I am reading this book now and am confused on something. When calling a bet, do you do the math street by street or include both cards to come in your decision?

For example, the part I am reading right now states a flush draw will come in approximately 1/3 of the times by the river. Do I call a flop bet if there is 3/1 in the pot, or do I just include the current amount and bet?

I am not sure if this question makes sense - unfortunately some of these concepts are hard for me to understand. Math was never my strong point.

Thanks to anyone who can understand the question and help with the answer.

Good question, and I've always thought this was a little glossed over.

The real way to solve a problem like this is to grind out the math street by street, starting at the end, with conditional probabilities. But that gets a little complex, and usually doesn't matter. If there are 4 small bets in the pot on the flop, with a strong draw such as a 9-out flush draw (which is about 4:1 on each card) you almost certainly can call one bet each on the turn and river, because you'd call in that same spot just to see one more card.* Then there will be 3 big bets on the turn, and your call won't be quite as obvious. But now if you expect to make at least one more big bet if you hit (implied odds), then you can call again.

The problem is when there are fewer than 4 small bets in the pot on the flop. Then you have to consider that 1/5 of the time you'll make your hand (and perhaps get paid off), but 4/5 of the time you'll still have a draw on the turn. If there are only, say, 2.5 big bets in the pot now, then you can't profitably call on the turn. So if you don't expect good implied odds when you hit, you can't call the flop.

As a competent LHE player, it should be rare for you to get to the flop with < 4 small bets(minus rake) in the pot. Why?

• If you're in a small stakes game, most limped pots will have 4 or more participants.
• Hands that aren't multiway will be folded to you; in most of those cases you'll be open-raising. A raised heads-up pot, with a folded small blind, will have 4.5 bets in the pot minus rake.

So you'd only get to the flop with < 4 small bets if you limped in early position expecting a multiway pot but everyone but the blinds folded; if you were in a blind and your opponents limped; or if the rake is really high (like, as much as the small blind).

So in sum, it's pretty rare for you to have to grind out the math for each street, so most poker authors just breeze by it.



=====
*Actually you're only 18% to make your flush and won't always win, so you need a little bit better than 4:1. I'm rounding.

Doug said it very well.

A lot of people forget that the advice: "Anything you do to significantly increase your chance of winning a 20-bet pot is worth a couple of bets" is useful only if you can significantly increase your chance of winning. Sometimes you can, and should play aggressively. If you can't, but try anyway, you are just spewing.

At one time I was looking at an expanded version of Morton's Theorem; I might revisit it in terms of overlapping outs for the trailing players.

Thanks for the detailed reply, I appreciate it.

I also have a question on folding/calling/raising if the pot has been reraised before you.

I know a lot of people raise to get a free card. If I have a draw that will almost certainly win, for example the nut straight or flush draw, and the pot is bet/raised on the flop I am pretty much lost on what to do. This happened a couple of times the last time I played. We had a frequent flop raiser, and when it came to showdown he would raise with very strong hands like a set, or with draws.

Since I had no idea where he was, I wasn't sure how to act. He could have a worse draw than me and be raising for a free card, or top set.

Any advice on how to navigate this? If the pot is very small obviously I would fold, but I am not sure where to draw that line?

Definitely do not fold. Calling is generally fine. With a very strong draw (good open-ended straight draw or good flush draw), you can consider putting in as many bets as possible if it is 3-ways+, as you will win > 33% of the pot on average.

What did he do on the turn? I'm assuming he was in position and not out of position. Many players will raise the flop with a strong hand or a draw, and then check the turn with a draw to get a free card, but bet if they have the strong hand.

If you also have a draw (say the nut flush draw) and then he checks the turn, I would check the river. If the flush comes, you can check-raise your nut flush. If he bets and the draw does not come in, you can strongly consider calling with Ace-high even though you missed your draw also.

If you never folded an open-ended straight draw or two-card flush draw in your life, that would be close enough to the correct decision to not worry about anything more complicated.

Thanks again. I have a few more questions.

On page 35 it states pot and implied odds are useful tools when deciding between calling and folding - not so much when deciding whether to bet or raise.

Pot equity can help make call/fold and call/raise decisions.

I don't understand why. Can anyone go into more detail that would make it easier to understand?

Also, on page 88 it states with a hand like Ks Js you will often flop two overcards and a backdoor flush draw. I don't understand how you will often flop two overcards here?

Lastly, more of an etiquette question.

I am not at the point where I can reply to threads but often when I am reading one I have questions. I know in this thread it's fine because it is open to discussing the book. Is it okay to ask questions in other threads that aren't general discussion ones?

pot and implied odds only refer to the price you are getting to put more money in the pot but don't give you any idea where you stand.
If you're getting 18:1 to call for your 4 out gut shot, you can profitably make the call as your gut shot draw will come in more often than you are being charged. Getting 18:1 though does not give you any idea where you actually stand in the hand.

Pot equity on the other hand, tells you how much of the pot is yours based on your hand strength. When your equity is greater than your "fair" share, it is going to be generally profitable for you to bet and/or raise. Say you are in a game where you raise on the button after 4 limpers with AQ and you see a flop 6 handed. The flop is 2TJ and the BB donks (bets even though you had the initiative preflop) and everyone calls. It gets to you and even though you do not have a "made" hand yet, you have plenty of pot equity to raise as any heart and any king give you the nuts, and any A plus any Q are also going to give you the best hand often. With 6 people in the pot, every bet that goes in here is going to be making you money as you are going to win more than 1 out of 6 times you are in this spot.

Go find a poker equity calculator like poker stove (lol makes me feel old) or equilab and play around with it.

He means that even on flops you miss, you will often have a BD flush draw and 2 overs to the board (ie the board is T high or lower). In a case like this, you will still often have quite a bit of pot equity because you have a few ways to improve with overs and a BD draw and will likewise will typically have the pot odds to continue if facing a bet/raise (obv situational),

Yes, but at least try to keep the question related to the topic or discussion in the thread. If you have a specific question, you can always start your own thread, but read around first as many basic questions are already discussed (ie read the FAQ and other stickies and do the same in the micro forum).

Your reply was extremely helpful.

This is really a great community.

Thanks to everyone again.

I just read this book over the past couple days...
nh sir, nh
What I am taking out of this, is that I need to be more fearless at the poker table. I need to stop thinking every time I get reraised that they have the nuts, and push my better hands besides trying to "keep customers around"

There is a natural tendency that develops early on to play backwards. You read stuff about pushing draws and semibluffing, so you start playing aggressively in spots where you don't have a monster. Then, you decide to slowplay in other spots for various reasons. You keep doing more of both of these things, and you get to the point where you're playing in reverse of your hand strength. Don't become one of those players who never has it when you put in a raise on the flop, but be aware of the tendency in your opponents.
If you're playing in a loose game, they don't want to fold. That's what keeps them around. It is the same thing that makes people say "AA never wins". Loose passive players demand that you play for value. If they won't fold, you can't protect your hand. What you can do is get paid handsomely when you have them drawing thin or dead. Don't out clever yourself.

I had a question about hand quiz 15 but I think typing it out helped me figure out the answer for myself:

You're in the BB with 65. Four players limp and the button raises. SB folds. You call. All limpers call (12.5 small bets).

Flop comes Q73. Checks around to the button who bets. You call and 3 limpers call (17.5 small bets)

Turn comes 4

My question was: What would be so bad about checking here and hoping the button bets, then just calling the button and hoping the 10.5 big bets in the pot get the other 3 limpers to make desperation calls?

I think the answer is that if I bet myself they're looking at 9.5 big bets instead of 10.5 big bets which isn't that much of a difference, and if it got checked all the way around and the button *didn't* bet it would be a catastrophe.

It's for that same reason that I think going for a check-raise would be a mistake. It's a catastrophe if it gets checked all the way through. But suppose for the sake of argument we did. If the button bets and we raise they're getting 11.5 to 2 on a call - how often will the villains have something they'll want to call 2 big bets cold with here?

With my relative position, I'm donking that gin turn all day every day. If I'm lucky, I'll get to reraise.

If we're worried that check-raising is too exclusive, then the solution is simple: put in bets in such a way as to invite chasers.

Interestingly, the next example in the book (I stopped reading a bit too soon!) is similar but we turn bottom two pair instead of the nut straight. In that example the author says it's worth the risk of it getting checked around to go for the checkraise because our hand is much more vulnerable.

Hello all,

New(ish) around the forums, but would love to throw this question out there as my first and my guess is this might be a good thread for it. I've read a lot of good posts around the boards, encouraging me to stop lurking, and preparing me for all the biting and fresh-blood gnawing soon to commence.

Playing live 4/8, in the BB, with a mixed bag of villains, mostly loose and passive, one TAGish player.

Considering T7s versus 43s, and the sorts of conditions which would justify calling the former — given most newer players to SSHE or beginning chart junkies will call only the latter — in a situation where everyone has called and at least one player has raised. I consider two extremes: UTG raises and everyone calls; everyone calls to SB who raises. With an effective drop of 1.5sb, the pot would be 15.5 or 8.5sb, respectively, in each case post-flop; both these pots are large enough to call 1 bet based on simple EQ/math alone:

Equity Win Tie
UTG+1 9.61% 8.72% 0.90% { random }
UTG+2 9.57% 8.67% 0.90% { random }
MP1 8.34% 7.47% 0.87% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
MP2 8.33% 7.46% 0.87% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
MP3 8.42% 7.53% 0.89% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
CO 8.46% 7.56% 0.90% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
BU 8.35% 7.48% 0.87% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
SB 25.99% 25.52% 0.47% { TT+, AJs+, KQs, AKo }
BB 12.93% 11.83% 1.10% { T7s }

Equity Win Tie
UTG+1 10.05% 9.10% 0.95% { random }
UTG+2 9.97% 9.03% 0.94% { random }
MP1 8.61% 7.67% 0.94% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
MP2 8.50% 7.61% 0.89% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
MP3 8.68% 7.74% 0.93% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
CO 8.56% 7.63% 0.92% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
BU 8.61% 7.67% 0.93% { 99-22, Q9s-Q2s, J9s-J2s, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, A7o-A2o, K9o-K2o, Q9o-Q2o, J9o-J2o, T2o+, 92o+, 82o+, 72o+, 62o+, 52o+, 42o+, 32o }
SB 26.31% 25.77% 0.53% { TT+, AJs+, KQs, AKo }
BB 10.72% 9.98% 0.73% { 43s }

I'm wondering why I shouldn't call T7s, especially if the pot is on the large end and if the raiser is weak? Also wondering if it's worth bothering with 43s anymore, period. I'll pause there for now.

I'd call T7s and 43s in those spots, but I'm an optimist.

Welcome to the forum.

+1 on the welcome to the forum.

I would point out a small artifact of the ranges you picked, namely you minimized domination of T7s while oddly maximized domination of 43s. You picked the villain PP hands such that the T was a live overcard, you included a bunch of Tx with kickers worse than T, and the only dominating A you put in the villain's ranges was A7. At the same time, you picked all the villain hand ranges down to something-2.

The impact of this is that you have perfectly sculpted out your middle card hand as being free of domination issues that it normally faces. Let's look at the Qx range you picked of Q9o-Q2o. Normally, QT would be a favorite limping hand of bad live villains while Q4 and Q3 would be played by only the worst. I think you've reversed this, I assume by thinking they'd open QJo and QTo? Your general villain's ranges are decapitated much more than I'd expect from loose/passive players, and some of your results are due to the exact hands you excluded.

Let's say I give UTG limper a 50% range dropping a 2% PFR, give that range to UTG+1, give the next couple of guys 70% ranges with 4% PFR, and then give everyone else 95% ranges with 4% PFR. A table full of horrible players who have poorish ranges and who only raise a little (and haven't).

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG*****9.47%***8.60%***0.86%*{ TT-33, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J4s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, A2o+, K5o+, Q7o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }
UTG+1***9.31%***8.46%***0.85%*{ TT-33, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J4s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, A2o+, K5o+, Q7o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }
UTG+2***8.62%***7.82%***0.80%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP1*****8.50%***7.61%***0.89%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP2*****8.82%***7.97%***0.85%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP3*****8.50%***7.67%***0.83%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
CO******8.47%***7.63%***0.84%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
BU******8.21%***7.41%***0.80%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
SB*****19.35%**18.89%***0.46%*{ TT+, AJs+, KQs, AKo }
BB*****10.74%***9.71%***1.03%*{ T7s }

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG*****9.56%***8.69%***0.87%*{ TT-33, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J4s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, A2o+, K5o+, Q7o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }
UTG+1***9.10%***8.28%***0.82%*{ TT-33, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J4s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, A2o+, K5o+, Q7o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }
UTG+2***8.80%***7.98%***0.82%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP1*****8.87%***7.99%***0.88%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP2*****8.87%***7.96%***0.91%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP3*****8.05%***7.13%***0.93%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
CO******8.11%***7.19%***0.91%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
BU******8.03%***7.18%***0.85%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
SB*****19.11%**18.63%***0.49%*{ TT+, AJs+, KQs, AKo }
BB*****11.51%**10.84%***0.67%*{ 43s }

Notice the reversal of fortune? As I fix up the ranges for the villains to be slightly tighter, 43s will continue to improve relative to T7s -- that's because being middle cards the T & 7 hit limpers ranges harder and are more likely to be dominated.

So, does it matter? No. Which leads to your point about
Been a long time since I used a beginner's chart. The lowest SC hands have their own problems. If there are two flushes, 43s is always the worst one. They hit the ignorant ends of straights. Their two pair get counterfeit. Once we've moved into fun hands, T7s seems a fine one in the mix. The two gap hurts its str8 potential, but whatever. Once we're playing suited 3 gaps, we're expecting stuff to go wrong at times.

At some point you're going to go from following a chart and avoiding trouble spots and work to understanding situational hand value and how the game works around you. There are just times where you want to be in the pot -- three bad players are in, I have good control, they place face up, and my position is good. There are other spots where a slightly better hand will want to fold -- the worst players have folded, the best players are in, I'm facing tenacious/showdown-bound villains, and I'm at huge risk to have an in position player raise me. That will matter more than fine points about if T7s is or isn't slightly better than 43s.

IIRC SSHE says elsewhere (I think in the preflop quiz section) that it's good to call 96s in this spot. Domination notwithstanding, I infer that T7s must be playable by relative beginners too.

The exception should be if there is a substantial limp/reraise risk. This could either be limpers who do dumb things with premium hands or who love gambling hence see a big pot coming and think it would be fun to help build it. You don't want to put in 2-3 bets here, although you must call if you get trapped in after calling the original raise. Be alert.

Doug's points are all great things to bear in mind as you improve. But rote rules for beginners are OK as long as they don't shut off broader thinking that will help you.

Thank you!

Optimism, eh? You should watch Black Mirror; that'll fix that.

Thank you! Glad to have taken off the gag.

One thing I noticed immediately is you made it a 10-player game, perhaps because I wasn't explicit that the table scenario I was contemplating was 9-max. I reran your stoves:

*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG+1**10.07%***9.16%***0.91%*{ TT-33, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J4s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, AQo-A2o, K5o+, Q7o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }
UTG+2**10.20%***9.28%***0.92%*{ TT-33, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J4s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, A2o+, K5o+, Q7o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }
MP1*****9.58%***8.70%***0.88%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP2*****9.57%***8.70%***0.87%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP3*****8.98%***8.16%***0.82%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
CO******8.98%***8.17%***0.81%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
BU******9.04%***8.20%***0.83%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
SB*****22.03%**21.54%***0.50%*{ TT+, AJs+, KQs, AKo }
BB*****11.55%**10.53%***1.03%*{ T7s }


*******Equity*****Win*****Tie
UTG+1**10.48%***9.57%***0.90%*{ TT-33, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J4s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, AQo-A2o, K5o+, Q7o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }
UTG+2**10.47%***9.56%***0.91%*{ TT-33, AQs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J4s+, T6s+, 96s+, 86s+, 76s, 65s, A2o+, K5o+, Q7o+, J7o+, T7o+, 98o }
MP1*****9.62%***8.72%***0.90%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP2*****9.74%***8.83%***0.91%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 93s+, 84s+, 74s+, 63s+, 53s+, 43s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q3o+, J5o+, T6o+, 96o+, 86o+, 76o }
MP3*****8.76%***7.86%***0.90%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
CO******8.78%***7.89%***0.89%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
BU******8.80%***7.90%***0.90%*{ 88-22, AJs-A2s, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T2s+, 92s+, 82s+, 72s+, 62s+, 52s+, 42s+, 32s, AQo-A2o, K2o+, Q2o+, J2o+, T2o+, 92o+, 83o+, 73o+, 63o+, 52o+, 43o }
SB*****21.20%**20.70%***0.50%*{ TT+, AJs+, KQs, AKo }
BB*****12.15%**11.49%***0.66%*{ 43s }

I definitely see your point and it is well-received. I also did take the time to think about the ranges I assigned, especially since the live play that sparked all the thinking I've put into this was the product of a very drunk and argumentative game I found myself in, where for about 20 minutes players were more attuned to the ping ponging tirade underway and the play became a bit absent-mindedly reflexive for an orbit. So, I don't think my ranges were too far off, but your adjustments are certainly more valuable to a general theory about this: Thanks — exactly why I wanted to post this.

This is the spot I consider myself at, as I'm trying to unweld the training wheels from the frame. It's less, for me, about The Perfect Preflop Strategy®, and more about approaching the game from a theoretical understanding that enables live adaptation. The thing I'm painfully aware of as I play is that the drop on a small pot must be a large consideration as to whether I continue or not, so that's really been a big chunk of my impetus to thinking about situations like this, even if it's only in order to be thinking differently than what is most commonly thought. No singular chart for that, indeed.

Agreed; definitely trying to become less myopic about each position, a task which exponentializes mental energy output. Is there a chart for overthinking on here I have yet to come across?

When playing against decent players online, you'd find that many of your opponents are actually playing from a chart. They're multitabling, trying to avoid tilt-drift in ranges, and only adjusting for specific reasons vs certain opponents. Thus, the exercise of understanding that by picking connectors just a pip or two under the bottom card that a tight opener can have will prevent domination (improve equity) is a real thing.

My observation in your ranges wasn't that they were wrong, it was just that they were particularly favorable to T7. That could be a real artifact of how your opponents play. How do you whether you're exploiting holes in villain ranges via your simulations or if you're just making artifacts in simulation? Experience. Hot/cold equity is a blunt tool, and it is better as a starting place than the sole source of PF ranges.

+1

As I mentioned, it is strange then that very good players seem to go back to charts later. They're looking at their overall PF strategy for balance. They need hands in certain ranges to hit board textures to provide proper bluffing ratios post flop. They are concerned about missing common flop textures. All that leads to having a chart and following it a lot. Experts also know that once they recognize a bad player, they can quickly leave the chart behind and go back to exploiting them whenever they want.

Still, I remember Gary Carson and many others wandering the forums ridiculing anyone who'd say anything positive about using a chart. It is funny that things have come full circle to where beginners should, intermediate players often don't, and experts often do use starting hand charts.

I stopped playing online around 2008 way before Black Friday, and that was also the last period in my life when I was playing poker regularly, hence my appearance, now, here.

But, is anyone in the states playing online anymore? I wish I could, but from what I glean it's either too cumbersome or too risky or too expensive. Am I mistaken? (Sorry if this is OT.)

Otherwise, I think having a general chart in one's mind, especially if you're a visual thinker, is ultimately helpful as one part of operating software for the hardware to make decisions, even if it's just a flowchart.

People are still playing for significant stakes online, even now. Expensive? I believe the rakeback/bonus deals are mostly worse, and the rake is at least slightly higher (especially effective rake once you subtract RB from rake paid). There are still people winning and getting paid. OTOH, there are certainly land mines from slow-to-pay sites and other sites that didn't pay out. I'd talk to someone you know/trust before depositing any amount of money you care about somewhere.

I'm guessing you could still fire up a decent 20/40+ online game somewhere. Degeneracy wins out in the end.

Admittedly, the social element of live rings are an added bonus I enjoy.

To answer your strategy question, any time there are more than 6 players seeing a flop for one bet, I'll strongly consider playing any 2 suited cards, especially if one is big or they are connected. In your example, I'd call both T7s and 43s. 43s is connected, and T7 is almost connected with one card almost big - close enough in such a big pot.

But mostly I'm writing to say THANK YOU for recommending Black Mirror. I've watched the first 2 episodes tonight and they were intense! And now I'm going to go watch episode 3!