I have recently been looking into the idea of ranges that shadow other ranges. Have there been previous discussions of this?

An example of Range Shadowing:
Preflop, on the button. You have what looks like a simple Range for Calling an open bet ( limp ). Your 3 bet Range includes AA, AK, and KK. You can never possibly call AA, AK, or KK. Never. That is because we all make the 3 Bet decision before the Call decision. So, if we will 3 Bet it, then we will never call it. The Call range is in the shadow of the 3 Bet Range.

I have read a lot of poker books, but have never seen a good discussion of the effect of shadows.

There are some interesting but not very useful things. The Big Blind can never Limp or Call. UTG can never Bet3 and can never Call unless he Limps.

You can spend a lot of time designing Call ranges for each position and get them all wrong unless 3 Bet range is considered.

Suppose your 3 bet Range is 5 percent and your Call Range is 7 percent. Your effective Call Range is really only 2 percent. The first 5 percent is the Shadow.

How about other Ranges such as 3 Bet Call. Does it have a Shadow? Yep, Bet 4 is the Shadow. Open is the Shadow to Limp.

Ranges are frequently used for advanced play, such as Button Steal, the Shadow there is Open. Button Isolate, the Shadow is Bet 3.

One use of Ranges that is overlooked frequently is using them for things like a Continuation bet Range. The Range should include randomness, the best hands for the Range, and the Flop board texture. A properly constructed Range can do that. The C-Bet Range is in the shadow of the preflop Open Range.

I don't understand.

Oo

This is just silly.
We have opening ranges, and we have ranges for calling, 3-betting, and folding, when faced by an open. We don't have "shadow" ranges. We just take actions given the situation we're in.

Fortunately we play one hand at a time and we are not obligated to make a decision 100% this way or that way.

I think the original post incorrectly assumes that poker strategy is static or unchanging.

Op I think u just solved poker ^_^

If it is then the Call range should not include AA, KK, or AK. If you want to have a Call range of 10%, then the use of combos to get to 10% will produce the wrong result. With applications such as FlopZilla the percentage shown at the button is based on combos. If AA, KK, AK are included in the Call range then there is a 2.11 percent error in the percentage calculation. That was my point. Not explained well in the original post.

Am I wrong?

There are certainly times to just call with AA,KK,AK

In Equilab, you can mark the top and bottom of a range. Say, for example, I only wanted to play 9.9% of hands, but I wanted to 3-bet QQ+. If I move the sliders (marked red in the screengrab below), I will find that the calling range is 8.9%. (QQ+ is 1.36%).



The numbers in boxes show that PFR (i.e. 3-bet) is 1.3% and VPIP is 9.9%, but the selected calling range is 8.9%.

For what's it's worth, there are some situations where my calling frequency is lower than my 3-bet frequency. e.g. for MP vs UTG, I might say "I only call 3%". That 3% does not include AA, KK or AK. Those are in the 3-bet range, which might be as wide as 5%.

Then Equilab takes into account the shadow but Flopzilla does not.

What I was trying to get to is that the idea of a starting Call range is almost never explained. Advanced players understand why there is a starting range, but it is not found much in the available literature. Less advanced players might benefit from knowing this.

Even some advanced players have not thought through other possible ranges such as preflop Steal.

Please show me these advanced players that don't know what stealing is.

I did NOT say that advanced player did not understand preflop Stealing. They certainly do. What I said, or meant to say, is that some have not thought through the idea that a Stealing Range is also shadowed. Most Steal but do not use a range in a conscious way. They are focused on an individual opponent. My focus is on an unknown opponent first for a strategy, then to make adjustments to that strategy based on gaining knowledge of the opponent.

In your excellent Eqiilab reply, you pointed out that a range can be partially covered by another range. I called it a shadow range, shadowed would be more accurate. Suggest a word?

The sequence in which poker decisions are made can get a bit complicated. I believe that when constructing ranges it is a good idea to keep in mind that sequence. For example, would you decide on preflop squeeze, preflop steal, preflop min bet, or a preflop steal call?

I have been busy coding a Holdem application. To write code, things like order of evaluation and downstream effects must be considered. My mind works like that. Sometimes causes confusion for others. True, programmers are a strange lot.

yadoula 2.0 imo

You mean the range that you balance your value hands with?

No, just talking about basic concepts and thought process, not specific hands. My thinking in the original post was that understanding your thought process is a good idea.

Another example on the Flop, Fold is always the last decision that you should make. A Check is the second to last. If I were to make the Check decision based on the hand or draw that I have, before considering C-Bet, Delayed C-Bet, MDF, Bluff, Check-Raise, Float, Steal, Isolate, and other possible plays, it would be a mistake. A Check decision early short circuits the thought process.

Ranges are a good way to define a default strategy when you don't have any read on your opponent. I assume that the unknown is an Average Opponent if no read. A Range gives me a default starting point. When I do have a read, then I take that into consideration before a default strategy.

The Original question was "Is this worth discussing?". I am looking for thoughts on this. I may be missing something.

Hell no! Noone will reach that level of arrogance and ******ation ever again.

I'm pretty sure that OP just has no knowledge about poker theory, and is re-inventing something that has already been invented in ~2002 (or maybe 1800s).

As I understand, he's saying that when someone has a raising range in a certain spot, those hands that the person is raising are now no longer in his calling range.
For example, if you always 3bet AA, this means that AA isn't in your calling range.

If you make the 3 Bet decision before you make the call decision then you will never call AA. If the percentage is calculated using combos, then the call range percentage will be incorrect. Total of combos / 1326 * 100 = percentage. Just math.

I did not claim to invent anything, just made an observation with the math to back it up.

The Original question was "Is this worth discussing?".

No.

I never understood how people can talk like this. You are using good grammar and paragraphs etc. But damn.... legit have no clue what you are trying to say.

I stick by my statement-- yadoula 2.0.

Anyways gl at the tables OP

I think it's pretty interesting, you should make a YouTube video describing this concept.

I think your starting position is wrong for at least 2 reasons. The first is that when considering "should I raise AA" I am absolutely permitted to say "no"

The second is that when you're making a poker decision, you are not really faced with a series of yes/no questions that you answer in sequence. Instead there are a range of choices, and you select from them. So I think the whole notion is something of a non sequitur.

What does this *mean*??? Please explain it as simply as possible. I've never been so confused by what someone is trying to say in one short sentence.

What if you make the "call decision" first? Then you will never 3bet?

What if you make the "3bet or call decision? Will any cats die as a result?

It means that you click the 3bet button before you click the call button.

Yeah, but this can't be what he means because it's obviously true that you can't click call *after* you've already raised and before the opponent acts. I'm trying to understand what a "shadow" of a range is according to him.

Can you prove the shadow range is a topological space?
Use neighbourhoods
Put it in the video.