Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Micro-Small Stakes Limit Discussions about micro-small stakes Texas Hold'em (all stakes up to around 15/30)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-18-2018, 07:45 PM   #1
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

I raise on the button with A7o, small blind folds, big blind calls.

J45r

Big blind checks, I bet, big blind check raises, and I?

How profitable do you think calling is?

Letís assume I call.

Turn 4o

Big blind bets.

How profitable do you think calling is?

Letís assume I call.

River Ko

Big blind bets.

How profitable do you think calling is?

I ask because Iíve been thinking about how to play bluffcatchers on future streets when faced with a close decision. Seems to me that the profitability of the bluffcatcher isnít neutral as some may believe. I think the profitability of the bluffcatcher will decrease as this hand progresses. Does this imply that any hand that can profitably call the turn, and can beat a bluff on the river, should be a call on the river?
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2018, 11:31 PM   #2
gr26
centurion
 
gr26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Murmansk
Posts: 186
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Do you call with KQo on the turn here?
gr26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 12:43 AM   #3
gr26
centurion
 
gr26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Murmansk
Posts: 186
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

I mean, what do you mean, Bob? You are talking about exploitive poker or theory one? We must know something about the opponent or at least default strategy at the level (people copy one another... i call it monkey equilibrium). If the latter you read MoP from top to bottom.
What happened? you sick and tired of calling down with Ax just to watch J10?
gr26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 02:44 AM   #4
maka2184
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 774
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by gr26 View Post
Do you call with KQo on the turn here?
I would personally call turn with KQo.
maka2184 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 02:53 AM   #5
maka2184
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 774
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
I raise on the button with A7o, small blind folds, big blind calls.

J45r

Big blind checks, I bet, big blind check raises, and I?

How profitable do you think calling is?

Letís assume I call.

Turn 4o

Big blind bets.

How profitable do you think calling is?

Letís assume I call.

River Ko

Big blind bets.

How profitable do you think calling is?

I ask because Iíve been thinking about how to play bluffcatchers on future streets when faced with a close decision. Seems to me that the profitability of the bluffcatcher isnít neutral as some may believe. I think the profitability of the bluffcatcher will decrease as this hand progresses. Does this imply that any hand that can profitably call the turn, and can beat a bluff on the river, should be a call on the river?
*Flop*
Calling flop in my opinion is at worst neatural EV. I suspect +EV considering straight redraw to the nuts.

*Turn*
Calling turn is still neatural EV here since MOST flip c/r by villain should bet a blank turn.

If anything, I suspect our EV went up on turn in what is essentially a blank turn especially if villain c/r flop with pair and straight draw type hand sans 4x

*River*
Our EV theoretically got worse but would Kx really have c/r flop and bet down as default majority of the time as BB villain?

My general read is they wont so I think based on size of the pot, Ahi in which kicker plays is a must call on river.

NOTE: I'm bad at poker math and too lazy to Stove or Equilab this although it seems fun
maka2184 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 09:48 AM   #6
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by gr26 View Post
I mean, what do you mean, Bob? You are talking about exploitive poker or theory one? We must know something about the opponent or at least default strategy at the level (people copy one another... i call it monkey equilibrium). If the latter you read MoP from top to bottom.
What happened? you sick and tired of calling down with Ax just to watch J10?
Let's pretend that the big blind is a strong limit holdem player.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 09:58 AM   #7
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by maka2184 View Post
*Flop*
Calling flop in my opinion is at worst neatural EV. I suspect +EV considering straight redraw to the nuts.
I agree, naturally, which is why I chose this hand for the example.
Quote:
*Turn*
Calling turn is still neatural EV here since MOST flip c/r by villain should bet a blank turn.

If anything, I suspect our EV went up on turn in what is essentially a blank turn especially if villain c/r flop with pair and straight draw type hand sans 4x
What if the big blind correctly drops the weaker pairs and draws from the turn betting range?
Quote:
*River*
Our EV theoretically got worse but would Kx really have c/r flop and bet down as default majority of the time as BB villain?

My general read is they wont so I think based on size of the pot, Ahi in which kicker plays is a must call on river.
The King is pretty much a blank here, which is why I chose that river card. It causes the river betting range to be polarized to (monsters) and (busted draws).

Quote:
NOTE: I'm bad at poker math and too lazy to Stove or Equilab this although it seems fun
That's fine. I'm doing this in an attempt to get better at estimating bluffcatching ev without tools.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 11:12 AM   #8
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/5...+fold+the+turn

some good bluffcatching discussion here with DeathDonkey imo. Been mulling this topic over and over in my head ever since this talk.

The main theme I'm trying to present is this:

If I think I have a close decision on the flop, and the turn does not help me in any way, then I think this makes the turn a clear fold.

This theme also extends to the turn: if I think I have a close decision on the turn, and the river does not help me in any way, then I think this makes the river a clear fold.

This is contrary to the (imo overused) statement that gets thrown around "if you call the x you have to call the y."
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 02:41 PM   #9
Hysteresis
stranger
 
Hysteresis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 13
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
I raise on the button with A7o, small blind folds, big blind calls.

J45r

Big blind checks, I bet, big blind check raises, and I?

How profitable do you think calling is?

Letís assume I call.

Turn 4o

Big blind bets.

How profitable do you think calling is?

Letís assume I call.

River Ko

Big blind bets.

How profitable do you think calling is?

I ask because Iíve been thinking about how to play bluffcatchers on future streets when faced with a close decision. Seems to me that the profitability of the bluffcatcher isnít neutral as some may believe. I think the profitability of the bluffcatcher will decrease as this hand progresses. Does this imply that any hand that can profitably call the turn, and can beat a bluff on the river, should be a call on the river?
What is your button opening range? That matters.
Hysteresis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 04:45 PM   #10
jdr0317
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 6,511
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

I suspect having the 7 in our hand is good for calling the flop raise but not so great for calling down.
jdr0317 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 05:01 PM   #11
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hysteresis View Post
What is your button opening range? That matters.
22+, A2s+, A2o+, K2s+, K8o+, Q2s+, Q9o+, J7s+, J8o+, T7s+, T8o+, 96s+, 97o+, 86s+, 87o, 75s+, 76o, 64s+, 54s, 43s.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2018, 11:32 PM   #12
Howard Beale
Formerly red
 
Howard Beale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Doing what my dog wants
Posts: 21,727
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
Let's pretend that the big blind is a strong limit holdem player.
In that case you had a big problem as soon as the BB called. I'd check back the flop.

I like 'monkey equilibrium', btw, that's a nice one.
Howard Beale is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 10:30 AM   #13
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Howard, what kind of range do you give the big blind here preflop?
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 06:03 PM   #14
Howard Beale
Formerly red
 
Howard Beale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Doing what my dog wants
Posts: 21,727
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
Howard, what kind of range do you give the big blind here preflop?
The kind that beats the huge range that you posted. I don't think that I'm being nitty when I say to check back the flop v. that type of player and if you always bet the flop you're exploitable. As for having a bluff-catcher, well, BB's not bluffing most of the time esp at small stakes.
Howard Beale is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 06:35 PM   #15
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
The kind that beats the huge range that you posted.
Ok if that's true then I agree check flop. However I think that correct big blind calling ranges should be wider than the opening raise range.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 09:56 PM   #16
Howard Beale
Formerly red
 
Howard Beale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Doing what my dog wants
Posts: 21,727
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
Ok if that's true then I agree check flop. However I think that correct big blind calling ranges should be wider than the opening raise range.
As long as it's not ridiculous. One of the problems is that a strong player will c/r any non-Ace flop w/ a single over card on the board and then we are wondering if we have a bluff-catcher. It's worse in it's way v. a player who will call w/ trash and then we have zero idea what's going on.

There's no shame in giving the hand up when we should. We take our swing and we miss. It's going to happen again in a few minutes and if we keep on swinging at them all the manager's going to have a talk w/ us.
Howard Beale is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 10:21 PM   #17
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

I haven’t played live in years.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2018, 10:49 PM   #18
callipygian
slowrolled by tpiranha!
 
callipygian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: but I don't know which
Posts: 19,889
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

I think this discussion is headed in the wrong direction, in the sense that it's starting with preflop and moving to the river, the way we'd analyze a typical hand - but the question posed is the multistreet considerations of a flop call.

To answer that question, analysis should start on the river. What hands does Villain 3-barrel? Which river cards do we call? What hands would Villain have checked? Which river cards would we bluff if checked to?

Then, it moves backwards - given the answers on the river, and what hand Villain 2-barrels, which turn cards do we call? What hands would Villain have checked? Which turn cards would we bluff if checked to?

Then you can take those and answer for the flop call.
callipygian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 12:09 AM   #19
Hysteresis
stranger
 
Hysteresis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 13
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by callipygian View Post
I think this discussion is headed in the wrong direction, in the sense that it's starting with preflop and moving to the river, the way we'd analyze a typical hand - but the question posed is the multistreet considerations of a flop call.

To answer that question, analysis should start on the river. What hands does Villain 3-barrel? Which river cards do we call? What hands would Villain have checked? Which river cards would we bluff if checked to?

Then, it moves backwards - given the answers on the river, and what hand Villain 2-barrels, which turn cards do we call? What hands would Villain have checked? Which turn cards would we bluff if checked to?

Then you can take those and answer for the flop call.
I agree but how do you know what bands you could have on the river, or what hands villain could have on the river, without knowing what you open and what villain defends. Not trying to be argumentative but game tree starts preflight imo. I do agree flop decision is interesting.
Hysteresis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 12:43 AM   #20
Hysteresis
stranger
 
Hysteresis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 13
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Beale View Post
In that case you had a big problem as soon as the BB called. I'd check back the flop.

I like 'monkey equilibrium', btw, that's a nice one.
Do you ever check back good hands here? Do you bluff any hands here?
Hysteresis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 05:45 AM   #21
Howard Beale
Formerly red
 
Howard Beale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Doing what my dog wants
Posts: 21,727
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hysteresis View Post
Do you ever check back good hands here? Do you bluff any hands here?
Since giving free cards is a horror I rarely check back if I've hit. And ofc I c-bet w/e the flop is very often but it's certainly not automatic.
Howard Beale is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-21-2018, 09:38 PM   #22
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: takin it to the streets
Posts: 10,368
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

I think that’s a fine exploit for live poker Howard.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:21 AM   #23
maka2184
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 774
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/5...+fold+the+turn

some good bluffcatching discussion here with DeathDonkey imo. Been mulling this topic over and over in my head ever since this talk.

The main theme I'm trying to present is this:

If I think I have a close decision on the flop, and the turn does not help me in any way, then I think this makes the turn a clear fold.

This theme also extends to the turn: if I think I have a close decision on the turn, and the river does not help me in any way, then I think this makes the river a clear fold.

This is contrary to the (imo overused) statement that gets thrown around "if you call the x you have to call the y."
Thanks for this but am I wrong to think WTSD% > W$@SD?

Very general thought process but my biggest leak 3nax as a prop on Cereus was my low WTSD%.

My conclusion was that my WTSD% was too low but this was about 10+ years ago and my ability to self analyze myself via PokerTracker, Stove, HUD, or game theory never got anywhere near DonJuan, Unguarded, OnTheRail15, Ninawilliams, etc where I can comfortably beat LHE 4+ tabling including HUHU.
maka2184 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:34 AM   #24
maka2184
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 774
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
I agree, naturally, which is why I chose this hand for the example.

What if the big blind correctly drops the weaker pairs and draws from the turn betting range?


The King is pretty much a blank here, which is why I chose that river card. It causes the river betting range to be polarized to (monsters) and (busted draws).



That's fine. I'm doing this in an attempt to get better at estimating bluffcatching ev without tools.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonJuan View Post
Style wish I prefer to stick to as best mix strategy as I can. I don't have to worry about what my opponent does. Pre flop or flop any action they take that not GTO is leaking in each decision tree. Maybe in a different structure game like nl or pot limit that I can exploit the bet size.
Quoting expert DonJuan in completely different scenario via "Tough spor vs. super wide range on river" thread in Mid-High Stakes Limit.

Even if not remotely applicable, shouldn't the best mix strategy call the TURN high probability over folding?
maka2184 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 02:22 AM   #25
Aaron W.
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 29,348
Re: Bluffcatching ev and the multi street implications

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob148 View Post
The main theme I'm trying to present is this:

If I think I have a close decision on the flop, and the turn does not help me in any way, then I think this makes the turn a clear fold.

This theme also extends to the turn: if I think I have a close decision on the turn, and the river does not help me in any way, then I think this makes the river a clear fold.
I had a longer answer, but I've decided to just give a short answer. It seems to me that "does not help me in any way" is doing all of the heavy lifting for you.

Put very simply, on both the flop and the turn, it's possible to classify the next street as being either "good" cards and "bad" cards. The "good" cards are the cards that will allow you to continue with your hand and the "bad" cards are the ones that will lead you to fold.

When you make your decision, you're weighing the balance of EVs for all those possible situations. On the next street, you're looking at the EV of the specific situation that you are in. So it seems it would be uncontroversial that if your first decision is close, that if one of the "bad" cards falls on the next street (that is, a card that "does not help [you] in any way") then you should fold. Not only is it a "bad" card, but based on the wording you've provided (not a help in *any* way), it seems to suggest that it is among the worst of the "bad" cards.

Quote:
This is contrary to the (imo overused) statement that gets thrown around "if you call the x you have to call the y."
I don't know what you think this statement means or how you think it's used, so an example to provide context would be helpful.
Aaron W. is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online