Two Plus Two Poker Forums Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts
 User Name Remember Me? Password
 Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read TwoPlusTwo.com

 Books and Publications Discussion and reviews of books, videos, and magazines.

 Thread Tools Display Modes
03-09-2019, 09:21 AM   #1676
Matthew Janda

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 993
Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Pokerpothead I figured out it has something to do with the price we give our opponent. I do understand the ratio of value bets to bluffs, but why is the frequency we bet have to be the same as that ratio? I guess because when we check we lose and we bet we win, so therefore we have to carry over the betting frequency. Maybe I just answered my own question. Brain is mush been studying all day! Thanks Matt.
I don't have Applications in front of me.

But the idea behind the bluffing to value betting ratio is that once you bet the river, your opponent is indifferent to calling with his bluff catchers. So he's effectively lost. So if you laying your opponent a price on the turn that requires him to only win 30% of the time for his call to break even, then you need to be following through with your river bets 70% of the time (this way, you'll check 30% of the time and he'll win, and you'll bet 70% of the time and he'll effectively lose).

 06-07-2019, 08:07 AM #1677 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts I am, relatively,new to both the game and to forums so please bear with me. Regarding, 'pot odds' and the 'bluff to value ratio'. On p111 Mr Janda makes reference to two points. Point one is the principal that... The size of the bet relative to the size of the pot determines how often you bluff. I can see how if villain checks on the turn and river and hero bets IP then the pot odds determine the bluff to value ratio. However I am perplexed as to quite what is going on on the flop,where, in the preceding example villain bets and hero raises. I've read, elsewhere, that the pot odds determine the bluff to value ratio but my understanding of the terms seems to break down here. In the example it is explained that villain risks 0.57PSB for a potential reward of 1.57PSB. I'm not feeling concerned that my calculations give a figure that rounds to 0.56PSB as I feel this is most likely a trivial matter in context. My question is... Is not the bet of 6BB by villain 'dead money' and the pot odds determined by the the amount the bet is 'raised by' rather than the figure it is 'raised to'? This would mean that villain risks 0.375PSB on the flop? I'm not presuming to have found a mistake, rather, I feel there is an important principal I've missed along the way? I also feel I perhaps lack adequate language to succinctly describe this matter? I'm loving this book but have been focussed on this part for a week. I'd be very grateful for any help in illuminating this area of interest.
 06-10-2019, 06:01 AM #1678 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Greetings. I am finding a point on page 118 of 'Applications' a little hard to grasp and I wonder if anyone can clarify. The point is contained in 'requires us to lower our value raising to bluff raising ratio on the flop.'. There are two aspects to my uncertainty. Firstly, why does checking the turn with a bluff require changing the ratio? Is it the case that including the hand in the betting range necessarily changes the ratio by virtue of it being another bluff OR is it the checking which necessitates changing the ratio Secondly, am I right in saying that the lowered ratio would therefore be more bluff heavy (perhaps I've been reading too long)? Perhaps you could advise us, Matt. Thanking you in advance.
 06-20-2019, 08:15 AM #1679 Matthew Janda Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em     Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 993 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Honestly I'm having a lot of trouble understanding your questions. Can we start with one clear question at a time and then if we get that worked through we'll move on to the next?
 06-21-2019, 06:33 AM #1680 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Thanks for replying Matthew. Re. Post #1677. I'll try to make myself clear. On page 112 you state that, by calling, our opponent risks 12BB for a potential gain of 32BB and yet you then state that we must again bet the turn 73% of the time as the raise is approximately 57%. I understand that 12BB is how much our opponents bet is raised by and that the raise is 18BB. I am asking why the 6BB initial bet by our opponent is not dead money, the pot odds, 0.375, and the amount we must bet the turn then approximately 79%? I hope I'm being clear and apologies if I've asked a dumb question.
 07-01-2019, 12:21 AM #1681 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Re. Post #1677 and #1680 I think I now understand, how this works, how you arrived at the figure of 73% for the frequency with which we must bet the turn and thus the answer to my question. Given that: Pot = 8BB Bet by villain = 6BB Raise by hero = 18BB Call by villain = 12 BB ((8+6+18)(1-X))-((12)(X))=0 32 -32X -12X = 0 32 -44X = 0 Thus X = 73% So the initial bet of 6BB is dead money. I calculate a figure of 0.6PSB, for how much we should bet on each subsequent street, would be consistent with 73% bet frequency calculated this way. I hope I've not wasted your time on this point Mathew.
07-07-2019, 10:47 AM   #1682
Matthew Janda

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 993
Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by singing_base Thanks for replying Matthew. Re. Post #1677. I'll try to make myself clear. On page 112 you state that, by calling, our opponent risks 12BB for a potential gain of 32BB and yet you then state that we must again bet the turn 73% of the time as the raise is approximately 57%. I understand that 12BB is how much our opponents bet is raised by and that the raise is 18BB. I am asking why the 6BB initial bet by our opponent is not dead money, the pot odds, 0.375, and the amount we must bet the turn then approximately 79%? I hope I'm being clear and apologies if I've asked a dumb question.
The 6bb is dead money.

07-07-2019, 10:47 AM   #1683
Matthew Janda

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 993
Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by singing_base Re. Post #1677 and #1680 I think I now understand, how this works, how you arrived at the figure of 73% for the frequency with which we must bet the turn and thus the answer to my question. Given that: Pot = 8BB Bet by villain = 6BB Raise by hero = 18BB Call by villain = 12 BB ((8+6+18)(1-X))-((12)(X))=0 32 -32X -12X = 0 32 -44X = 0 Thus X = 73% So the initial bet of 6BB is dead money. I calculate a figure of 0.6PSB, for how much we should bet on each subsequent street, would be consistent with 73% bet frequency calculated this way. I hope I've not wasted your time on this point Mathew.
Yup, sorry about the late response. Good job figuring it out and you'll now remember it/understand stuff way better because you did, though usuually I do try to answer questions quicker.

Best of luck!

 07-10-2019, 12:24 AM #1684 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts On page 147 you state... we're allowed to bluff more combinations of hands for each strong hand we value bet on the flop compared to raising on the flop. Is not the difference in the examples sited due to the differences in the size of the bet in terms of PSBs? I can understand that, for an identical size in terms of pot size, a bet would be smaller than a raise in terms of BBs and that the bet could be larger for a given initial effective stack size than a raise following a bet. I'm not sure what you mean though and I'd really appreciate more clarification here.
 07-10-2019, 12:55 AM #1685 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Having written the above post (#1684) I'm now content that the bet can be larger in terms of PSBs and that it follows that for a given effective stack size the percentage of value bets on the flop can therefore be lower. Sorry to have wasted your time, again, Mathew.
 07-16-2019, 02:22 PM #1686 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Could you please expand upon how you reach the probabilities 20% and 15% in the example on page 155? It would really help if you could define the range that you expect the big blind would have on the flop, please.
 07-20-2019, 01:03 AM #1687 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Regarding post #1686 I just realised that the hand chart you give on page 83 is exactly what I was asking for. Having now counted the hands using this chart I can see what you are saying. I'm now at page 184 and feel I'm learning a great deal. I'm looking forward to reading 'No limit Hold em for Advanced Players, Emphasis on Tough Games.' Which I've already bought.
 10-19-2019, 08:43 AM #1688 singing_base stranger   Join Date: Jun 2019 Posts: 9 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Greetings Mathew. Pardon me if I seem stuck on some tiny detail but I'm trying to glean the most out of your excellent book. On page 231 you refer to pre flop play when you say 'Remember, when analyzing preflop play, we saw that the out of position 3-bettor pays on average 6 to 7 big blinds to see a flop with his bluffs,'. I've tried rereading the section referred to and yet I do not follow. Could you please put my mind at rest and explain why the out of position 3 bettor, who I would expect to make a larger bet, would only be risking so little to see the flop?
 06-02-2020, 04:47 PM #1689 HeadUpFriend enthusiast   Join Date: Mar 2017 Posts: 82 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts So im reading the book Applications of NLHE by Matthew Janda. I think it is very insightful and can provide huge profits for a long term poker strategy. I stumbled upon one of the equations and wanted to get some help from you guys understanding how it was solved so, when the time comes to put it into practice with my own numbers and input Ill know what Im doing. On page 37 he's talking about how often a 5 bet bluff needs to work in order to be profitable. He gives these numbers Pot:36.5 Blinds: 1.5bb + original raisers open plus his 4bet: 24bb + Our original 3bet: 11bb He gives this equation to figure out how often he needs to be profitable for the 5bet bluff to work: (X)(36.5)+(1-X)(-26.5)=0 63X=26.5 X=.42 Im lost here how is this whole equation solved step by step? How did the number .42 come into fruition? What is the 1-x? The 36.5 is the amount of bb we win on average when our opponent folds to our 5bet bluff. And the -26.5 comes from the average expectation of bb when we 5bet shove and we get called and are a dog.
06-03-2020, 05:36 AM   #1690
jeccross
Pooh-Bah

Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,811
Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by HeadUpFriend (X)(36.5)+(1-X)(-26.5)=0 63X=26.5 X=.42 Im lost here how is this whole equation solved step by step? How did the number .42 come into fruition? What is the 1-x?
0.42 is the answer, 42%.

The equation works as 42% of the time we win 36.5, and (1-42%, i.e. 58%) of the time we lose 26.5. In terms of how you get the answer you would be best googling basic equation soliving.

06-08-2020, 05:32 PM   #1691
Matthew Janda

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 993
Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by singing_base Greetings Mathew. Pardon me if I seem stuck on some tiny detail but I'm trying to glean the most out of your excellent book. On page 231 you refer to pre flop play when you say 'Remember, when analyzing preflop play, we saw that the out of position 3-bettor pays on average 6 to 7 big blinds to see a flop with his bluffs,'. I've tried rereading the section referred to and yet I do not follow. Could you please put my mind at rest and explain why the out of position 3 bettor, who I would expect to make a larger bet, would only be risking so little to see the flop?
Don't have the book in front of me at the moment, but it's probably referring to the fact that the 3-bet will get your opponent to often fold pre-flop. Since you take down some pots pre-flop, when your 3-bet does it called it's effectively "discounted" by all the times you took down the pot pre-flop.

So for example if button min-raises and you 3-bet to 8.5BB in the SB and your opponents all fold 50% of the time pre-flop, that means 50% of the time you'll win 2BB + 0.5BB + 1BB = 3.5BB pre-flop without taking a flop. So when your 3-bet is called the other 50% of the time, you're really only paying on average 8BB - 3.5BB = 4.5BB to see the flop, since you get to take down the pot pre0flop so often.

Keep in mind when this book was written people defended WAYYYYYYY less to 3-bet than they do now. 3-betting was massively exploitatively +EV back in the day.

 07-17-2020, 01:44 AM #1692 Jiuffett stranger   Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 14 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts hey Matthew, I dont believe you can imagine how Application of NLH is sOOO popular , that every serious poker player should read it. Thanks for your hard work. There is a small detail I can not understand it. The first paragraph on page 237, the 3 bettor has EV 9BB if he bet the flop with his gutshot, and if cold caller defend by mini raise, 3-bettor EV drop to almost 1BB. How to calculate that ? Thanks
 09-10-2020, 10:32 PM #1693 TRUSTtheDRAWCESS old hand     Join Date: Nov 2016 Location: In the streets Posts: 1,899 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts How has this book aged in the solver world? My understanding is no solvers were commercially available in 2013.
09-23-2020, 12:23 AM   #1694
George Rice
old hand

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: A few clicks west of AC
Posts: 1,699
Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by HeadUpFriend So im reading the book Applications of NLHE by Matthew Janda. I think it is very insightful and can provide huge profits for a long term poker strategy. I stumbled upon one of the equations and wanted to get some help from you guys understanding how it was solved so, when the time comes to put it into practice with my own numbers and input Ill know what Im doing. On page 37 he's talking about how often a 5 bet bluff needs to work in order to be profitable. He gives these numbers Pot:36.5 Blinds: 1.5bb + original raisers open plus his 4bet: 24bb + Our original 3bet: 11bb He gives this equation to figure out how often he needs to be profitable for the 5bet bluff to work: (X)(36.5)+(1-X)(-26.5)=0 63X=26.5 X=.42 Im lost here how is this whole equation solved step by step? How did the number .42 come into fruition? What is the 1-x? The 36.5 is the amount of bb we win on average when our opponent folds to our 5bet bluff. And the -26.5 comes from the average expectation of bb when we 5bet shove and we get called and are a dog.
X is the percentage of times the 5-bet bluff needs to be successful to break even (.42=42%). 1-X is the difference between that and 1 (1=100%), or the percent of times you were unsuccessful with your bluff and got called (.58 or 58%). So if you were called less than 58% of the time (your bluff raise worked more than 42%) you will show a long term profit. If you were called more than 58% of the time (your bluff raise worked less than 42%) you will show a long term loss. Or in other words, the break even point is your opponent folding 42% of the time (x), which is the same thing as your opponent calling 58% of the time (1-X).

09-23-2020, 12:25 AM   #1695
George Rice
old hand

Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: A few clicks west of AC
Posts: 1,699
Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts

Quote:
 Originally Posted by TRUSTtheDRAWCESS How has this book aged in the solver world? My understanding is no solvers were commercially available in 2013.
His second book used solvers to inform many of his examples and advice. There are differences which he mentions in the second book (No Limit Hold'em for Advanced Players).

 09-14-2021, 02:07 PM #1696 JupJ stranger   Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 1 Re: Applications of No-Limit Hold 'em Review and Discussion - See 1st post for Updated Concepts Hello everybody, I'm from France and I'm pretty new on the 2+2 forum (even if 2+2 is known for years all over the world). I go through this thread since I bought applications of NLHE, to make some light on certain point. I'm a slow reader. It hurts me to go to a new concept when I don't embrace it perfectly . So now I can say that I mastering better preflop concepts but I'm stuck to one point: Page 80 in Recommended Hand Chart, Matthew says: "if we use a smaller open sizing, we should be able to open a bit wider". Since I believe this is true, I can't get the logic/mathemathic behind that assumption, and it seems to me that all the concepts landed in previous chapters can't help to understand that point. Does somebody feel okay to try to explain me ? Or even Matthew personnaly ? Thanks !

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Poker News & Discussion     News, Views, and Gossip     Poker Blogs and Goals     Poker Beats, Brags, and Variance     YouTube Podcasts & Twitch Streams     General Poker Discussion Online Poker Sites & Marketplaces     Online Poker Sites         Discussion of Poker Sites         Global Poker         BetOnline.ag     Coaches & Schools         Seeking Coaching         Study Groups         General Coaching & Schools Discussion     Staking         Offering Stakes         Seeking Stakes         Selling Shares - Live         Selling Shares - Online         Staking Rails     Poker Software         General Software Discussion     General Marketplace     Transaction Feedback & Disputes Live Poker     Las Vegas Lifestyle     Venues & Communities     Tournament Events         WPT.com     Home Poker     Casino & Cardroom Poker Poker Strategy     Live No-Limit Hold’em Cash     Online No-Limit Hold’em Cash     No Limit Tournaments         Heads Up SNG and Spin and Gos     Mid-High Stakes MTT     Omaha         Omaha/8     Other Poker Games         Mid-High Stakes Limit         Micro-Small Stakes Limit         Stud     Psychology     Books and Publications     Poker Theory & GTO     Beginners and General Questions 2+2 Communities     Other Other Topics         OOTV     The Lounge: Discussion+Review     BBV4Life         omg omg omg     House of Blogs Sports and Games     Sporting Events         Single-Team Season Threads         Fantasy Sports     Sports Betting     Fantasy Sports         Sporting Events     Wrestling     Golf     Chess and Other Board Games         Backgammon Forum hosted by Bill Robertie.     Video Games         League of Legends         Hearthstone     Puzzles and Other Games Other Topics     Politics and Society     Business, Finance, and Investing     History     Health and Fitness     Travel     Science, Math, and Philosophy     Religion, God, and Theology     Laughs or Links!     Probability     Other Gambling Games     Computer and Technical Help Two Plus Two     About the Forums

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 AM.

 Contact Us - Two Plus Two Publishing LLC - Privacy Statement - Top