2/4 HU - first 3bet POt...
05-24-2012
, 09:51 AM
hi,
we are 10 hands into match. All i know so far is that villain played tight oop and opened all buttons himself. We havenīt seen a single SDS so far.
SB: $400 (100 bb)
Hero (BB): $404 (101 bb)
Preflop: Hero is BB with 2
2
J J
SB raises to $12, Hero raises to $36, SB calls $24
Flop: ($72) 9 5
4
(2 players)
Hero bets $44, SB calls $44
Turn: ($160) A (2 players)
Hero ?
What would you bet on turn ( i feel we have to) with what intention (b/c or b/f) and what river plan if get called?
we are 10 hands into match. All i know so far is that villain played tight oop and opened all buttons himself. We havenīt seen a single SDS so far.
SB: $400 (100 bb)
Hero (BB): $404 (101 bb)
Preflop: Hero is BB with 2
2 J JSB raises to $12, Hero raises to $36, SB calls $24
Flop: ($72) 9
5 4 (2 players)Hero bets $44, SB calls $44
Turn: ($160) A
(2 players)Hero ?
What would you bet on turn ( i feel we have to) with what intention (b/c or b/f) and what river plan if get called?
05-25-2012
, 03:16 AM
05-27-2012
, 09:57 AM
Hi tizzl,
TURN
As TGSM pointed out, it's quite ridiculous to bet/fold this hand. Even if you bet as little as 100 here OTT, you only need 27.5% equity to call a shove. Against A9xx, a hand very close to the top of our opponent's range (he should slow play his sets here but he shouldn't have that many 44xx or 55xx and there are far more 9xxx,QQxx,76xx etc. padding his range) we have over 28% equity. If you bet you have to bet/call and pot/call seems smart.
I think CR the turn has merit but I would need to do a deeper analysis so I can't substantiate this argument at present. This hand made me want to focus on something different, namely the flop sizing.
FLOP
Your bet of $44 into $72 is a similar size to what I would use as a "standard" against an unknown on this texture. However, given that on this turn card we still want to bet/call the turn A with a hand this low down in our range, I wanted to investigate where our source of profit is in the hand...
Clearly, when we bet/call the turn with Jacks unimproved and a weak FD we are not expecting to make a ton of money from getting it in against worse. If the play is +EV then it is because we are folding him off of his equity (he should get in unimproved QQxx against our hand but cannot against our range). That being the case, we increase the EV of our overall line by bloating the pot on the flop. This led me to consider whether we could bet bigger, say closer to 4/5th pot on the flop.
We of course cannot take this particular flop/turn transition in isolation. Yet when we consider our range on this board and on various turns, the case for a large flop bet becomes stronger. Consider that any overcard is pretty decent for our range against his continuing range; {T-A} comprise 20 cards that look pretty good for our high-card-oriented range compared with his wider and weaker range.* Furthermore, low board pairs {4,5} are unlikely to give him trips very often and it seems pretty bad for us to consider bet/folding the turn with an overpair on such a card without substantial nitty history. Of the other 23 cards (disregarding our hand at the moment) the majority put a flush draw out there where often times we will have an overpair +FD or Nut FD + gutter hand which we will bet/call. Since there are so many turns on this 954r structure which we intend on getting the money in with the case becomes even stronger for bloating the pot on the flop.
A final consideration against betting large on the flop would be if we were taking bet/fold lines frequently on the flop. Against an unknown I would argue that it is pretty terrible to bet/fold KKxx on this structure. A top 70% (excluding AAxx) hand only flops >70% equity against unimproved Kings 15% of the time (against unimproved AAxx 14% of the time). If we want to bet/fold KK here HU against an unknown then I think we are folding far too much of our range. Since we accept now that we are bet/calling these hands we have the final piece of the puzzle in choosing a larger flop bet size.
Finally in the investigation I want to look at what other flops fall into this class (of betting a larger amount based on the logic above). They clearly need to be rainbow to fit into this category (pair+FD hands have tons of equity on two-tone boards and require a different approach). It is also important that no straight is already present and that few are completed on the turn. To be similar in structure the highest card should be no higher than a Jack and the second ranked card should be unlikely to make much of our opponent's range two pair.
Obvious suitable candidates are {732, 843, 852, 942, T53, J63}r. I would also contend that a flop of J76r is appropriate since although we lose 8 overcards from the 954r board we gain 12 bricky undercards of 2-4.
We should also note that the width of our opponent's range is important here on the super-static flops like {932, T32, J53}. In a HU game, or against a BT open in 6max I would still advocate betting larger since our opponent will have A95x type hands with a pair and a gutter and I want to turn this into a two street game. Against an EP/MP open with a tighter range many of the low cards become bricks because of the relative dearth of wheel cards
in our opponent's flop calling range. On such really static boards it may make sense to bet the more "standard" 60% sizing.
Glad 2+2 is back up, hello again to all,
Quad
*It is also important to note that much of our opponent's calling range will be JT9x-type hands. His calling range is likely going to be quite inelastic on this flop and yet he is going to get better odds to stack us when we bet/call the turn into his two pair with our dry overpair. Betting bigger on the flop charges him a higher premium to do this.
TURN
As TGSM pointed out, it's quite ridiculous to bet/fold this hand. Even if you bet as little as 100 here OTT, you only need 27.5% equity to call a shove. Against A9xx, a hand very close to the top of our opponent's range (he should slow play his sets here but he shouldn't have that many 44xx or 55xx and there are far more 9xxx,QQxx,76xx etc. padding his range) we have over 28% equity. If you bet you have to bet/call and pot/call seems smart.
I think CR the turn has merit but I would need to do a deeper analysis so I can't substantiate this argument at present. This hand made me want to focus on something different, namely the flop sizing.
FLOP
Your bet of $44 into $72 is a similar size to what I would use as a "standard" against an unknown on this texture. However, given that on this turn card we still want to bet/call the turn A
with a hand this low down in our range, I wanted to investigate where our source of profit is in the hand...Clearly, when we bet/call the turn with Jacks unimproved and a weak FD we are not expecting to make a ton of money from getting it in against worse. If the play is +EV then it is because we are folding him off of his equity (he should get in unimproved QQxx against our hand but cannot against our range). That being the case, we increase the EV of our overall line by bloating the pot on the flop. This led me to consider whether we could bet bigger, say closer to 4/5th pot on the flop.
We of course cannot take this particular flop/turn transition in isolation. Yet when we consider our range on this board and on various turns, the case for a large flop bet becomes stronger. Consider that any overcard is pretty decent for our range against his continuing range; {T-A} comprise 20 cards that look pretty good for our high-card-oriented range compared with his wider and weaker range.* Furthermore, low board pairs {4,5} are unlikely to give him trips very often and it seems pretty bad for us to consider bet/folding the turn with an overpair on such a card without substantial nitty history. Of the other 23 cards (disregarding our hand at the moment) the majority put a flush draw out there where often times we will have an overpair +FD or Nut FD + gutter hand which we will bet/call. Since there are so many turns on this 954r structure which we intend on getting the money in with the case becomes even stronger for bloating the pot on the flop.
A final consideration against betting large on the flop would be if we were taking bet/fold lines frequently on the flop. Against an unknown I would argue that it is pretty terrible to bet/fold KKxx on this structure. A top 70% (excluding AAxx) hand only flops >70% equity against unimproved Kings 15% of the time (against unimproved AAxx 14% of the time). If we want to bet/fold KK here HU against an unknown then I think we are folding far too much of our range. Since we accept now that we are bet/calling these hands we have the final piece of the puzzle in choosing a larger flop bet size.
Finally in the investigation I want to look at what other flops fall into this class (of betting a larger amount based on the logic above). They clearly need to be rainbow to fit into this category (pair+FD hands have tons of equity on two-tone boards and require a different approach). It is also important that no straight is already present and that few are completed on the turn. To be similar in structure the highest card should be no higher than a Jack and the second ranked card should be unlikely to make much of our opponent's range two pair.
Obvious suitable candidates are {732, 843, 852, 942, T53, J63}r. I would also contend that a flop of J76r is appropriate since although we lose 8 overcards from the 954r board we gain 12 bricky undercards of 2-4.
We should also note that the width of our opponent's range is important here on the super-static flops like {932, T32, J53}. In a HU game, or against a BT open in 6max I would still advocate betting larger since our opponent will have A95x type hands with a pair and a gutter and I want to turn this into a two street game. Against an EP/MP open with a tighter range many of the low cards become bricks because of the relative dearth of wheel cards
in our opponent's flop calling range. On such really static boards it may make sense to bet the more "standard" 60% sizing.
Glad 2+2 is back up, hello again to all,
Quad
*It is also important to note that much of our opponent's calling range will be JT9x-type hands. His calling range is likely going to be quite inelastic on this flop and yet he is going to get better odds to stack us when we bet/call the turn into his two pair with our dry overpair. Betting bigger on the flop charges him a higher premium to do this.
05-28-2012
, 10:58 AM
05-30-2012
, 06:40 PM
Hi tizzl,
You made a lot of comments and I don't want to delve too far into defending my position; not least because as you point out a lot of the grittier numbers depend on your own 3bet range. One point I will detail further is the bet/call versus bet/fold on the flop with say unimproved KK. This is because it is a lynchpin of my argument in my first post and also because it's easy to discuss in a way which allows the reader to follow with his own ranges.
1) If you make a pot-size bet on the flop you need 37% equity to have a profitable stack/off (assuming you never have any F.E once villain raises). If you bet your size (44 into 72) you need 40% equity.
2) Take your 3bet range and see how often you flop either 40%+ or 37%+ equity on this flop against the "quality" stack off range you choose for villain. In my case I chose {70%: (95,94,99,54,876)}. With the 3bet range I used I found I flopped 37%+ equity 17% of the time and 40%+ equity 9% of the time.
3) If your numbers look anything like the above then the first observation you should make is that your bet/calling range should be cut in half if you bet $44 rather than full pot. This seems rather odd and is the first clue that our opponent's shoving range is too tight if we can exploit him as simply as betting smaller and only calling off 9% of the time when we cbet.
4) Next, assess honestly how frequently you C-bet this flop. I would be surprised if against an unknown villain many players are betting this dry low board less than 70% of the time. Now take 17/70 and 9/70 to find that if we do bet/fold we are folding 76% or 87% of our C-betting range respectively. Let's say you only C-bet 50% of the time, now you are still folding 66% and 82% respectively.
5) Finally, take a look at the equity calculation below for as horrible an OESD as you can find. I have run it against nutty stack off hands without weighting, but you aren't going to find a huge amount of difference when you tweak it.
ProPokerTools Odds Oracle Results (2.05 Professional)
Omaha Hi, Generic syntax
Board - 9s5h4c
PLAYER_1 QJ63
PLAYER_2 99,95,54,94,876
3805176 trials (randomized)
All-in Equity
This garbage straight draw has 38% equity against a nutty range. When you then run the fold equity calculation with 38% equity you find the shover needs 34% folds to have a plus EV shove with this hand.
6) Look back up at your numbers and you will realize one of two things:
Either your opponent actually just shoves a nutty range and you can lol-exploit him by bet/folding unimproved AA/KK small all day.
Or you know a guy who bet/folds unimproved AA/KK in this spot (and similar structure boards) and you can clown him by shoving every 67xx,63xx in this spot and more hands besides.
7) As a bonus, let's say we know a guy is folding 66% of his hands when he bets this flop as the pre-flop 3bettor. How little equity can we shove here? The answer comes out to 20% (any naked gutter). Even QJ62(!) has 26% equity against the nutty range. If the reader is a tight player and ever wonders how maniacs keep finding hands to shove on dry boards there's your answer.
Cliffs:
If your opponent has a clue here you really can't bet/fold big overpairs.
If you find an opponent who does this, start shoving like a maniac on these textures until he adjusts.
You made a lot of comments and I don't want to delve too far into defending my position; not least because as you point out a lot of the grittier numbers depend on your own 3bet range. One point I will detail further is the bet/call versus bet/fold on the flop with say unimproved KK. This is because it is a lynchpin of my argument in my first post and also because it's easy to discuss in a way which allows the reader to follow with his own ranges.
1) If you make a pot-size bet on the flop you need 37% equity to have a profitable stack/off (assuming you never have any F.E once villain raises). If you bet your size (44 into 72) you need 40% equity.
2) Take your 3bet range and see how often you flop either 40%+ or 37%+ equity on this flop against the "quality" stack off range you choose for villain. In my case I chose {70%: (95,94,99,54,876)}. With the 3bet range I used I found I flopped 37%+ equity 17% of the time and 40%+ equity 9% of the time.
3) If your numbers look anything like the above then the first observation you should make is that your bet/calling range should be cut in half if you bet $44 rather than full pot. This seems rather odd and is the first clue that our opponent's shoving range is too tight if we can exploit him as simply as betting smaller and only calling off 9% of the time when we cbet.
4) Next, assess honestly how frequently you C-bet this flop. I would be surprised if against an unknown villain many players are betting this dry low board less than 70% of the time. Now take 17/70 and 9/70 to find that if we do bet/fold we are folding 76% or 87% of our C-betting range respectively. Let's say you only C-bet 50% of the time, now you are still folding 66% and 82% respectively.
5) Finally, take a look at the equity calculation below for as horrible an OESD as you can find. I have run it against nutty stack off hands without weighting, but you aren't going to find a huge amount of difference when you tweak it.
ProPokerTools Odds Oracle Results (2.05 Professional)
Omaha Hi, Generic syntax
Board - 9s5h4c
PLAYER_1 QJ63
PLAYER_2 99,95,54,94,876
3805176 trials (randomized)
All-in Equity
This garbage straight draw has 38% equity against a nutty range. When you then run the fold equity calculation with 38% equity you find the shover needs 34% folds to have a plus EV shove with this hand.
6) Look back up at your numbers and you will realize one of two things:
Either your opponent actually just shoves a nutty range and you can lol-exploit him by bet/folding unimproved AA/KK small all day.
Or you know a guy who bet/folds unimproved AA/KK in this spot (and similar structure boards) and you can clown him by shoving every 67xx,63xx in this spot and more hands besides.
7) As a bonus, let's say we know a guy is folding 66% of his hands when he bets this flop as the pre-flop 3bettor. How little equity can we shove here? The answer comes out to 20% (any naked gutter). Even QJ62(!) has 26% equity against the nutty range. If the reader is a tight player and ever wonders how maniacs keep finding hands to shove on dry boards there's your answer.
Cliffs:
If your opponent has a clue here you really can't bet/fold big overpairs.
If you find an opponent who does this, start shoving like a maniac on these textures until he adjusts.
05-31-2012
, 02:49 AM
Quote:
Hi tizzl,
You made a lot of comments and I don't want to delve too far into defending my position; not least because as you point out a lot of the grittier numbers depend on your own 3bet range. One point I will detail further is the bet/call versus bet/fold on the flop with say unimproved KK. This is because it is a lynchpin of my argument in my first post and also because it's easy to discuss in a way which allows the reader to follow with his own ranges.
1) If you make a pot-size bet on the flop you need 37% equity to have a profitable stack/off (assuming you never have any F.E once villain raises). If you bet your size (44 into 72) you need 40% equity.
2) Take your 3bet range and see how often you flop either 40%+ or 37%+ equity on this flop against the "quality" stack off range you choose for villain. In my case I chose {70%: (95,94,99,54,876)}. With the 3bet range I used I found I flopped 37%+ equity 17% of the time and 40%+ equity 9% of the time.
3) If your numbers look anything like the above then the first observation you should make is that your bet/calling range should be cut in half if you bet $44 rather than full pot. This seems rather odd and is the first clue that our opponent's shoving range is too tight if we can exploit him as simply as betting smaller and only calling off 9% of the time when we cbet.
4) Next, assess honestly how frequently you C-bet this flop. I would be surprised if against an unknown villain many players are betting this dry low board less than 70% of the time. Now take 17/70 and 9/70 to find that if we do bet/fold we are folding 76% or 87% of our C-betting range respectively. Let's say you only C-bet 50% of the time, now you are still folding 66% and 82% respectively.
5) Finally, take a look at the equity calculation below for as horrible an OESD as you can find. I have run it against nutty stack off hands without weighting, but you aren't going to find a huge amount of difference when you tweak it.
ProPokerTools Odds Oracle Results (2.05 Professional)
Omaha Hi, Generic syntax
Board - 9s5h4c
PLAYER_1 QJ63
PLAYER_2 99,95,54,94,876
3805176 trials (randomized)
All-in Equity
This garbage straight draw has 38% equity against a nutty range. When you then run the fold equity calculation with 38% equity you find the shover needs 34% folds to have a plus EV shove with this hand.
6) Look back up at your numbers and you will realize one of two things:
Either your opponent actually just shoves a nutty range and you can lol-exploit him by bet/folding unimproved AA/KK small all day.
Or you know a guy who bet/folds unimproved AA/KK in this spot (and similar structure boards) and you can clown him by shoving every 67xx,63xx in this spot and more hands besides.
7) As a bonus, let's say we know a guy is folding 66% of his hands when he bets this flop as the pre-flop 3bettor. How little equity can we shove here? The answer comes out to 20% (any naked gutter). Even QJ62(!) has 26% equity against the nutty range. If the reader is a tight player and ever wonders how maniacs keep finding hands to shove on dry boards there's your answer.
Cliffs:
If your opponent has a clue here you really can't bet/fold big overpairs.
If you find an opponent who does this, start shoving like a maniac on these textures until he adjusts.
You made a lot of comments and I don't want to delve too far into defending my position; not least because as you point out a lot of the grittier numbers depend on your own 3bet range. One point I will detail further is the bet/call versus bet/fold on the flop with say unimproved KK. This is because it is a lynchpin of my argument in my first post and also because it's easy to discuss in a way which allows the reader to follow with his own ranges.
1) If you make a pot-size bet on the flop you need 37% equity to have a profitable stack/off (assuming you never have any F.E once villain raises). If you bet your size (44 into 72) you need 40% equity.
2) Take your 3bet range and see how often you flop either 40%+ or 37%+ equity on this flop against the "quality" stack off range you choose for villain. In my case I chose {70%: (95,94,99,54,876)}. With the 3bet range I used I found I flopped 37%+ equity 17% of the time and 40%+ equity 9% of the time.
3) If your numbers look anything like the above then the first observation you should make is that your bet/calling range should be cut in half if you bet $44 rather than full pot. This seems rather odd and is the first clue that our opponent's shoving range is too tight if we can exploit him as simply as betting smaller and only calling off 9% of the time when we cbet.
4) Next, assess honestly how frequently you C-bet this flop. I would be surprised if against an unknown villain many players are betting this dry low board less than 70% of the time. Now take 17/70 and 9/70 to find that if we do bet/fold we are folding 76% or 87% of our C-betting range respectively. Let's say you only C-bet 50% of the time, now you are still folding 66% and 82% respectively.
5) Finally, take a look at the equity calculation below for as horrible an OESD as you can find. I have run it against nutty stack off hands without weighting, but you aren't going to find a huge amount of difference when you tweak it.
ProPokerTools Odds Oracle Results (2.05 Professional)
Omaha Hi, Generic syntax
Board - 9s5h4c
PLAYER_1 QJ63
PLAYER_2 99,95,54,94,876
3805176 trials (randomized)
All-in Equity
This garbage straight draw has 38% equity against a nutty range. When you then run the fold equity calculation with 38% equity you find the shover needs 34% folds to have a plus EV shove with this hand.
6) Look back up at your numbers and you will realize one of two things:
Either your opponent actually just shoves a nutty range and you can lol-exploit him by bet/folding unimproved AA/KK small all day.
Or you know a guy who bet/folds unimproved AA/KK in this spot (and similar structure boards) and you can clown him by shoving every 67xx,63xx in this spot and more hands besides.
7) As a bonus, let's say we know a guy is folding 66% of his hands when he bets this flop as the pre-flop 3bettor. How little equity can we shove here? The answer comes out to 20% (any naked gutter). Even QJ62(!) has 26% equity against the nutty range. If the reader is a tight player and ever wonders how maniacs keep finding hands to shove on dry boards there's your answer.
Cliffs:
If your opponent has a clue here you really can't bet/fold big overpairs.
If you find an opponent who does this, start shoving like a maniac on these textures until he adjusts.
I agree with all that incl. the numbers and thoughst for sure.
Let me say this. If i put villain on a range that is wide but reasonable like (80%!aa)!(99,55,44,95,94,54,(63,67,32)
9,5,4,3,8) ,a23,(9,5)68,87)) he still can shove 37% of his range on flop and i donīt have my equity to call it off.If i give him one of the loosest ranges i can think about:
(80%!aa)
99,55,44,95,94,54,(63,67,32)9,5,4,3,8) ,a23,(9,5)68,87,86,87,62,73,a3,a2),67,63,32,(([t+][t+])!rr)86,87,62,73,a3,a2))i have to b/c the AKKT +BDFD hand we talked about because i have 43.7% equity and ev of b/c is 30$ or in other words folding costs me 30$ in long run but: that range means villain ships 53% on flop on me as default (that has to be my assumption early in match). If i see villain jamming constantly iīd (try to) adjust and b/c a wider range (any OP) instead of b/c "light" as default and adjust from there once i figured oiut that villain is nittier on flop ip f.e..
What i am trying to say is:
I donīt think we are far away regards our opinions about b/f and b/c flop with AKKT - its just that i think/feel that its more likly that we get jammed by a range that is less then 40% of villains flop range (and we have to b/f because if he jams 37% its "clear" b/f so 40%ish should be boarderline i guess) then that we can expect a unknown villain to jam 50%+ on that flop once we cbet as default...
So i think its questionable to assume we get immediatly expoited here by default (with b/f dry KK) by a unknown villain that doesnīt know much about us but we still try to adjust in advance to something that hasnīt been proofed just for the reason that its theoretical possible (that he could exploit us here if he know etc.).
TizzL