Here we'll talk about preflop aspects of cold calling. Firstly, cold-calling is generally bad. You are giving up initiative, often to be in a heads up pot, against a villain who is already showing strength. When you are not in a heads up pot, you end up with poor relative (and often absolute as well) position. So why do we do it?

Recall the three main edges in hold’em: card edge, positional edge, and skill edge. When a villain raises, if we believe ourselves to be ahead of their range cardwise, we generally 3-bet. Thus when we are cold calling, we are mostly trying to push our positional and skill edge. Based on their ranges, we should have a plan for cold calling from the start. The idea is either to potentially bust the player we are involved with by hitting a monster against their made hand, or to take the pot away from them on a later betting round, hopefully with outs to a better hand than theirs if that fails. In general, while these two purposes can merge somewhat, it is best to have a plan for which is the main goal unless it is highly dependent on board texture, meaning that on some board textures you will have fold equity and some you will be likely to stack them. Thus, the two most important questions about our opponents when we are considering cold calling are: do we have implied odds, and two, is their range weak enough that we will likely have fold equity on later streets? The reason the ideas of busting vs. bluffing are separate is that usually you usually don’t have much fold equity if you have large implied odds and vice versa, although there are exceptions.

These ideas can be illustrated nicely by seeing the goals of calling vs. different player types. For instance, vs. a nit who will mainly play big pair hands and AK preflop, but will go too far with overpairs and TPTK, we are calling for the massive implied odds they offer. The standard is that we are trying to crack aces with a set. Vs. a positionally aware thinking TAG/LAG, we are calling to use our positional advantage to put pressure on them and put them in difficult situations where we can force them to fold better hands or extract value from worse in spots that are easy for us to play but marginal for them due to our positional advantage. Vs. these opponents we could either bluff them or bust them based on board texture and betting action and the lines between fold equity and implied odds can become blurred. Vs. a maniac we are calling to flop something strong enough to give them rope to hang themselves with. We are calling to bust them, but we may not need as strong a hand to bust them as we need to bust a nit. Finally, vs. a passive fish, we are calling so that we can value bet and raise them very aggressively. As you can see then, in all cases the two factors to consider are what are our implied odds vs. this player and what is the likelihood we will have fold equity later on.

Position ties well in with this in that it often tells us more about our implied odds and/or fold equity. For most villains, we can create some kind of range for them based on their position. If they make an EP raise, we can generally assume we have implied odds, while if they make an LP raise, we will often have fold equity on later streets. There are exceptions though. Bad players generally cannot be put on a range based on position, while tricky villains will occasionally mix in more speculative hands EP for balancing their ranges. Also, extremely nitty players will have an extremely strong range regardless of position. We additionally have to consider our own position; more for the risks. For instance, if UTG raises and we call UTG+1, there is a good chance we will play a multiway pot with no initiative and both poor absolute and relative position on postflop betting rounds. On the other hand, if the CO opens and we flat on the button, we our opening ourselves up to a potential squeeze from aggressive players from the blinds. Further, the position we are calling from and their position also tells an observant opponent something about the strength of our hands. If a thinking UTG raiser opens and we call UTG+1, he will generally put us on either a strong hand or something like a medium pocket pair that can easily make a very strong hand postflop. Finally, it is generally terrible to cold call from the blinds; mainly due to the disadvantages you have in controlling the pot size being out of position. You lose the implied threat of future bets, and thus much of your fold equity, you often have to pay more if you are on a draw to see if you hit, and you lose much of your implied odds because it is harder to build a pot out of position.

Now we come to what hands to cold call with, and it really mostly relates to whether we have implied odds or fold equity, and also where our implied odds come from. Do our implied odds come from him overplaying strong, but not monster hands? Do they come from him being a calling station, or do they come from him bluffing too much? For instance, vs. a nit who overplays big pairs, it might be wise to cold call with pocket pairs only. You will need a very strong hand to beat his, and if you have little fold equity it may be difficult to play draws successfully, so a fit or fold strategy where you attempt to hit a set may be best. Vs. a persistent bluffer, we may only need a good top pair hand to bust him, we could add AK/AQ to the list, and if he has poor preflop hand selection and will likely play dominated hands we could even add AJ-AT and KQ/KJ to the list. The hand selection ideas vs. a bluffer are similar vs. a calling station, but in fact hands with huge potential like 33 may be less valuable (though probably still worth playing) vs. a calling station, since you will hit a set less often than top pair playing the other range, and a good top pair may be more than sufficient to take his stack. Against all of these except perhaps the aggressive nit whose bet sizing is too small, drawing hands like 67s are pretty weak, since against the group you will likely have no fold equity when you flop a draw, and against stations even if they let you get to your draw, the pot might be too small for you by the time you hit on the turn or river for you to get his stack.

Finally, we should look at our image when deciding when to cold call. For instance, in some cases versus an MP open with us on the c/o we may decide that AQo is ahead of his range. However, if we’ve been 3-betting relentlessly it may be time to cold call instead of 3-betting, as 3-betting can open us up to a 4-bet bluff. Similarly, if we haven’t been 3-betting much a 3-bet may be better in some cases than a cold call. Finally, if we are just to active and we pick up a hand like 67s we may just decide to chuck it.

In sum, the most important things to decide in cold calling are whether we will have fold equity or implied odds post flop, and if we do, we may decide to cold call. However, it must be remembered that cold-calling in and of itself is often not good and we must make up for it by a skill and/or positional edge.

Very good post

Those people who open this up, see all the writing and are about to go to a different thread instead should stop. Make time for this post now or later, because even though i subconsciously did most of what is said here, it is fantastic.
It has given me a bit of insight as to WHY i play certain cards against certain people. This definitely needs to go into the digest, if not the sticky.

Very well thought out and articulated post sir.

That's really good. Thanks alex.

Really good post with a lot of very insightful stuff!

This should get much more love as it will help some of you guys tremendously if you take some time to wrap your head around this.

Only negative remark: the layout of the text is not very reader - friendly.

Another great post, thank you.

EDIT, I've turned it into a .pdf file, you can download it here:

http://www.sendspace.com/file/uxmw7x

Any idea as to what percentage of hands we should be cold-calling with? I am at less than 3%, almost always from late position.

very good OP!

my CCPF% is generally around 7%. however, i play different than the conventional 2p2 style (which is VPIP very very close to equaling PFR). I do a lot of overlimping and overcalling PF to use my postflop edge against ppl (for both VBing AND bluffing). however, if your edge isnt primarily in postflop play, then getting involved in deeper SPR pots wont be of much help esp if you get carried away with 1pr type hands and struggle with draws, VBing, and hand reading.

I love these posts, more about the psychology of poker and less about specific situations

Very good way to put it without needing to get into specifics

wow sick.

what kinda ppl would u play 67s, would u play it vs tight ep ranges? I mean cause I always thought if you flop a big draw and if u raise flop you usually get it in flipping, sometimes people fold as well. Also sometimes you get trip value. So I'm asking don't you think 67ss can play both for implied odds vs very tight ranges in ep?

Im going to have to read it a couple more times. (pen+paper)

I think it's marginal in a vacuum, but can help you get paid off more with your sets by balancing your range against good players. This is because if you flat with these type of hands, you have more than just sets in your flop raising/cr'ing range, you also have draws (and maybe even some air if you've built up a dynamic). The easiest players in the world to play against are the nits that only cold-call with pocket pairs. If I get called by one of those guys, it doesn't even matter whether I hit the flop or not, because either way I bet and if they hit a set they raise and I fold, if they didn't hit then they fold. They lose almost every time and win only a small pot when they do hit. Obviously most thinking players are not that easy to read, but there are surprisingly a lot of them. It's much tougher to play (especially out of position) against guys that are cold-calling with suited connectors, suited aces, and playing them well postflop.

plays well as a hand with good IO and good bluff potential. I can think of a few boards id bluffraise 85% of the time which gives my float pf more value.

i think Harrington is the one who said being in position gives you a rough 2:1 edge regardless...so why not use it?

Another thing to consider when cold-calling is the people behind you. If you're in an aggressive game where you're likely to get squeezed you have less opportunity to play these hands that want high stack-to-pot ratios. If you have passive people behind you, that allows you to cold-call with a lot more speculative hands in position that don't mind playing multiway pots.

Concur with this. The entire post was outstanding, but there were some real gems buried in there:

well done, sir, I will definitely be reading this several more times.

very good read, sir!

mpethybridge, the concept of the week idea is just brilliant, absolutely BRILLIANT. You are really something here at uNL.

LOL, TY. I sincerely mean that. BUT: I stole the idea from micro six max and credit for the excellent content of course goes primarily to the outstanding OPs (and to the other posters who contribute). I wish I could, but I can't take any credit for how awesome the CotW stuff has been. It's all you guys and gals, who rule the world and make uFR the best effing place on the interwebz!

/hijack

Really good post.

Thanks, OP.

Great post, Alex!

The only thing missing was a cleaner layout. Such gems as these would truly deserve a cleaner presentation. Now it takes voluntary effort to read through and understand the importance of your text.

...but then again, that may be a good thing. Mpethy's annotations show just how deep the original post goes.

I can think of only one thing to add: when considering the call, there is a definite difference in implied odds between calling to bust and planning to use FE. When calling to bust, we are aiming for the entire stack. When calling to take the pot away, we're aiming for significantly less simply due to pot commitment issues.

can I post a hand that might be somewhat inbetween type of situation from the 2 we are looking at?

I say post it, examples are always good IMO.

It's not like this is the PS regs thread where the HH police immediately slap you fingers

+1

Very good post mang. If I may contribute...

I really like your discussion of the types of value we should be planning to get from our hand. Versus some opponents, we will be playing for high IO, and vs others, we will be playing to steal the pot later with a float/bet. Aside from considering his range and tendencies with overpairs, we should also take a close look at villain's betting tendencies postflop. For example, if you were against a villain with a 85% flop cbet, but a 20% turn cbet, we could profitably call with ATC, float, and then bet the turn when checked to. (Of course, OP's notes on how your position affects your willingness to call apply.) Another example would be someone who check/folds the flop every time they miss. Again, (especially if there are nits behind) our cards here really don't matter since we're calling primarily for bluff value.

The last thing I'd like to add (which may seem kinda obvious) is that the more confident you are in your game, and the better you are at range assessment and hand-reading, the more profitable cold-calling will be...so open up and play some damn postflop poker!

actually, its probably more me wanting advice/opinions.

villain is a 10/6/3 reggy/nit type. Cbets 88% over 1.3K hands.

no notes on him or hands I've played past the flop. Not really surprised being the nit he is.

Party Poker $100.00 No Limit Hold'em - 6 players
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter Powered By DeucesCracked.com

UTG: $95.50
MP: $98.00
CO: $14.00
Hero (BTN): $160.65
SB: $100.00
BB: $23.00

Pre Flop: ($1.50) Hero is BTN with 6 5
1 fold, MP raises to $4, 1 fold, Hero calls $4, 2 folds

Basically pre-flop I think I have really good implied odds and a chance to a good semi bluffing hand to abuse his high cbet%. Even top 6% hands isn't going to be able to stand a lot of heat unless he hits well. unless he's always stacking with TP type hands.

Flop: ($9.50) 9 T 8 (2 players)
MP bets $8.00,

Normally if a reg Cbets this flop OOP I'd give him a lot of respect for a big hand but this guy is cbetting close to 100% HU.

does that sound right so far?