I have just went through the entire book from start to finish during the past 10 days or so, taking notes.
So obviously it was a lot of things to cover.
One thing I cannot seem to wrap my wits around fully - river betsizing. Two concepts clash, and even when I try to combine them the outcome doesn't seem elegant enough.
Scenario a is as follows - I am in the SB, taking a bbb line. HU play.
Villain has a more or less capped range OTR (due to a turn overcard with draws out there).
On the other hand, I am holding a hand which I know how often it is best (and it is not the nuts).
Those two seem to get me to two different ideas on how to proceed.
Example, flop was J74, and turn was a Q - an overcard. He will not have any Q other than Q7 and possibly Q4 in his flop xCalling range. It is very likely that the few Queens that he does hold will be raised on the turn (since they'll turn twopairs), together with his sets, when I do bet there.
It is a common HU situation, where turn overcards typically completely miss BB's flop xCalling range.
So on the river his range is pretty much capped to Jx, other than rare rivered two pairs and rare slowplays.
Let's assume the river bricks off, and this is our scene:
Now, how should I then proceed? Ignoring the xR possibility (ie those few 2pairs and sets in his range on the screenshot), if we could work it out specifically, it'd be great.
Flopzilla tells us how often we are ahead. If I remembered to exclude sets and most twopairs before taking the screenshot, it'd be about 78% ahead and 22% behind.
My best guess, after going through the book, for our entire range is -
- bet big (pot or even overbets, overbets are theoretically better as we can bluff more then) with TP+
- fill up the range that bets that same big size with the "appropriate" number of bluffs (so for PSB we add in half as many bluffs, etc. for different sizings, depending on his pot odds after we bet)
- and, bet the "optimal size" with TP, like J3 on the screenshot, as per the maths in the equation in the book.
(I think that range will often be quite small? Nothing other than a J would fit in this spot.
And there are no bluffs to be included there to counteract it, as the bluffing part of the range is covered by Jacks which happen to be behind his Jacks when we are called)
But it feels kind of crude, and even a bit transparent.... and aside from that crudeness, I might be missing something else in the situation, as well?
Is that how we approach the situation? The Pinpointing river sizing chapter is for our "good but not great, and definitely non-nuts" hands only?
If we weren't into multiple sizing but wanted to use one size, how does that fit with our knowledge of how often we are beat/good and what our sizing should be according to that, as opposed to the bet-big-to-bluff-more concept? it appears as if it simply does not.
If we could work out the specifics, in a typical single raised pot with the percentage our hand is ahead from the screenshot, that would be great.
Pot on the river is 34bbs, we have 83 bbs each, we can ignore huge overbets or math that isn't as consequential here with too many overbet sizings as I'm more into the concepts. The river bricks off, like a 2h.
Scenario b, let's assume he isn't capped (maybe some draws he might have hit OTR, a 2s would make for some interesting changes in our scenario as several flop gutters or A highs turned a flushdraw) - how do we betsize then, in a nutshell?
That's a lot of parts of the picture, I know, but I felt each of them is necessary to complete it and see it clearly!
Last edited by Eagle7; 08-30-2013 at 08:01 PM.