Hi poker people.

So I am just starting off with Flopzilla and have been working on my first Minimum Defence Frequency calculation, using a random flop generated through flopzilla. The method which I used was taken from a youtube video put up by Mathew Janda a couple of years ago (unusually titled "How to make maple syrup pancakes"?!) I have done my best to simulate the method which he used. I have gone for defence of a BTN flat vs a 50% MP Cbet. The ranges which I used are those Janda used for both the btn and the MP. Please tell me what you think, what you might do differently, or let me know if you think I'm way off. I only play full ring MTT and these ranges are, according to Janda, for 6 max, I'm not sure how I should adjust the ranges used, feel free to comment on that too.

btn range = 10.5% (excluding AA,KK,AKs which we 3bet)
MP range = 19.6%


Defending BTN flat vs MP 50% PSB cbet

step 1: Calculate Villain’s RFF: required fold frequency ( I might have made this term up a little this is the fold frequency that villain would need in order this continuation bet to be +EV)

X = Y/(1+Y)
X = .5/(1+0.5)
X = 0.33
X = 33%

Therefore our MDF = 66%+ (say 70%)

FLOP Td 6h 4h

Total combos 124

124*.07 = 87 combos to be defended

step 2: Calculate value raise range:
firstly we can see that villain has an over-pair to the board or better: 14.3%
According to Janda anytime villain has a hand beat over 10% we should no longer consider an equivalent hand good enough to raise. In this case villain has an over pair 14.3% of the time (AA,KK,QQ,JJ,TT,66,44), so we will not be raising top pair or overpair type hands:

Value raise range: 8 combos

Sets: 66(3), 44(3) [6] *not raising TT(3)
NFD: AQs(1), AJs(1) [2] *not raising ATs(1)

step 3: calculate target Bluff raise range: 13 combos (2 combos to balance each raised set and 1 combo to balance the raise FD's)

Bluffs to balance sets (*2) = 12
Bluffs to balance NFD (*.5) = 1

step 4 : calculate Target Calling range: 87 – (8+13) = 66 combos

Sets: TT(3) [3]
Overpairs : QQ(6), JJ(6) [12]
Top pair: ATs(3), JTs(3), T9s(3) [9]
FD: KQs(1), KJs(1), QJs(1), T9s(1), 98s(1), 87s(1) [6] {30 so far}
OESD: 87s(3) [3]
PP Below TP : 99(6),88(6),77(6) [18] {51so far}
MIDDLE PAIR: 76s(3), 65s(3) [6]
Ace high (BDNF) AhKx(3), AhQx(3)
Ace high (BDF) AxKh (3) {66 so far}

step 5 : assign Target Bluff range: target = 13 combos

Ace high: AxKx (6)
Gutshot: 98s (3)
Ace high: AxQx (4)


Thats it guys. Looking back over my range I atleast feel that it looks quite balanced. By slow playing TT and AhTh we keep a strong balanced calling range. Furthermore our bluff raising range consists of over cards and gutshots which nicely balance our strong raising range. Again, please let me know where I might have gone wrong, thanks....and back to Flopzilla to generate a new flop

Without looking at this very closely, it seems your analysis and combo counting is accurate, and I think this kind of exercise can be very useful in helping you visualize ranges on a variety of board textures. (I did several of the same exercises with random flops when I first saw the videos a few years ago).
That said, in tough cash games of 2017, players tend to cold-call in position pre-flop less often than they used to, the OOP c-bettor often uses a smaller sizing and a fairly low c-betting frequency, and the player in position calls/floats at a considerably higher percentage of the time than MDF would indicate. (The M in MDF stands for minimum, after all). If you find that on some flops your continuance range can't meet the MDF number, or it can only do so by peeling with some very weak hands (like many underpairs that won't be able to withstand multiple barrels), it's often because your pre-flop range is too wide/weak to begin with.

Thanks Arty!

What you said about not being able to meet the MDF or only being able to do so with weak hands such as underpairs that cannot withstand multiple barrels is particularly interesting because the very next flop which I generated seemed to create that exact issue! On an Ac5cTs board I found myself struggling to find meet the calling range, and calling with 99(6 combos), 88(6 combos) and still not being able to meet the range requirements. :-

Defending BTN flat vs MP 50% PSB cbet

required fold frequency = 33%

MDF = 66%+ (say 70%)

FLOP Ac 5c Ts

Total combos 119

119*.07 = 84 combos to be defended

Calculate value raise range:
villain has two pair or better: 10.00 % this is on the threshold. I will opt for the conservative approach and not raise two pair hands here.

Value raise range: 8 combos

Sets: TT(3), 55(3) [6]
NFD: [0] *not raising KQs(1), KJs(1)

Bluff raise range: 12 combos

Bluffs to balance sets (*2) = 12

Target Calling range: 84 – (8+12) = 64 combos

Sets [0]
Overpairs : [0]
Two pair ATs(2)
Top pair: AQs(3), AJs(3), AKo(9), AQo(9) [24]
FD: KQs(1), KJs(1), QJs(1), JTs(1) T9s(1), 98s(1), 87s(1), 76s(1) [8]
OESD: [0]
PP Below TP : QQ(6), JJ(6) [12] {46 so far}
MIDDLE PAIR: JTs(2), T9s(2)
Weak pair: 99(6), 88(6) {60 so far}

Target Bluff range: target = 12 combos

Gutshot: KQs(3), KJs(3), QJs(3), 98s(3)


Would you say that a btn flatting range of 10.4% is possibly too wide? It does include 56s,67s,87s,98s,T9s, and all of the pocket pairs from QQ to 22.

I think it's important to note that not all of the preflop money in the pot is your own and that good strategies will have a nutty advantage, as well as a range vs range equity advantage on such a flop as the AT5. These factors make it ok to defend less than mdf would suggest in the spot you listed above.

The converse is also true imo: on flops that give the button a nutty advantage and a realizable range vs range equity advantage, you will find many more hands to continue with in position than mdf would suggest.

Boards containing two Broadway cards would heavily favour the pre-flop raiser instead of the caller if the caller has many underpairs and middling suited connectors in his range. If there is a distinct range advantage, the weak range of the caller could be subject to 'exploitation'. (You can just fire some big bets into it and watch it collapse like it's still 2011.)
Yes, I think it's too wide except in very soft games, where set-mining all pairs is still profitable and villains aren't very aggro with regard to squeezing pre-flop, or barreling and check-raising post.

In tougher games, cold-calling ranges are tighter/stronger, the smallest pairs are folded (because they realize equity so badly) and many of the suited connectors (and some suited aces, some suited Broadways) would be 3-bet pre-flop instead of flatted.
e.g. A tight calling range in BTN v MP might look more like JJ-77, AQs-ATs, KTs, QJs, JTs, AQo (5%), and this sort of range would be able to "defend" on boards like ATx as well as 87x, as it has "board coverage" on just about every possible flop texture.

i wonder why are we bluffing with GS instead of high equity bluff like FD

Polarization for the win.
You can definitely raise some flush draws, but if you're raise-folding some hands (i.e. bluffing), it's often best to pick hands that have lower equity, and that can't easily get to the river by calling.
e.g. If you raise a flush draw and face a big 3-bet on the flop, you hate having to lay it down when you could have 35% equity. It's easy to fold a 9-high gutter that only has 3 clean outs.

On the other hand, when we get flatted we have better equity with our fd. Would be interesting to see whether solver prefers to raise our higher or lower equity draws

我從使用 Tapatalk 的 SM-G9350 發送

On the other other hand, if we bluff sometimes with both gutshots and flushdraws at frequency, we increase our fake outs.

This also allows us to have a bluffing range on all runouts, where if we only bluff flushdraws we can't bluff when the flush hits because our range is (value) and nothing else worth bluffing.

Yeah. It's complicated. Mixed strategies for just about all of your draws would be optimal at equilibrium. On a human level you might say "I'll raise my gutshots, and call with my flush draws", but at solver/bot level it's more like "Raise this gutshot combo 72%, that flush draw combo 24%, another flush draw at 62%, that combo gutshot/BDFD 87%" etc.