are better than me.

point of hu zoom is to create action other than bumhunting, if you want to play recs in the pool, you are also forced to play some hands vs regs along the way (actually, you'll play most of your hands vs regs, as they usually use more entries). It's working quite well @ nl50 and nl100, higher - not so much.

as for sustainable wr in hu, if you're strictly bumhunting, you can have a solid 10bb/100 winrate even if you're a beginner, however smarter move is to battle some regs as well (at least those that you don't think are absolutely crushing you) in order to improve.

That's where zoom comes in handy, it automaticly creates a playing field that is soft enough to be beat if you're any decent, but also forces you to improve while battling regs. Some people complain about lack of a one-table-dynamics at zoom pool, but, first, that is mostly used to pick up dead money from tilting rec, and second, after a few hundred of hands you will build up some dynamics with other regs.

DAE think HU is more tilting then 6 max or full ring? If I'm getting owned by some guy, I feel it's more personal or emotional. I want to "get him back".. Maybe it's just because I'm new to HU..

So, the dude that challenged me HU4rolls (because I commented on a vid and said his analysis was bad), on youtube has a channel where he claims to be a pro/instructor.

Turns out he's posting vids on youtube that are playmoney, where he's pretending he's playing real money. After a quick google/PTR search (to see who I would be playing HU), he has a facebook/youtube channel with fake graphs where he says he's a pro that's made 700k playing poker, and went to Princeton. His PTR shows him losing ~1k, while playing 15k hands, mostly at penny stakes. He's also been banned from 2+2 for scamming someone out of $110, and then made a new account here where he continued to do transfers.

What exactly would compel someone to lie about being a pro poker player to this extent? Going through the trouble to make like 30 youtube training vids, setting up a fake facebook account, with fake graphs? All to get likes on youtube? WTF.

^^He's just an attention seeking whore)))

Wow, that's sick ... who is he ?

HU is more tilting and more personal than other forms of poker, you should have strong mindset before even trying to play it.

@up yeah, plz post the videos, they should be fun

Here's his facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php...434568&fref=nf

Here's his youtube channel with various 'instructional' vids at ~$5 SnG's, vids buying into nl25 with 62bb's and calling it 'kinda deep', generally playing awful, etc... Once in a while you can see his account balances, which range from $90 to $500.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj0...qhF8v2Q/videos



This is the only vid where he's not playing micro stakes, and appears to be playing high stakes (but it's actually play money). He acts like he's playing 5/10 PLO in it. He cropped out the top of the browser that says it's 'play money', but you can tell it's play money because they aren't taking any rake, and he never played anywhere near this level on his PTR. Also, the people he's playing against in the vid have only played a small amount of penny stake games per PTR.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gy1vHqDC1U0

Here's his PTR
http://www.pokertableratings.com/mer...ch/JewishMoney


A vid where he's flashing his sharkscope graph, but it's been cropped to not include the nosedive he took before this part of his graph, or show that he's averaging 11 cents per tourney. Seems like he started the cropped graph at ~game 2500 of his actual sharkscope.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vSnOANjv9g
http://www.sharkscope.com/#Player-St...rs/JewishMoney



The post where someone says he scammed them for $111.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28...l#post36795447


That account was banned so he made this new account right after, and started trading $ again.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...stcount=137403

You can see him playing with that SN on true poker here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhtB5AEdFVE




I wasn't planning on looking any of this stuff up. I stumbled across one of his vids, and made a post saying something along the lines of "this is bad analysis", then moved on with my day. He responded, told me to email him to challenge him to HU, started calling me a drug addict, with no BR, and a bunch of other weird stuff. So, I email him to set up a match, and he says he won't play me on Bovada (where we are both member), and wants to play me on Carbon (where I'm not signed up). At this point I had just googled/PTR'd him, and confronted him with being a lying scammer scumbag that deleted my youtube post so others wouldn't see his deal. Then he emailed me basically saying (and I'm paraphrasing) "yes I am up $700k you ****** pieces of ****. Go die slowly, I will laugh hard at that ****, and love to watch it. Go pop some pills you crack head, and keep watching my vids because you know you want to be me. I'd love for you to come to Atlantic City (he actually lives in Chicago) so I could beat the **** out of you, etc.... etc...."

So, yeah. That was odd.

Kingdanmer's brother?

How do I calculate the profitability of this turn AI 3-Bet?

I was thinking it might be $9.23 / ($9.23 + $11.40) =44.7% equity needed but I don't know, I'm hopeless with math.

^^

You apparently mean this as a value raise ? Your opponent must call with more worse hands than better hands, i.e. your required equity against his calling range is not 44.7% but >50%.

Otoh, if you were bluffing, then you risk $9.23 to win the $11.4 pot. A bluff would need to work at least 9.23 / (9.23 + 11.4) = 44.7% of the time, but that is not the equity you need. With that equation, you calculate the fold equity, i.e. you are +EV if Villain folds more than 55.3% of the time.

Note that it's an AI spot, I put him all-in. I thought about it more and I think I have to calculate the profit of all scenarios which are:

V Folds, V calls and we win, V calls and we lose = EV.

Is this correct?

If the above is true,

"you are +EV if Villain folds more than 55.3% of the time."

this would be false because we have to consider the amount we win when it goes all-in. (we don't lose 100%)

In N-AI spot it'd work though I think.

This is only true of value raises on the river, and of value bets on the river and in position. You can do it with <50% elsewhere.

Indeed, what I wrote was not correct for this situation on the turn, it would have been true only for the river (-> value bet / raise on the river needs to be >50% against opponent's calling range, and river bluffs need to succeed according to the fold equity equation that you gave).

Here, as we are on the turn, even when called and behind, we still have equity, and when called and ahead, our opponent also has equity, so:

EV = fold% * $11.4 + call% * [hero-eq * 11.4 - vill-eq * (11.4 + 9.23)]

with hero-eq + vill-eq = 1 and fold% + call% = 1

Excuse me, why don't we add my 3Bet on the pot with hero-eq * 11.4, but we do on the vill-eq pot?

@+VLFBERH+T,

I understand now, thanks.

Dammit, seems like I am hopeless too OMG ...

So:

1) Villain calling and you winning means you get the $11.40 in the pot plus his call of $9.23

2) Villain calling and you losing means you lose your bet of $9.23; the $11.40 is dead money that wasn't yours anymore.

EV = fold% * $11.4 + call% * [hero-eq * (11.4 + 9.23) - vill-eq * 9.23]

I was wrong. Sorry for being confusing

Now someone just confirm this to be true.

I'll see where I get with this equation.

EV = (v fold %)*11.40 + (v call %)*(26.06*equity - 9.23)

26.06 is the pot size following an all-in and a call. Assuming villain never folds, jamming is >0 EV as long as you have >35.4% equity.

But traditionally, when we ask if we can raise for value, we aren't settling for 0 EV. We want the EV of raising to be higher than the EV of calling. That requires more thorough calculation -- not just "if we have >x% equity, we can do this or that".

This is how it will work in simple, non-numerical terms: you'll want to reraise if villain's bluffs have a lot of equity (OESDs+), will call a shove in spite of having poor equity (GSs), or will never bluff the river; and you'll want to call if villain's bluffs have poor equity, will fold to a shove, and will bluff the river.

So, here we deduct 9.23 out of the full pot because it doesn't count when we calculate my share of the pot with my equity?

Also, did you forget the V's share of the pot with his equity from this equation or is it gone on purpose?