online 6 max

i open with 6 6 in the CO, folds to the TAGLAGgy(28/15/3.2) bb who calls.

Flop(4.5sb): J 8 3

check, check.

i'm usually calling down.

this is mostly a randomization decision. you should know i'm betting this flop a good amount of the time with my range as well. this is important for you to know. so here's what this post is really about.

a)what is your/my(the same for our purposes) range in this spot?

b)say i bet my "made" range x% of the time and check my "missed" range y% of the time. according to game theory against an unknown opponent, i want these frequencies to come as close to providing 0 ev for our opponent's flop decision as possible.

but we know a bit about our opponent here. let's try to exploit him(while simultaneously avoid exploitation as much as possible) by adjusting our actions for each leg of our range. what is the optimum frequency for each flop action(betting made/betting bluffs:checking made/checking bluffs) to keep our opponent from exploiting our strategy more than we are exploiting his?

This is fine as long as you balance your range, which I guess is what your saying with your questions.

Put another way, our range should be fairly open here against a thinking player who is going to try to exploit patterns in our play. In other words, I'd check this flop with hands like 66 or AT with marginal SD value, hands like AJ or A8 with good SD value, and occasionally with hands like JJ or 88 or 33. I'd also take a free card sometimes with gutshots and other weak draws.

A thinking player will sometimes give you more action than is warranted because he doesn't think that anyone who actually has a hand would check a two-flush board with a possible straight draw and so will bluff twice on the turn and river with a hand he would have check-folded on the flop.

Hi James,
maybe it's just a coincidence but a i also just read your post where you check flop with A7 after flopping bottom pr and call to river.

One might infer that you routinely chk behind with a made hand that is less then TP(or even below second pr)

in other words, i think this line is ok occasionally, but be careful to be predictable, cause that is the worst part of this line imho, it will be very noticable when you do it, and most players will pick up on this.


thanks for the post

brian

hey brian,

valid concerns. i could see how(given the limited sample) that your conclusion might be drawn. in reality, it's something i tend to balance at first and then adjust based on how my particular opponents adjust.

as you'll see in some following posts i'll try to construct some frequencies with which i check a range of made hands, busted hands, and drawing hands.

thanks again.

Okay, so here’s my default opening range from the CO:

44-AA, A2s+, K5s+, Q7s+, J8s+, A5o+, K8o+, Q9o+, 67s+, 9To+, 86s+, J9o+. I don’t stox’s book in front of me so I don’t really know how it relates to the ranges in WITHEG. Again, this is the range I use at a table of mostly unknowns in a game inwhich I feel very comfortable in terms of my edge(with regard to the average opponent). This range breaks down as follows(on this particular board):

Total Hand Combinations: 407(100%)

Total Made Hand Combinations: 155(38%)

Total Missed Hand Combinations with a Draw: 168(41%)

Total Missed Hand Combinations w/o a Draw: 84(21%)

For the sake of clarity, I consider a missed hand combo with a draw any gutshot, OESD, flush draw, etc. I neglected to include overcard combos because a)they are very sensitive to our opponent’s holding and b)I consider a lot of Ahigh hands showdownable but not made hands. This is probably just a matter of subjectivity but should be noted. So it’s possible I have a missed hand that is showdownable(AK for instance) as well as a made hand that is not(44 maybe?). What it boils down to is my opponent’s tendencies in a vacuum, how my opponent might adjust to prior flop checks, the board, and what hands/how often I’ve been checking behind on these types of flops.

Anyway, back to the question at hand. Given the above mix of hands, does anybody want to venture a guess as to what frequency or mix I need to bet/check each of the groups for the sake of optimal play?

James,

Just curious why you open with 44 but not 33 or 22. It can't be because of pot equity. Any pp has to be a favorite against three random hands, no?

Tom

oops. i generally open with any pp from the CO at a 6max table. definitely the button. i'm a bit surprised i missed that. oh well. for our purposes it shouldn't change things alot. even if it did, the actual range is less what i care about. i'm more concerned with how we handle that range.

okay. this is a good start. i would like to add that, rather than check a hand like JJ, i would likely balance by betting the strongest part of my range as well as the weakest(pure bluffs) portion. i would leave the checks behind for other strong hands like top pair/overpair that benefit less from monster over monster encounters.

thanks!

let me know what you think about by mixed strategy.

i'm going to give my mix. i'm going to discuss how i got to these numbers later. for now it should suffice to know that i worked off from a few variables in the equation(my mix, the pot size, and my opponent's profile).

anyway, here it is:

38%(made hands): check 13% + bet 25%
41%(missed hands): check 19% + bet 22%
21%(drawing hands): check 5% + bet 16%
________________
100%(total hands): 13%+25%+19%+22%+5%+16=100%

this comes out to where i'm betting the flop in this situation against this particular opponent 63% and checking 37%.

what do you think of these numbers?

I think I admire a poker player who is willing to give 110%

LOL. that's awesome.

i do that(mispost/overlook goofy details) more than anyone i know.

If you're bringing in game theory that implies you have an opponent who recognizes that you're using mixed and not pure strategies.
Many opponents will, when you check, quickly narrow your range to something like 90%air / 10%monster and play accordingly, so your job is more to exploit them, rather than preventing them from exploiting you. i.e. check to extract bets from bluffers; bet to extract bets from chasers.

OK suppose it takes them a while, but in a game of smart players, they eventually adjust and learn that a check or bet could mean anything, but the probability of each possible event is able to be estimated. Now we bring the game theory. Recognize there are some situations where an optimal strategy will be 100% bet and 0% check.

I am intrigued by this stuff; maybe make the board bone-dry J72 rainbow or something so it's easier to quantify things.