$215 A-high Call
08-23-2019
, 08:22 AM
Last edited by wowsooooted; 08-23-2019 at 08:39 AM.
Reason: What would you say if I told you that PIO can only solve hands in a vacumn when the majority of hands are not played in one?
08-26-2019
, 10:19 PM
I made ranges look as "realistic" as possible (meaning what I think the population is doing):
OOP Player
IP Player:
OOP Flop Strategy:
I tried elaborating on why 1bb works so well here, suffice it to say it's simple to implement and completely unexploitable (indeed highest EV). IP player should be folding a small part of his range but if gets stubborn and never folds then that exploitatively boosts the EV of cbet1bb with AhJh because every additional hand he neglects to fold is losing to AhJh:
OOP Turn Strategy
Speaking of AJ in particular, there's pretty clear merit to either barrel or x, on one hand 6c is a super dry card such that AJs equity has been pretty well preserved (probably 40% equity or so vs IPs range) such that it makes sense to bet AJ, generate some folds, and keep range merged heading to river (barreling with a merged range implies barreling with a wide, diffuse range which implies small sizing--on this texture, again 1bb is a valid option for the same reasons it's optimal on the flop, nothing changes with a 6c OTT.)
That's why we can barrel merged in this fashion in the first place: nothing has changed because of that turn card.
On the other hand, we can pick off small sized bluffs if we x, most attrractively we can realize our SDV/equity as cheaply as possibly often (V should not find that many hands that do not prefer checking back turn--this is a pretty high freq checkback spot for IP player OTT).
The equilibrium strategy implies both options are equally valid.
IP's minraising strategy:
His sizing makes no sense, but it's not a huge EV difference compared to the optimal choices, meaning it makes equally little sense for any hand to take this sizing, meaning his range is pretty much merged i.e. he can, in theory, have anything here (this is where the thread comes in handy--why is this a bad assumption?) because everything is equally silly as a minraise in this spot.
We basically can never fold vs his minraise, assuming he is indeed as diffuse and wide as we'd expect him to be in theory. Getting 11.5:1, this is just a pure 1st principles pot odds problem:
His river sizing is totally too small and suboptimal (is this because he's a shitty bluffer or is he milking me?). A pretty clear spot where he's gonna have to heavily split his range with lots of large sizings, even jams for 3x pot can be balanced and in doing so IP player would maximize his EV (max value w/ top of range, max FE on bluffs)
If we think he goes for thin value sometimes (88-QQ) and "valuebluffs" whiffed broadways, for example, something like this as his river better range using his chosen sizing:
Then AJ is printing as a call (over 6bb +EV)
There's a million different ways you can construct his range at any point in the hand, this is all conjecture sure and sometimes you come up with a perfectly plausible story that ends in hero losing money in real and or theoretical ways.
I wouldn't make a thread where I though the decisions were trivial and sure, this hand is relatively early in an MTT and whether I win or lose it ultimately has little effect on my $EV. But I think it's an interesting spot where opinions can wildly differ, and what you do here is going to necessarily depend entirely on your assumptions because there's little mathematical justification for ever being in this node of the game tree. These are the fun spots.
In fact I made this thread because I respect the forum's observational skills to lend me some insight about what they think (perhaps have seen) the population is doing in anything approaching a similar spot to this one.
I'd say you're using the tool the wrong way.
OOP Player
IP Player:
OOP Flop Strategy:
I tried elaborating on why 1bb works so well here, suffice it to say it's simple to implement and completely unexploitable (indeed highest EV). IP player should be folding a small part of his range but if gets stubborn and never folds then that exploitatively boosts the EV of cbet1bb with AhJh because every additional hand he neglects to fold is losing to AhJh:
OOP Turn Strategy
Speaking of AJ in particular, there's pretty clear merit to either barrel or x, on one hand 6c is a super dry card such that AJs equity has been pretty well preserved (probably 40% equity or so vs IPs range) such that it makes sense to bet AJ, generate some folds, and keep range merged heading to river (barreling with a merged range implies barreling with a wide, diffuse range which implies small sizing--on this texture, again 1bb is a valid option for the same reasons it's optimal on the flop, nothing changes with a 6c OTT.)
That's why we can barrel merged in this fashion in the first place: nothing has changed because of that turn card.
On the other hand, we can pick off small sized bluffs if we x, most attrractively we can realize our SDV/equity as cheaply as possibly often (V should not find that many hands that do not prefer checking back turn--this is a pretty high freq checkback spot for IP player OTT).
The equilibrium strategy implies both options are equally valid.
IP's minraising strategy:
His sizing makes no sense, but it's not a huge EV difference compared to the optimal choices, meaning it makes equally little sense for any hand to take this sizing, meaning his range is pretty much merged i.e. he can, in theory, have anything here (this is where the thread comes in handy--why is this a bad assumption?) because everything is equally silly as a minraise in this spot.
We basically can never fold vs his minraise, assuming he is indeed as diffuse and wide as we'd expect him to be in theory. Getting 11.5:1, this is just a pure 1st principles pot odds problem:
His river sizing is totally too small and suboptimal (is this because he's a shitty bluffer or is he milking me?). A pretty clear spot where he's gonna have to heavily split his range with lots of large sizings, even jams for 3x pot can be balanced and in doing so IP player would maximize his EV (max value w/ top of range, max FE on bluffs)
If we think he goes for thin value sometimes (88-QQ) and "valuebluffs" whiffed broadways, for example, something like this as his river better range using his chosen sizing:
Then AJ is printing as a call (over 6bb +EV)
There's a million different ways you can construct his range at any point in the hand, this is all conjecture sure and sometimes you come up with a perfectly plausible story that ends in hero losing money in real and or theoretical ways.
I wouldn't make a thread where I though the decisions were trivial and sure, this hand is relatively early in an MTT and whether I win or lose it ultimately has little effect on my $EV. But I think it's an interesting spot where opinions can wildly differ, and what you do here is going to necessarily depend entirely on your assumptions because there's little mathematical justification for ever being in this node of the game tree. These are the fun spots.
In fact I made this thread because I respect the forum's observational skills to lend me some insight about what they think (perhaps have seen) the population is doing in anything approaching a similar spot to this one.
Quote:
What would you say if I told you that PIO can only solve hands in a vacumn when the majority of hands are not played in one?
Last edited by EggsMcBluffin; 08-26-2019 at 10:28 PM.