Have people who play primarily in 10 handed LIVE [1/2 & 1/3] games found this book just as useful as for 6 handed, which is what the theory in the book focuses on? It says it is easily transferable to 9 handed games, but all the table I play at are 10 handed. Thanks.

6 or 9 or 10 handed won't matter much, but I'm not sure how useful it is to live players. I know some have really liked it (I get a fair amount of PMs from people telling me they liked it and occasionally telling me they won a live tourney or something), but after playing a tiny bit of live NL$500 at a local casino with 3 blinds ($5/$3/$2) I would think a lot of the players at that table would benefit from a much easier book that deals with much more basic concepts.

So yeah, I don't think I'd recommend this book to the average NL$200 live player, but you're probably better off specifically asking NL$200 live players (so if any here are reading the thread please speak up).

Was looking at Snowie's pre-flop advice recently... it's advocating opening 0.5PSB from all positions now? I seem to recall it used to advocate opening 0.5PSB in EP and 1PSB in LP. Any thoughts why it now prefers opening small in all positions aside from SB, and why it prefers 0.5PSB to 1PSB?

Matthew, Can you [or anyone] show me how to solve for the following simple algebra equation? It's been 20+ yrs since college & I don't remember the stuff. Thanks!

If I can get the step by step instructions on how this is solved, I should be good to go...I hope.

(4)(1-x-0.111)+(-5.5)(x)+(-8.5)(0.111)=0=>
x = 0.275 page 71

(4)(1-x-0.111)=4-4x-0.444
(-5.5)(x)=-5.5x
(-8.5)(0.111)=-0.9435
Therefore we get:
(4-4x-0.444)+(-5.5x)+(-0.9435)=0
Which can be written as:
(3.556-4x)-5.5x-0.9435=0=>3.556-0.9435=4x+5.5x=>2.6125=9.5x=>2.6125/9.5=x=>x=0.275

Hi Matthew

How important do you think it is to try to set up favourable SPRs for different hands pre flop?

I remember the Mat Flynn 2+2 book was big on the idea of trying to create a different SPR for a hand like AKo rather than say T9s..... or in modern theory has the importance of SPRs been superceded by needing to have balanced ranges etc? Just keen to know how important you think pre flop SPRs still are in today's 6 max games?

I think it's not so much trying to set up a favorable SPR pre-flop so much as the hand you have determines if it will play well in a single raised, 3-bet, or 4-bet pot.

For example I was playing the NL1500 event in the WSOP today and folded 9c8c in the SB against a MP open. I can't remember the original opening size or the stack depth, but it was shallow enough that I thought both calling and 3-betting would be bad. 9c8c has tons of robust equity so I am almost always 3-betting it in a 6-max cash game in those positions, but dislike a 3-bet in many tournament situations with shallow stack depth.

Post-flop you're more likely to see me pick a bet sizing to set up a turn or river jam. For example, if it's a 3-bet pot and I have 76 and the flop is T52, you might see me pick a bet-sizing that lets me jam (it'll be an overbet) any 8, 4, or turn. I do that a lot and think it's really important in tournaments and it's SUPER easy to balance it too (just ship your AT+ and friends on the flop as well).

Hope that answers your question.

TY

That's probably just better evidence that the optimal opening size (if you have to pick one bet-sizing) is between 0.5PSB and 1PSB, at least for the button.

But most people even on board with bigger button opening sizings weren't usually going to the full 3BB but usually somewhere around 2.6BB or something.

Thanks. However, due to my extremely limited knowledge of algebra, I still couldn't figure it out from your answer. All I knew was that you have to get X on both sides of the = sign & then reduce X to 1.

For those with the same limited algebra skills as I, here is the answer I got from the probability forum:

Here: (4)(1-x-0.111)=4-4x-0.444 & (-5.5)(x)=-5.5x

What he is doing is multiplying the (4)* the integers in the 2nd parenthesis & the same with -5.5*x

So, you also multiply (-8.5)(0.111) & get -0.9435

Now you have the equation:
4-4x-0.444-5.5x-0.9435 = 0

Now you need to get the total of X on both sides of = so add the Xs together:
4-9.5x-.444-.9435 = 0

Now you need to remove the X from the left side of = & move it to the right. The reason for doing this is to get X on one side by itself.
So you add +9.5x to both sides & you get:

4-.444-.9435 = 9.5x

Now add the integers on the left side

2.6125 = 9.5x

Now reduce X to 1x by dividing 9.5x by 9.5. Remember that when you do something with X you have to do the same thing on the other side. That's how we got 9.5x on the right side.

So, 2.6125/9.5 = 0.275 = 1x

This is as basic of an algebra equation as you can get I think. So, in order for me to get thru this book - I'm going to have to watch Khan Academy videos on youtube.

I guess this is pretty much like in your last post but let me write down my foolproof way anyway.

Here I just simplify by actually calculating these 3 products:
4-4x-0.444-5.5x-0.9435 = 0

And I keep on simplifying by calculating the sums
=> 2.6125-9.5x = 0

It's a linear equation, i.e. there is only x=x^1 and no x^2, x^3, ... , so you can just get the term with x on one side by adding 9.5x on both sides
=> 2.6125 = 9.5x

And then you divide both sides by 9.5
=> 0.275 = x

Ship (synonym for jam?) on the flop, or same betting pattern as the 76, i.e., size to set up a later jam?

Also, is this regardless of relative position?

And, why is it really important in tournaments?

Sorry, meant turn.

All I was getting at is it's very easy to balance overbets on the turn with good draws and then strong but vulnerable made hands.

It's more important in tournaments because you need to understand how your stack depth is changing and how that should change your bet sizing. If we were 120BB deep in a cash game, I'm not going to be able to set up a turn jam so I might want to go 1/2 pot flop, 1/2 pot turn, and 1/2 pot river with many of my "value" hands (keep in mind we still likely won't be all-in by the river, but that can be fine). But if we're shallower I can maybe 2/3 pot the flop and like 1.3x pot the turn since it's hard to effectively utilize 3 streets and by going all-in you can't get pushed off your equity.

EDIT: I'm not sure what you mean by relative position.

If you want the lazy/automated way you can go here: https://mathway.com/

select Algebra and then Solve for x

If you create a Free Account, it'll even show you your work/steps.

Attention readers with math limitations!
mathway.com will give you the answer to the equations for free.
If you want the step by step process to obtaining the answer - it's $20 per month with a cheaper yearly fee.
I'm certain I can get thru the book in 1 month.

this show you step by step and i believe it is free.

http://mathpapa.com/algebra-calculator.html

Completely free, with step by step calculations and tons of other stuff: http://www.wolframalpha.com/

On page 46 where the EV is being calculated for calling a 5-bet jam with 45% equity, the equation is

-9.325=(0.45)(201.5)-100

which shows that we lose 9.325bb everytime we call a 5-bet jam with 45% equity.

Isn't the 100 wrong there as we don't lose 100 when we call the jam but we lose a lot less as part of our 100bb stack was already dead money?

Since we're looking from the 4-bettor's perspective who will all the 5-bet, would the equation be this?
(0.45)(201.5)-78 (if he 4-bet to 22bb)

Cause this would lead to an EV of 12.68 which seems rather high. Am I making a mistake somewhere? Cause with this EV the final EV would be

12.68(0.4)+7.5=12.57bb instead of the 3.77 which would be calculated by not changing the 100 to 78.

Ok I've figured out why 100 is used. Cause we're trying to calculate the EV of hands that we began with the idea of reaching a stage where we 4-bet and call a 5-bet jam. hence we're trying to see what the overall EV of the hand is and if its <3.5bb our opening size so we figure out if we should even bother 4-betting in the first place.

I'm about a 100 pages in and I'm somewhat lost. Too much math and number for my lizard brain. Does things come together deeper into the book?

Maybe others can chime in but the book stays pretty dense. I do think more things start to "click" towards the end of the book as more concepts are discussed and I wouldn't worry too much about the math anyways. My favorite sections talk about overbetting and defending checks and the concepts are way way more important than any math.

Are the articles you wrote for Two Plus Two Magazine still available somewhere? Clicking the old links just redirects me to the newest issue of the magazine.

Would you make any changes to your open ranges from all positions? I know you said you would make changes to 3bet and 4 bet ranges (btw you won't give a detailed answer of which changes you would make so should I go by the book or ignore that section completely, which is the lesser of two evils).

I would go with PokerSnowie ranges over my ranges.

PM me your email and I'll send it to you