Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Mid-High Stakes Limit Discussions of mid-high stakes limit Texas Hold'em

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-31-2020, 11:37 PM   #101
Victor
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Victor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 63,545
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

I think you gotta call the river. theres a ton of hands he can be bluffing with on the river bc hes gonna peel the flop light and pick up all kinds of draws on the turn. even just bluffing sometimes with JT should make it profitable to call and he should always be at the river with that.
Victor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2020, 08:53 PM   #102
maka2184
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 926
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Victor View Post
I think you gotta call the river. theres a ton of hands he can be bluffing with on the river bc hes gonna peel the flop light and pick up all kinds of draws on the turn. even just bluffing sometimes with JT should make it profitable to call and he should always be at the river with that.
+1

& thanks Victor! Love your posts

PS: Lineup at Commerce 200/400 looked juicy fyi for anyone going in future.

PS #2: I went during Jan 18 - 20 in 2020 during LAPC so might have been an outlier.
maka2184 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2020, 01:43 AM   #103
prototypepariah
old hand
 
prototypepariah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,977
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by maka2184 View Post
+1

& thanks Victor! Love your posts

PS: Lineup at Commerce 200/400 looked juicy fyi for anyone going in future.

PS #2: I went during Jan 18 - 20 in 2020 during LAPC so might have been an outlier.

ya? who was in there that makes you feel that way?
prototypepariah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2020, 07:04 AM   #104
stinkypete
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
stinkypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: somewhere
Posts: 15,615
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Victor View Post
I think you gotta call the river
Quote:
even just bluffing sometimes with JT should make it profitable to call and he should always be at the river with that.
one of these statements is false
stinkypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2020, 07:18 AM   #105
stinkypete
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
stinkypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: somewhere
Posts: 15,615
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by WillyT View Post
It seems to me that your statement can be interpreted in two ways.

1. That an optimal strategy can contain 'loss leaders'

or

1 is very unlikely to be true
Unless I'm losing my mind, I'm pretty sure it's true at least in the relative sense, meaning that the mixed strategy includes plays that are not the highest EV of the options available at some nonzero frequency. Knowing that, intuition would suggest it's likely the GTO mixed strategy includes very marginally losing plays as well, no?
stinkypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2020, 01:58 PM   #106
maka2184
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 926
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by prototypepariah View Post
ya? who was in there that makes you feel that way?
Don't want to derail thread but couple 20/40 players / regs who I viewed as TAG fish when game was 6 handed and 1 player with under 10BB playing 3 handed.

On bright side, whatever Stinkypete and WilkyT osted is probably GTO and 99% correct
maka2184 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2020, 03:35 PM   #107
Jeltsin
centurion
 
Jeltsin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 145
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

I almost never see 200/400 (or higher) going on Bravo, how often does it run?
Jeltsin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-02-2020, 04:50 PM   #108
Victor
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Victor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 63,545
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by maka2184 View Post
+1

& thanks Victor! Love your posts

PS: Lineup at Commerce 200/400 looked juicy fyi for anyone going in future.

PS #2: I went during Jan 18 - 20 in 2020 during LAPC so might have been an outlier.
thanks Bud! I dont even play poker so you may want to reassess my posts here. vote Bernie tho.
Victor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2020, 01:02 PM   #109
maka2184
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 926
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Victor View Post
thanks Bud! I dont even play poker so you may want to reassess my posts here. vote Bernie tho.
No problem hopefully you can head to WSOP for a LHE Donkament. If you do, 1st round of drinks on me with hopefully DonJuan and/or Sean Snyder (if neither too busy crushing souls).

Going back to thread, I play too bad to fold this river as played
maka2184 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2020, 10:58 AM   #110
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: scattar branez at work
Posts: 10,694
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

I don't 4 bet anything here as default. Reasons for deviating include (opponents are passive postflop so there is ev to be seized preflop due to the lower average price to get to showdown) or (opponents are much too loose preflop so there is ev to be seized preflop due to opponent's preflop errors).

However since you 4 bet:

I dislike the turn bet exactly because you can't call a river bet(with the exception of trying to run over a tight opponent, which would be proper here). There's very little draw value(3 outs to value hand) so there's not much semibluff ev coming in. You're relying almost entirely on your ability to either win immediately(likely a breakeven value vs good players or a negative value vs loose players by definition) and your ability to win a river checkdown(since cards 7 and under = no straight possible = best case scenario for your Ace high, yet you still fold a hand that can beat a bluff on the river? seems inconsistent to me). The value of winning immediately is additive with the value of winning a river checkdown, the value of hitting a 3, and the value of hitting an ace(depending on how frequently these events occur).

This hand on the turn can win a showdown at decent frequency if turn and river check through(perhaps not enough to entirely recoup the previous investments, but every bit of ev helps). This showdown ev is additive with the ev gained when we river a pair after the turn checks through. In order for betting to be correct, it must have ev higher than the sum of the checking ev sources.

If this A3s(4 combos all likely all have same ev on turn) happens to be the very bottom of your fold range, the river is likely well played as a fraction of your range that can beat a bluff should be folding the river depending on the price your opponent is getting on the bluff(not considering hands that can't win a showdown as these are not bluffcatchers). So if the bottom of your range looks like this:

T9s, J9s, JTs, A3s (perhaps straight draws at frequency(.75, .75, .5 respectively imo).

this folding range is 13 combos and your opponent is getting 9:1 on river bet. This means if you have less than 130 combos in your range, the fold is likely creating a vulnerability.

If you never check the draws on the turn, then this folding range is 16 combos, and you would need 160 combos in your checking range to support such a folding range.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2020, 11:11 PM   #111
MrPoon
newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: ComancheIndianReservation
Posts: 26
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

How to play this hand preflop depends on the dynamic of the game at that moment.
MrPoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2020, 01:13 PM   #112
WillyT
veteran
 
WillyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Wood Shed
Posts: 2,290
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by stinkypete View Post
Unless I'm losing my mind, I'm pretty sure it's true at least in the relative sense, meaning that the mixed strategy includes plays that are not the highest EV of the options available at some nonzero frequency. Knowing that, intuition would suggest it's likely the GTO mixed strategy includes very marginally losing plays as well, no?
reasonable point. i've seen examples of mixing a hand that has better ev raising than calling into the calling range as a sort of 'loss leader' (value adder to the range it's mixing itself into).

I don't have data in front of me to look up but I don't recall ever seeing solvers take minus EV plays with any hands though (or maybe i have seen it very infrequently and always assumed it was going to be removed from the range on further iterations of the solver, which 'always' happened IME.)




A further interesting point I recall from looking at some sims is that under reasonable play from the btn and sb the bb can play cap or fold without losing any ev. If the btn and sb both play too loose however the bb now needs a flatting range and doesn't want to cap a range as wide as the range he wants to continue with vs the widened btn and sb ranges.
WillyT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2020, 07:38 PM   #113
Montrealcorp
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Montrealcorp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,279
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathDonkey View Post

2) if we magically knew our equity is exactly 33.3% we could put in our whole bankroll and be breaking even / fair gamble. This 40% threshold you decided on is arbitrary and meaningless.
I know I’m probably wrong but I can’t really agree with this.
We can’t break even cause we aren’t all in and if it was true, why are we saying the guy IP have an edge ?

Yeah the 40% ( probably a bit high) is a number out of thin air but I don’t see anything wrong to give us a certain marge of safety taking into account it will always be more difficult in “real time” to achieve are full equity OOP .
I’m pretty sure we will always lose a little bit more and win a little less when OOP with some postflop play still in play compare to when we are IP .
Montrealcorp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2020, 02:03 AM   #114
maka2184
adept
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 926
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montrealcorp View Post
I know I’m probably wrong but I can’t really agree with this.
We can’t break even cause we aren’t all in and if it was true, why are we saying the guy IP have an edge ?

Yeah the 40% ( probably a bit high) is a number out of thin air but I don’t see anything wrong to give us a certain marge of safety taking into account it will always be more difficult in “real time” to achieve are full equity OOP .
I’m pretty sure we will always lose a little bit more and win a little less when OOP with some postflop play still in play compare to when we are IP .
-1

Confident 99.99999% chance DeathDonkey is right here from theoretical, mathematical, EV, practical, GTO, etc standpoint

Can agree to disagree for anyone that supports Montrealcorp view
maka2184 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2020, 04:28 AM   #115
Montrealcorp
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Montrealcorp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,279
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Im not trying to be right , it just what my thought process at .
Montrealcorp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2020, 11:20 AM   #116
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: scattar branez at work
Posts: 10,694
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

what i think montreal is having a hard time rationalizing is that these truths don't conflict:

checking back on the river in equilibrium will always give ev greater than zero or equal to zero.

checking out of position on the river will also give ev greater than zero or equal to zero.

however, the difference is that when out of position, your opponent has the option to bet. this causes a large portion of your out of position range to become 0ev(folding is free and calling bluffcatchers is exactly breakeven vs equilibrium opponent). this regression of hand strength comes with the sunk cost of getting to that point in the hand. so in the case of the original post vs equilibrium opponent, the river decision actually will add zero ev to the op's bottom line without known opponent deviation.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2020, 07:55 PM   #117
Montrealcorp
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Montrealcorp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,279
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Do you agree bob if I have 35% equity pf OOP, I won’t be able to fulfill that 35% of equity because I will win less at the end of the hand due to miss value bet postflop ?
I mean it’s pretty clear in my mind that being all in pf and not being all in pf changes the value of some weak hands due to the existence of postflop bets.

I mean just hands like 22 is a clear example how so many time I might have the best hand OOP on turn but the board is so ugly I just can’t c/c twice .
So I forfeit some equity postflop while if I was all in pf, I wouldn’t care and I would always be assure i realize my full pf equity .

Last edited by Montrealcorp; 05-20-2020 at 08:01 PM.
Montrealcorp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2020, 09:49 AM   #118
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: scattar branez at work
Posts: 10,694
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

I don't think in terms of raw equity. Instead I think about what range the opponent is raising, the resulting correct defense range, and any adjustments that I should make on the margins(like folding more vs players that deny equity through aggression, or calling more vs players that allow equity realization through passivity.

if you look at huhu preflop play, you see the button opening around 82% and the big blind playing about 90% of hands. I believe this pattern is evident in all heads up situations, where the big blind will defend a range that is slightly wider than the opening range, with the mentioned adjustments on the margins being taken into consideration after the standard defense range has been estimated.

interestingly, this pattern is not evident in no limit holdem except at very shallow stack depths. the intersection is right around 6 big blinds if I remember correctly, which is likely not coincidental. After all what's the most you can charge a player that calls flop turn and river in a limit game? hmmm.

so instead of thinking about equity I'm asking myself what range fits these conditions.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2020, 06:09 PM   #119
Montrealcorp
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Montrealcorp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,279
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

If you don’t take raw equity% pf , what are you basing yourself than to say , a ration for BB is x% equity vs a CO open with x% range ?

Me obviously , I don’t take the raw % equity pf since I already said,
because some hands play terribad postflop OOP and are almost impossible to realize your full equity ( because you aren’t all-in) , i rather give myself a certain Marge of security and play a bit tighter than the raw equity To compensate the lack of realization.

So let’s say HJ oraise with x% range and I have 40% equity , I will play a bit tighter than 40% because I am OOP but seem I am wrong and I just don’t understand .

If it is right you can play a bit looser IP when you 3bet because of the money in the pot and you have position , it should make sense to play a bit tighter with your bottom range OOP .

But seem I am wrong when I read a lot of reply .
Montrealcorp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-21-2020, 07:55 PM   #120
Jules22
Pooh-Bah
 
Jules22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: rolling something up
Posts: 4,035
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Does calling gain any merit if the cap is five bets? Forgive me if it’s a dumb question :-)
Jules22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2020, 03:38 PM   #121
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: scattar branez at work
Posts: 10,694
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montrealcorp View Post
If you donít take raw equity% pf , what are you basing yourself than to say , a ration for BB is x% equity vs a CO open with x% range ?
I'm aware of the equities as I've put in the time with equilab vs various ranges. However, as you note, we are forced to fold sometimes which means we need more than 29% equity to play full stacked poker. since there is no clear way to quantify the difference between (raw equity) and (realized equity), then we should focus on understanding the latter better.

Quote:
Me obviously , I donít take the raw % equity pf since I already said,
because some hands play terribad postflop OOP and are almost impossible to realize your full equity ( because you arenít all-in) , i rather give myself a certain Marge of security and play a bit tighter than the raw equity To compensate the lack of realization.
i agree with this entirely.
Quote:
So letís say HJ oraise with x% range and I have 40% equity , I will play a bit tighter than 40% because I am OOP but seem I am wrong and I just donít understand .
let me rephrase this the way I think about it: hj raise with 25% range(i think its tag range) and i defend slightly wider than this range around 30-40% depending on how much equity this particular opponent will allow me to realize. the structure is essentially the same as the opening range(same general shape in equilab) but my kickers go a notch or two lower than the opening range.
Quote:
If it is right you can play a bit looser IP when you 3bet because of the money in the pot and you have position , it should make sense to play a bit tighter with your bottom range OOP .
while this is intuitive, its not a measure of profitability.
Quote:
But seem I am wrong when I read a lot of reply .
its not that youre wrong, its that your approach to using equity is incomplete. you must keep learning about equity realization to better understand where the money is coming from in a hand of poker. here's a thread that really helped me to grasp the deeper meaning of the profitability of individual hands:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/1...alization+yaqh

it gets really good when yaqh(2+2 author will tipton) comes in and sets the record straight.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2020, 08:12 PM   #122
Montrealcorp
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Montrealcorp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,279
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4

Ok thx !
Montrealcorp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2020, 11:33 AM   #123
Bob148
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bob148's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: scattar branez at work
Posts: 10,694
Re: 200/400 Recap: Hand #4



this is a graph of the fraction of the pot won by individual hands in heads up no limit holdem 25bb games. the solid line is raw equity. the dots are hands. the left axis represents the fraction of the pot won(1 = 100% equity realization) and some very strong hands have ev > pot(top left segment). the bottom axis shows hands in order of (highest fraction earned) down to (lowest fraction earned.

notice that draws earn a larger fraction than the raw equity would suggest, and bluffcatchers earn less than the raw equity would suggest.

i think that a similar graph for limit holdem would naturally feature a much less steep incline curve, as potential winnings with strong hands is worth more in no limit. the draws would run closer to the raw equity, as would bluffcatchers run closer to the raw equity. for lack of better description I think limit holdem would have a much more condensed and organized curve of points representing the fraction of the pot won.
Bob148 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online